Murder, Voluntary manslaughter and Intoxication

Question 1

What are the two forms if intoxication in a defence?

Answer 1

1- as a way to negate the mens rea of murder; or

2- as an influencing factor on the special defences of loss of control and diminished responsibility.

Question 2

What is the correlation between intoxication and loss of control?

Answer 2

a) Defendant is not precluded from using the defence just because he is drunk;

b) His intoxication will be ignored in accordance with the loss of control act - if it has no connection to the qualifying trigger; and

c) If there is a connection between the things said or done which make up the qualifying trigger; the jury can take that into account in assessing the gravity of the qualifying trigger.

Question 3

What is the correlation between intoxication and diminished responsibility?

Answer 3

Depending on whether the intoxication is:

• independent of the abnormality - the defendant has an abnormality of mental functioning and is voluntarily intoxicated;

or

• as a result of alcohol dependency syndrome (‘ADS’)

Question 4

What is intended when saying that the intoxication was independent of the abnormality?

Answer 4

If the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the killing, the jury should then ask themselves:

has the defendant satisfied you that, DESPITE THE DRINK…

1. he was suffering from mental abnormality; and
2. his mental abnormality substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his fatal acts?’

Question 5

What is intended when saying that the intoxication was a result of alcohol dependency syndrome (ADS)?

Answer 5

• D must have an AMF (Abnormality of mental functioning) - at the time of the killing due to ADS.
• AMF must arise from a recognised
  medical condition.
• AMF must have substantially impaired the defendant’s ability to do one of the thins in s 2(1A).
• AMF must provide an explanation for D’s conduct, even if it is not the only cause.