Insanity - Defences
a quiz for AQA Law Unit 3 Exam students on the defence of Insanity.
- Created by: Sarah Reynolds
- Created on: 10-06-12 14:06
Other questions in this quiz
2. Which of the following is the correct summary of the M'Naghten rules?
- The defendant must be suffering a defect of reason which results from a disease of the mind which then causes the defendant to not know the nature/quality of his act or not know what he was doing was wrong.
- The defendant must be suffering from a defect of reason and must be able to prove his insanity on the balance of probabilities.
- The defendant must be suffering from a loss in control caused by an external factor which means he lacks the mens rea of the offence.
- The defendant must be suffering from a recognised medical condition which impairs the defendants ability to understand the nature of his act and excersize self-control.
3. The case example of 'Clarke' showed what legal point relating to the law of insanity?
- If the defendant knows that what he has done is legally wrong then he is not insane.
- Insanity must be proved on balance of probabilities.
- Mere absent-mindedness or confusion is not a defect of reason and is not insanity.
- Insanity can be aplplied to a temporary organic or functional disease.
4. Which of the facts below corresponds to the case of 'Sullivan'?
- The defendant injured his girlfriend whilst sleep walking.
- The Diabetic who took a car after failing to take his insulin.
- The defendant absent-mindedly took items from a supermarket.
- The defendant injured his friend during an epileptic fit.
- The defendant stabbed his neighbour whilst suffering from paranoid frenzys,
5. What was the legal point that was made by the case of 'Sullivan?'
- For the defence of insanity to succeed no mens rea is required.
- Organic and functional diseases are included in insanity and the defence can apply where the insanity is temporary.
- Mere absent-mindedness or confusion is not a defect of reason and is not insanity.
Comments
Report
Report
Report