Other questions in this quiz

2. What was the conviction in the case of Lipman 1970 and why?

  • Murder, as the defendant had already had the MR before becoming intoxicated
  • Manslaughter, as the defendant was reckless and this is not covered in Intoxicatio
  • Manslaughter with the defence of intoxication, as the defendant took the LSD involuntarily

3. Can you use the defence of intoxication if you are drinking voluntarily?

  • No
  • Yes
  • Depends of circumstances

4. What was outlined in the case of Kingston 1994?

  • Even though his coffee was drugged he still had the relevant MR
  • That he could use the defence of intoxication as he was involuntarily drugged

5. Which case outlines voluntary intoxication and basic intent?

  • R v Dytham
  • DPP v Smith
  • DPP v Majewski 1976
  • R v Lancaster


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »