Intoxication Flashcards
What is Intoxication?
Intoxication is not a defence to a crime as such, but the level of intoxication may prevent the defendant forming the necessary men’s rea of a crime.
How does public policy play a strong factor in in this?
Public policy plays a strong factor in ascertaining whether the defendant’s intoxication may be used by a defendant to negate the men’s rea of a crime.
Is Intoxication a aggravating factor or a mitigating factor?
Aggravating factor as the defendant put himself in that position.
Voluntary Intoxication is when?
If the D was voluntarily intoxicated then the defence of intoxication is only allowed where the crime is specific intent and not a basic intent offence
What is involuntary intoxication?
Drug taking unexpected effect or being spiked.
Definitions of involuntary intoxication
Where a person has their food spiked without their knowledge Particular drug has an unexpected result to that anticipated
Leading case of involuntary intoxication
The defendant set light to a wardrobe after consuming some out of date valium tablets which had been prescribed to his partner. He took the valium tablets as he was feeling stressed as his partner had asked him to leave their homeThe appeal was allowed – D had an unexpected reaction to the drug and
therefore the intoxication was considered to be involuntary
What is the leading case of voluntary intoxication?
R v Allen (1988) The defendant had consumed some homemade wine. This had a much greater affect on him than anticipated The intoxication was still voluntary even though he had not realised the strength of it
R v Allen (1988) The defendant had consumed some homemade wine. This had a much greater affect on him than anticipated The intoxication was still voluntary even though he had not realised the strength of it
What is the leading case of voluntary intoxication?
Case of involuntary intoxication but unsuccessful defence
R v Kingston (1994) he was set up, known to have paedophililac tendencies, brought into room with 15 yer old unconscious boy and Kingston was drugged without his knowledge plied with alcohol and invited to abused the boy. As Kingston abused the boy he was filmed and photos were taken.a drugged intent is still an intent
R v Kingston (1994) he was set up, known to have paedophililac tendencies, brought into room with 15 yer old unconscious boy and Kingston was drugged without his knowledge plied with alcohol and invited to abused the boy. As Kingston abused the boy he was filmed and photos were taken.a drugged intent is still an intent
Case of involuntary intoxication but unsuccessful defence
What is basic intent?
A crime that can be committed by recklessness
A crime that can be committed by recklessness
What is basic intent?
What is a specific intent?
A crime that cannot be committed by recklessness and requires intention
A crime that cannot be committed by recklessness and requires intention
What is a specific intent?
DPP v Beard (1920)
The defendant whilst intoxicated (voluntarily) raped a 13 year old girl and put his hand over her mouth to stop her from screaming. She died of suffocation.Where there is a specific intent offence if D was so drunk that he was incapable of forming the intent required he can not be convicted of the crime
The defendant whilst intoxicated (voluntarily) raped a 13 year old girl and put his hand over her mouth to stop her from screaming. She died of suffocation.Where there is a specific intent offence if D was so drunk that he was incapable of forming the intent required he can not be convicted of the crime
DPP v Beard (1920)
R v Sheehan and Moore (1975)
The two defendants, in a drunken state, poured petrol over a a man and set light to him causing his death A drunken intent is still an intentHowever, it was held that they were too drunk and did not form the mens rea for murder and were therefore convicted of man slaughter
The two defendants, in a drunken state, poured petrol over a a man and set light to him causing his death A drunken intent is still an intentHowever, it was held that they were too drunk and did not form the mens rea for murder and were therefore convicted of man slaughter
R v Sheehan and Moore (1975)
What is Dutch courage in intoxication?
Where a a person forms the intention to commit a crime and then drinks in order to enable them to carry out the crime, they cannot claim the intoxication prevented them from forming the mens rea
(A-G for N.Ireland v. Gallagher (1963) )
Where a a person forms the intention to commit a crime and then drinks in order to enable them to carry out the crime, they cannot claim the intoxication prevented them from forming the mens rea
(A-G for N.Ireland v. Gallagher (1963) )
What is Dutch courage in intoxication?
A-G for N. Ireland v. Gallagher (1963)
D wanted to kill his wife and drank a bottle of whiskey to make him do it - convicted of murder
D wanted to kill his wife and drank a bottle of whiskey to make him do it - convicted of murder
A-G for N. Ireland v. Gallagher (1963)
DPP v Majewski
The defendant was heavily intoxicated and got into a fight at a pub. During the fight he attacked several people including a police officer. He was found guilty and appealed contending that he could not be convicted when he lacked the mens rea of the offences due to his intoxicated state.The crime was one of basic intent and therefore his intoxication could not be relied on as a defence
