Mental Capacity Defences Flashcards
(40 cards)
Who does the burden of proof lay on when proving insanity and what is it proved on?
Defendant
Balance of probabilities
What is insanity sometimes known as?
Insane automatism
What does insanity negate?
Actus Reus, presumes act wasn’t voluntary
What are the 4 factors to prove?
Defect of reason
Disease of the mind
Nature and quality of act
Knowledge that the act was wrong
Defect of reason case and description
R v Clarke (1972), deprived of power to reason
Short periods of absentmindedness fall short
Disease of the mind cases and description
Legal not medical definition, malfunctioning of the mind.
- Arteriosclerosis: R v Kemp
- Epilepsy: R v Sullivan
- Diabetes: R v Hennessy
- Sleepwalking: R v Burgess
What does Devlin way about the disease of mind
The duration of temporary suspension of the “mental faculties of reason, memory and understanding is all that is required to satisfy the disease of mind requirement.”
Nature and quality of act cases and description
Codere: physical not moral nature of act: R v Oye (2013)
Knowledge that the act was wrong cases and description
legal not morally wrong : R v Windle (1952), R v Johnson (2007)
Insanity and voluntary intoxication, what must cause insanity
Internal factor, intoxicating substances are external, defence can’t be used: R v Quick, R v Coley
The M’Naghten Rules (1843)
Defendant is suffering from defect of reason + defect is due to disease of the mind + defendant does not know nature of quality of their action, or if they do know it, do not know it is wrong
What does automatism seek to prove?
Involuntary act caused by an external factor
What defines automatism?
Bratty v A.G for NI
What does Bratty v A.G for NI state?
Defendants will have a complete defence if they can show at the time of the offence they were not in control of their bodily movements, rendering their conduct involuntary
What are the 3 factors to prove automatism?
Involuntary act
External cause
Self induced automatism
Involuntary act cases and description
Total loss of voluntary control: Brooke v Perkins
Can include conditions like PTSD: R v T
External cause cases and description
Inability to control ones acts must be caused by an external factor
Not available via internal cause: R v Quick, R v Hennessy
Self induced automatism facts and cases
If automatism results from an appropriate action with unforeseen consequences, defence can be used regardless of the crime.
Defence may not be available is automatised caused by the defendants own fault: R v Bailey
There and specific rules for specific and basic intent
What is specific intent in automatism?
Crimes that only have intention as a level of mens rea (s.18 GBH)
What is basic intent in automatism?
Crimes where the defendant has been reckless or negligent (s.20 GBH)
Was are the specific intent facts?
Might still have a defence is automatism was self-induced as there was a lack of mens rea
First rule of basic intent?
Defendant cannot use the defence if being reckless as it is a basic intent
Second rule and case of basic intent?
Drinking, illegal drugs etc are reckless courses of action, therefore cannot use the defence: R v Coley, R v Majewski
Third rule and case of basic intent?
If the defendant doesn’t know their actions are likely to lead to a self-induced automatic state they haven’t been reckless and can use the defence: R v Hardie
