Defences

?
View mindmap
  • DEFENCES
    • Insanity
      • M'Naghten: DOR caused by DOM which makes no know nature of quality of act/ if wrong
        • DOM= any mental disorder which manifests in violence and is prone to recur      (Bratty v AGNI)
          • Must be internal (Quick)
            • If ordinary faculties of reason, memory+ understanding affected= DOM (Kemp)
              • Can be organic or functional (Sullivan)
        • DOR= powers of reasoning impaired (Clarke)
        • Not know nature or quality of act or if wrong    (R v Johnson)
    • Intoxication
      • Voluntary+ basic
        • No defence (MAJEWSKI)
          • Possible if not realised sober (Richardson and Irwin)
      • Voluntary+ specific
        • If already formed= guilty (AGNI v Gallagher)
        • Lesser which R suffices (Sheehan v Moore)
      • Involuntary
        • Had already formed MR= guilty            (R v Kingston)
        • No MR formed= success        (R v Hardie)
    • Automatism
      • Any act done by muscles w/o any control by the mind or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing
        • Bratty v AGNI
        • Must be invol. and cause must be external
          • Hill v Baxter
        • Must have a total destruction of voluntary control
          • A-G's Reference no.2
        • Self induced
          • SI defence as lacks MR (Bailey)
          • BI defence where not R into that state (Hardie)
    • Self-defence
      • Common Law
        • Defend self from attack
        • Defend 3rd party
        • Defend property
      • S3 Criminal Law Act 1967
        • Prevention of crime
      • Force must be necessary
        • Imminent threat
        • Pre-emptive strike (Beckford)
        • Retreat (Bird)
        • Mistake s76(4) CJIA
          • If D genuinely but mistakenly succeed (Williams)
            • Doesn't work if intox. (O'Grady)
        • Force must be reasonable and proportionate
          • Proportionate
            • Revenge/ after danger passed= X (Clegg)
            • Not excessive (Martin)
    • Duress
      • Threats
        • Must be death/ serious injury
          • Valderrema-vega
        • Can be toward fam (Martin)
          • Or friends (Conway)
        • Must make commit specific offence (Cole)
      • Test set out in Graham:
        • Was D compelled to act as he did because he reasonably believed he had good cause to fear serious injury or death (Hasan)
        • Would sober person of reasonable fairness sharing same characteristics as D have acted same (Bowen)
      • Factors affecting available
        • Only available if no evasive action could be taken (Hasan)
        • Voluntary associates with criminals=X (Hasan)
          • If D doesn't know likely to be violent can succeed (Shepherd)
      • Duress of circumstances
        • Willer

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »