Other slides in this set

Slide 2

Preview of page 2

Here's a taster:

Covers intoxication of drugs and alcohol or other
Whether the defendant is guilty depends on
· The intoxication was voluntary or involuntary
· Whether the offence is one of specific or basic
intent…read more

Slide 3

Preview of page 3

Here's a taster:

Voluntary intoxication
Voluntary intoxication can negate the mens rea for a
specific intent crime
DDP v Beard (1920)- if D is so intoxicated that they have
not formed the mens rea then they are not guilty
Sheenan and Moore (1975)-proves to be another
Gallagher (1968)-held that if the D is intoxicated but has
formed the mens rea, then they are guilty
DPP v Majewski (1977)- if the intoxication was of a basic
intent offence, then the defence cannot be used…read more

Slide 4

Preview of page 4

Here's a taster:

Involuntary intoxication
This covers situations where D is unaware that
they are taking an intoxicating substance
Kingston (1994)- held that even when
involuntary intoxicated, if D has formed the
mens rea to the offence, they are still guilty
Hardie (1985)- shows that when D is
involuntarily intoxicated and has not formed a
mens rea, they are not guilty…read more

Slide 5

Preview of page 5

Here's a taster:

Intoxicated mistake
It depends on what D is mistaken about as to
whether they can use intoxication as a defence.
If D has not formed the mens rea when intoxicate
because they are mistaken in that aspect, then
they can use the defence.
Lipman (1970)- demonstrates that if the offence is of
basic intent, then D has no defence
O'Grady (1987)- stated that if D was mistaken for
another aspect such as the amount of force
needed for self defence, again they cannot use
intoxication as a defence…read more

Slide 6

Preview of page 6

Here's a taster:

Criminal Justice & Immigration Act
This makes it clear that a mistaken belief cause
by D's voluntary intoxication cannot give a
defence of self-defence.
An exception however is seen in the case of
Jaggard v Dickinson (1980)- where D thought
they were breaking into a friend's house. The
court allowed for an `honest belief'.…read more

Slide 7

Preview of page 7
Preview of page 7


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all resources »