Automatism - Defences

A quiz for AQA Law Unit 3 Students on the defence of automatism.

?

1. The definition of 'automatism' is...

  • 'An act done by the muscles without any control of the mind such as a spasm'
  • 'An act done by the muscles with control of the mind where the defendant does not know the nature of what he was doing'
  • 'An act done by the muscles caused by a disease in the mind'
1 of 10

Other questions in this quiz

2. The answer from the previous question was defined in which case?

  • Bailey V Attorney General for N, Ireland
  • Attorney General's reference (no 2 of 1992)
  • Bratty V Attorney General for N. Ireland
  • DPP V Majewski

3. Which of the following isn't an example of external causes for non-insane automatism?

  • Hypnotism
  • Effect of drug
  • Pregnancy
  • Post-traumatic Stress
  • Blow to the head

4. What happened in the case of 'Bailey?'

  • The defendant had taken alcahol and drugs, he attacked people in a pub and injured police officers whilst resisting arrest.
  • Defendant was a diabetic who failed to eat after taking insulin and as a result hit someone over the head with an iron bar.
  • The Defendant was a sleepwalker who injured his gf whilst asleep.

5. The case of 'Bailey' is related to what legal point on automatism?

  • Where the automatism is knowingly self-induced, it can only provide a defence to an offence of specific intent as the defendant lacks the required mens rea.
  • For non-insane automatism, the external factor must cause a total loss of control to succeed as a defence.
  • If the automatism is caused by a disease of the mind it then comes under insanity.
View more questions

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Law of Tort resources »