intox AO3

Question 1

public policy

Answer 1

rare - root for most crimes and it rarely succeeds which is good.
personal responsibility - good as people need to take responsibility.
NHS - costs the NHS alot of money.
Dutch courage - delibrate drinking shouldnt be a defence

Question 2

harsh approach

Answer 2

general defence? - incorrect as it rarely succeeds.
spiking - too harsh if D is faultless.
II - most fail which is too harsh.
general public - few people foresee to commit a crime.

Question 3

the dichotomy

Answer 3

different approaches - good as the label and sentence is different.
unclear list - various lists and tests.
illogical - rape is basic and attempted rape is specific

Question 4

the Majewski rules

Answer 4

S.8 CJA basic - ignores MR under S.8.
Majewski - drinking is an automatic MR which is wrong.
R & I - if sober would D have foresaw, impossible for the jury to know.
Specific intent - can reduce if lack MR, if D had no MR should defend basic (Lipman).
Beard - specific capability should have about foresight

Question 5

Involuntary intoxication

Answer 5

full defence - if D was not at fault it still fails.
prescribed drugs - good to acquit and innocent defendant, still fails for many.
soporific drugs - good as its a full defence if not reckless

Question 6

legal policy v public policy

Answer 6

good? - protects public and the human rights of D.

balance - weighted towards PP

Question 7

intoxicated mistake

Answer 7

approach - specific and basic mistake should be considered.

jaggard v dickinson - can be a defence for criminal damage (basic) wrong

Question 8

reform

Answer 8

Law commission - parliament never accepted the Majewski rules - inconclusive.
The Butler committee - instead charge with dangerous intoxication and offer rehab