Involuntary intoxication

Question 1

When do the Majewski rules apply

Answer 1

when V is voluntarily intoxicated

Question 2

What is involuntary intoxication

Answer 2

When D takes an intoxicating substance but is unaware of doing so

Question 3

Are the rules of IVI less or more stringent than VI?

Answer 3

less

Question 4

What case stated that if D is rendered intoxicated by after persons action then he is not responsible for what he did

Answer 4

R V pearson

Question 5

When may intoxication still be classed as involuntary

Answer 5

When D takes a drug but an unknown affect happened e.g. takes Valium to calm down but becomes aggressive

Question 6

What is the test

Answer 6

whether D had any MR when he committed the offence

Question 7

How many main situations are there when D’s intoxication will be treated as involuntary

Answer 7

4

Question 8

First situation regarding prescriptions

Answer 8

If D took a drug under prescription, as long as there was no recklessness, then the prescribed drugs have an unexpected side affect of making D intoxicated as in R V Bailey

Question 9

Second situation regarding sedative effect

Answer 9

If the drug is commonly known to have a sedative effect there can be defence providing there was no recklessness

Question 10

Third situation regarding knowledge

Answer 10

If the drug was taken by D without his knowledge, however D cannot argue that he was drinking voluntarily but failed to realise the strength of his drink as in R V Allen

Question 11

Fourth situation regarding duress

Answer 11

If D if forced to take an intoxicating substance then he may have the defence this is persuasive from America

Question 12

IF D matches one of the four situations what happens

Answer 12

He may have his evidence considered even when the crime is a BIC

Question 13

Law regarding involuntary intoxication and BIC

Answer 13

Can be a defence because no recklessness as D has not chosen to take the substance so there is no MR

Question 14

Law regarding involuntary intoxication and SIC

Answer 14

If D has MR formed before becoming intoxicated there can be no defence
there can be a defence to SIC if the MR is not formed

Question 15

Which case showed there couldn’t be a defence for a SIC

Answer 15

R V Kingston:
D homosexual tendencies and was drugged and left with a 15 year ld boy who he raped. D claimed to have no knowledge of the offence and said if he wasn’t intoxicated he would have restrained himself.
HL said a drugged/drunken intent is still and intent and since he has MR he was found guilty