Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
CAPACITY DEFENCES, - Coggle Diagram
CAPACITY DEFENCES
INTOXICATION :beer:
R v Allen [1988] -The potency of the alcohol is irrelevant. Defendant is to be aware of the risk of consumption. :wine_glass:
-
R v Kingston [1994] - Guilty as Kingston had intention before being inaberiated on drugs. The Drugs enhanced confidence :crown:
R v Fotheringham [1989] - Intoxicated but conviction of rape was upheld. Rape is a basic intent crime :woman::skin-tone-2:
-
DURESS :gun:
Duress By Circumstance
R v Willar [1986] Charged with reckless driving but was aquitted as no possibility of avoidance :blue_car:
-
Duress by Pressure
R v Vega [1985] - The court must consider the seriousness of the harm the accused was threatened :hocho:
R v Bowen [1996] - Low intelligence characteristic are inadmissible but other factors are included 
-
-
-
AUTOMITISM :sleeping:
Hill v Baxter [1957] Established case for Automatism as the defendant had involuntarily lost control "Swarm of Bees" :bee:
-