1. What type of intent must the crime be, to use intoxication as a defence?
- Specific Intent
- Basic Intent
1 of 9
Other questions in this quiz
2. Which case outlines voluntary intoxication and basic intent?
- R v Lancaster
- R v Dytham
- DPP v Majewski 1976
- DPP v Smith
3. Why can't the defence of intoxication be used if the defendant was voluntarily intoxicated?
- As they have both the AR and MR of the crime
- As they have the relevant Mens Rea for the offence whilst intoxicated
- As they take on responsibility at the time of consumption
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. What case outlines Voluntary/ Specific intent?
- DPP v James
- R v Dica
- Sheeman & Moore (1975)
- Lamb v Landcaster
Similar Law resources: