Paper 1.14 - Intoxication Flashcards
(10 cards)
What does the defence of intoxication mean?
Intoxication is when d attempts to argue that they were so intoxicated they could not form the mens rea of intent.
How many types of intoxication are there? How are they different?
Two - voluntary and involuntary.
Vol: D becomes intoxicated out of their own free will.
Inv: D is forced to be intoxicated eg spiked, drugs having opposite effect
What is a specific intent crime? What is a basic intent crime?
Specific: Mens rea is intention, eg murder.
Basic : Mens rea is intention or recklessness, eg manslaughter.
What is the Majewski rule and why does it exist?
HoL: voluntary intoxication is never a defence from basic intent crimes.
By being intoxicated, d is being reckless.
How can voluntary intoxication reduce a sentence?
D is charged with the basic intent equivalent eg murder -> manslaughter.
What is so special about the defence of voluntary intoxication and theft?
Theft has no basic intent equivalent, so results in an acquittal.
What two limits are placed on the defence of intoxication? What cases?
D cannot form the mens rea before becoming intoxicated/drink for Dutch courage (Gallagher).
D cannot use the defence if they make an intoxicated mistake (Lipman, s76 CJIA 2008 - self defence) unless its criminal damage (Jaggard).
How can involuntary intoxication reduce a sentence?
Full defence; complete acquittal.
If D takes a drug and it has the opposite effect, can d claim involuntary intoxication? What case?
Yes, this was the case in Hardie.
If d has been spiked after developing MR, can d claim involuntary intoxication? What case?
No, this was the case in Kingston.
