Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
LO6 - Understand the requirements of the general defences - Requirements…
LO6 - Understand the requirements of the general defences - Requirements of the defence of intoxication
voluntary intoxication
D lacks MR due to voluntary intoxication he will not be guilty of a crime of specific intent but will be guilty if the crime is one of basic intent.
-
-
-
-
-
DPP v Majewski (1977)
H of L upheld D's convictions and ruled that evidence of voluntary intoxication cannot negative MR in a crime of basic intent.
-
R v Heard (2007)
Whilst drunk D took out his penis and rubbed it on a constable. C of A held D would be liable even if he had not formed the required intent because sexual assault is a crime of basic intent.
R v Lipman (1970)
The jury were directed that it was sufficient for a conviction of manslaughter for the Crown to prove that L must have realised, before he got himself into the condition that he did by taking the drug, that acts such as those which he subsequently performed and which resulted in death were dangerous. On L's appeal against conviction for manslaughter, held that the appeal be dismissed
-
R v Kingston (1995)
D committed indecent assault on a 15 yr old boy while involuntarily intoxicated. D formed the MR for the offence and was therefore guilty.
R v O'Grady (1987)
D fought with his friend and killed him. C of A held that even if D mistakenly believed his friend was attacking him D could not rely on self-defence.
-