Defences

?
  • Created by: Aimee
  • Created on: 08-01-17 17:13
Why can a child under 10 not commit a crime? Case.
They are incapable of forming the mens rea. C v DPP
1 of 34
What is non-insane automatism?
If the defendant has acted in a state that is equivalent to unconsciousness. Their actions are involuntary
2 of 34
Case- Medical evidence must be shown to prove the act was involuntary.
Bratty
3 of 34
Case that established non-insane automatism
Sullivan
4 of 34
Case of R v T
If depression has been caused by external factors which impairs consciousness, defendant may rely on non-insane automatism.
5 of 34
Case- Self-induced automatism
Bailey. Defendant claimed he had not eaten enough food after taking his insulin causing a hypoglycaemic coma.
6 of 34
What is insane automatism?
A person can be found not guilty by reason of insanity if they can prove they had no rational mental capacity at the time
7 of 34
Problem with insanity as a definition?
It is not a medical definition. Some people have a condition that fulfils the law's definition of insanity, but does not correspond to any medically recognised condition.
8 of 34
Case and explain- Law relating to insanity set out in.
M'Naghten. He suffered from paranoid delusion
9 of 34
Who is the burden of proof on for insanity?
The defendant to prove he was insane
10 of 34
3 steps to fulfilling a defence of insanity.
1 The defendant was suffering from a disease of the mind 2 This caused a defect of reasoning 3 That mean they did not know what they were doing or that what they were doing was wrong
11 of 34
"Disease of the mind" defined in...
Kemp
12 of 34
Case of Quick: Use of insulin mean it was judged to be...
Non-insane automatism as the insulin which caused the automatism was an external factor.
13 of 34
Case- When you know something is morally wrong but not legally wrong that can be a defence.
Windle.
14 of 34
Butler Committee reform?
Knowledge of the law is not a good test when determining responsibility of the insane.
15 of 34
Case- It is not enough for the defendant to say they would not have committed the actus reas if sober.
DPP v Majewski
16 of 34
Intoxication is only relevant to crimes of... Why?
Specific intent to basic intent. Because intoxication will prove the defendant did not have the mens rea for the crime.
17 of 34
In crimes of basic intent voluntary intoxication will affect the MR to form...
Recklessness
18 of 34
Drunken intent is still intent...
R v Heard. Sexual assault
19 of 34
Intoxication does not exactly substitute the mens rea. It is a...
Policy decision so decided on a case by case basis.
20 of 34
Involuntary intoxication is possible in 3 different circumstances (3)
1 Where D is drugged by other 2 Where D has taken medically prescribed drugs as advised 3 Where D takes a non-dangerous drug, not recklessly.
21 of 34
What effect can involuntary intoxication have on the MR?
It can negative it.
22 of 34
If the defendant's mens rea is proved, involuntary intoxication will..
Only be a mitigating factor in sentencing of the crime
23 of 34
Self-defence permits the defendant to...
Use force, including potentially fatal force.
24 of 34
A person may use self-defence to... (3)
1 Prevent a crime 2 Assist in a lawful arrest 3 to defend himself or others in an attack
25 of 34
It doesn't matter if the perception of the circumstances was a mistake according to...
s76(4) CJIA 2008
26 of 34
The degree of force used must be proportionate in the circumstances according to...
s76(5) CJIA 2008
27 of 34
In the cases of trespassers in a house, disproportionate force may be reasonable according to...
s43 CJIA 2008
28 of 34
Self-defence as a defence is not open to those who provoke violent confrontations
Browne
29 of 34
Is there a duty to retreat?
No
30 of 34
Case- A pre-emptive strike may be justified if the defendant foresees an attack coming
Beckford
31 of 34
Reasonable force question asked by the courts
Was the degree of force used objectively reasonable upon the basis of the circumstances as the defendant subjectively believed them to be?
32 of 34
Margin of error in self-defence. Explain with case.
Palmer v The Queen. A margin or error is allowed in the defendant's response, he cannot be expected t calculate his reaction in exact proportion to the threat
33 of 34
For self-defence success means... Failure means...
Success means acquittal. Failure means conviction.
34 of 34

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

If the defendant has acted in a state that is equivalent to unconsciousness. Their actions are involuntary

Back

What is non-insane automatism?

Card 3

Front

Bratty

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Sullivan

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

If depression has been caused by external factors which impairs consciousness, defendant may rely on non-insane automatism.

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal resources »