1/12
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai |
|---|
No analytics yet
Send a link to your students to track their progress
What rule in intoxication is contrary to four rules of criminal liability
The MAJEWSKI RULE
What is controversial about recklessness in intoxication?
It is too far-fetched to suggest a person who is getting drunk is aware of the conduct it will lead to.
What principle does intoxication ignore?
That AR and MR must coincide, the recklessness in becoming drunk will occur before the crime occurs. - Gallagher
What other principle does intoxication contradict?
That the MR must be proved by the prosecution, D is presumed reckless unless he produces evidence otherwise.
What principle in section 8 Criminal Justice Act does intoxication contradict?
It contradicts that the jury should consider D’s subjective state of mind, as he is so intoxicated he will have no foresight of possible consequences - he will have no state of mind.
The distinction between what two crimes is technical and difficult for juries?
The distinction between basic intent and specific intent crimes
When can the basic and specific intent conversions become difficult?
If D voluntarily drinks a little but it also spiked
Why is the effect of a successful plea unpredictable?
D will not be acquitted, he will be guilty of a lesser offence if there is one, or he will be acquitted if there is not one.
What will D have to evaluate which may cause confusion?
If D knew the effects of an unpredictable drug
What reforms did the LC suggest?
Distinction between voluntary and involuntary intoxication maintained
Abolish terms of ‘specific’ and ‘basic’ intention
D should be presumed to not be intoxicated and have the burden of proof of proving otherwise.
What would the reforms mean for voluntary intoxication?
That for an offence only requiring recklessness D is treated as being aware of everything as if he was sober
What would D have in involuntary intoxication if the reforms were passed?
A Complete defence
Intoxication conclusion:
It is a technical defence with the specific/basic distinction and it also defies legal principles such as recklessness.