Intoxication

Question 1

1) Introduction

Answer 1

• D may claim the defence of intoxication. There are two types of intoxication: voluntary and involuntary.
• Here it is…

Question 2

Option 1: Voluntary intoxication

Answer 2

• Voluntary intoxication is where D of his own free will decides to take an intoxicating substance.
• It’s only available from crimes of specific intent like murder & s.18 as it may prevent d from forming necessary MR, but not available for crimes of basic intent like assault & s.47 as recklessness is within MR (DPP v Majewski).
• If successful, the charge could be reduced where appropriate, eg. murder to manslaughter as seen in Lipman.

Question 3

Applying voluntary intoxication

Answer 3

• Here, D is voluntarily intoxicated as…
• The crime committed is (…) which is a specific/basic intent crime & so intoxication is/isn’t available.
• If it’s available the charge may be reduced.
• If it’s not available, D’s actions would be considered a reckless course of conduct.

Question 4

Option 2: Involuntary intoxication

Answer 4

• Involuntary intoxication is where D doesn’t know they’re taking alcohol/drugs, eg. their drink has been spiked, a person takes illegal drugs thinking it’s aspirin or taking a prescribed drug which has an undesired effect (Hardie).
• Involuntary intoxication is available for specific intent crimes like murder and basic intent crimes like s.47.
• It must be shown that the effect of intoxication meant D was unable to form the necessary MR for the offence (Kingston).

Question 5

Applying involuntary intoxication

Answer 5

• Here, D is involuntary intoxicated as…

* D was/wasn’t able to form the MR as … & so the defence will/won’t be successful.