General defences (Intoxication, self defence and consent)

Question 1

What is the general rule regarding the intoxication defence

Answer 1

Intoxication is not a defence (Downds)

Question 2

What are the main ways a defence of intoxication could be established.

Answer 2

Is the defence one of specific or basic liability and is the intoxication voluntary or involuntary

Question 3

How dose the defence of intoxication relate to the level of mens rea of the crime.

Answer 3

If the crime is one of basic liability then the defence of intoxication doesn’t stand Majewski. However if the defence is one of specific liability then the defence is not allowed

Question 4

How does the defence relate to type of intoxication

Answer 4

If the defendant is voluntarily intoxicated then the defence is not available but it the defence is one of involuntary intoxication then the defence is allowed as seen in the case of Kingston.

Question 5

What are the two types of self defence

Answer 5

Personal self defence / defence of another and prevention of a crime

Question 6

What are the two rules of self defence?

Answer 6

1. The force must be reasonable in the circumstances

2. The person must use such force that is reasonable in the circumstances

Question 7

What section of what act states what degree of force necessary

Answer 7

S 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration act 2008

Question 8

What is the Force that is necessary

Answer 8

As long as the the action was honest and instinctive then the amount of force used is necessary. (Martin)

Question 9

How can you decide if force is necessary?

Answer 9

Have to reference the circumstances as D believed them to be. Even if the mistake is unreasonable but the defendant genuinely believes it. (Williams)

Question 10

State some other elements of the self defence defence.

Answer 10

You cannot rely on the defence if there is a mistaken believe due to voluntary intoxication. Also you don’t need to wait to be attacked before being violent as seen in AG’s reference No2 of 1983.

Question 11

What are the four main points of a consent defence

Answer 11

1. Consent must be real
2. Consent maybe implied
3. If the defence is available relies on the level of injury
4. Consent is never a defence for murder.

Question 12

What to cases highlight the realness of consent

Answer 12

Tobassum and Didica.

Question 13

What happened in the case of Tobassam

Answer 13

D pretended to be a doctor giving free breast cancer checks. His defence was that the women gave consent for him to touch their breasts. It was held by the court of appeal that the act consented to must have been the act done

Question 14

What are the three situation where consent is implied

Answer 14

1. Properly conducted sporting contests
2. Lawful chastiesment or correction
3. reasonable surgical interference

Question 15

What did the case of Barns state about injury during a sporting event

Answer 15

Criminal cases should be reserved when the conduct is significantly grave to be categorised as criminal.

Question 16

What is the law regarding rough horseplay

Answer 16

In the cases of Jones and Aitkin the defendants where not convicted as it was said the victims consented to rough horseplay.

Question 17

What is said about medical treatment

Answer 17

In the case of Richardson the court of appeal stated that consent to the treatment is enough.

Question 18

What did the case of Burrell and Harmer state about the formation of consent

Answer 18

They were too young to give full consent

Question 19

What did the court of appeal state in AG’s reference (No 6 of 1980) (1981)

Answer 19

Consent is not a defence when injury in caused, as it is not in the public interest to cause people harm for no good reason

Question 20

Why did the defence of consent not apply in the case of Brown

Answer 20

Becuase the charges where of ABH and GBH and the defence is not available for such injuries.