Intoxication evaluation 8 mark explain - Paper 1

Question 1

Introduction sentence

Answer 1

The defence of intoxication is somewhat problematic in theory, and some reform may be desirable to make the law appear more justifiable

Question 2

What type of defence is it

Answer 2

General defence

Question 3

When can the defence be used

Answer 3

When it negates the MR

Question 4

What does intoxication do the liability

Answer 4

can reduce or remove

Question 5

Two types of intoxication

Answer 5

Voluntary and involuntary

Question 6

What is voluntary intoxication and case

Answer 6

-D knowingly chooses to get intoxicated
-Allen

Question 7

What is involuntary intoxication and case

Answer 7

-D does not make the choice to become intoxicated (they are spiked)
-Hardie

Question 8

Two types of intent

Answer 8

-Specific intent
-Basic intent

Question 9

Specific intent

Answer 9

Crime must have intent, recklessness is not enough, i.e murder

Question 10

Basic intent

Answer 10

Recklessness is enough, i.e NFO

Question 11

Lipman

Answer 11

-Voluntary intoxication can be a defence to a specific intent crime as long as D lacks the MR.

Question 12

Gallagher

Answer 12

-Drunken intent is still intent

Question 13

DPP v Majewski

Answer 13

-Voluntary intoxication will never be a defence for basic intent crime as D will have been reckless in choosing to get intoxicated in the first place

Question 14

Kingston

Answer 14

-If D still has the MR despite the intoxication being involuntary, the defence will fail