Criminal Law Defences: Intoxication and Self-Defence

This flashcard deck covers the SQE1 syllabus for criminal law defences, specifically focusing on the rules of voluntary/involuntary intoxication and the statutory/common law principles of self-defence.

Specific Intent Crimes

Offences where the mens rea is intention and nothing less, meaning recklessness will not suffice. Examples include murder, assault under $\text{s 18 OAPA 1861}$, and theft under $\text{s 1 TA 1968}$.

Basic Intent Crimes

Offences where the mens rea can be fulfilled by something less than intent, such as recklessness. Examples include manslaughter, assault under $\text{s 20}$ or $\text{s 47 OAPA 1861}$, and criminal damage.

Voluntary Intoxication

Intoxication resulting from a defendant's own choice to consume alcohol or dangerous drugs, including situations where they are mistaken as to the strength of the substance.

Involuntary Intoxication

Intoxication occurring when a defendant's drink is spiked without their knowledge, or when they take non-dangerous/prescribed medication that has an unpredictable and aggressive effect.

R v Kingston [1995]

Legal authority establishing that even if intoxication is involuntary, a 'drugged intent is still an intent'; the defendant is guilty if the prosecution can prove the necessary mens rea was present.

DPP v Majewski [1976]

Leading authority establishing that voluntary intoxication is no defence to basic intent crimes because the act of getting intoxicated is a reckless course of conduct that satisfies the mens rea.

Dutch Courage

The act of deliberately consuming alcohol or drugs to gain the confidence to commit a crime; this prevents the defendant from using intoxication to negate mens rea ($\text{Attorney General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher [1963]}$).

Mistaken Belief due to Intoxication

A rule established in $\text{R v O'Grady [1987]}$ stating that a defendant cannot rely on a mistake (such as the need for self-defence) if that mistake was induced by voluntary intoxication.

Lawful Excuse (Criminal Damage)

A specific defence under $\text{s 5(2) of the CDA 1971}$ where a defendant's honest belief in consent is valid even if that belief was formed while intoxicated ($\text{Jaggard v Dickinson}$).

Self-Defence

A general common law and statutory defence ($\text{s 3 Criminal Law Act 1967}$ and $\text{s 76 CJIA 2008}$) that allows the use of reasonable force to protect oneself, another, or property.

Evidential Burden

The requirement for a defendant to raise self-defence as a 'live issue' at trial, after which the prosecution must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Subjective Assessment of Necessity

The principle that the court must decide if force was necessary based on what the defendant honestly believed the circumstances to be at the time ($\text{s 76(3) CJIA 2008}$).

Reasonable Force

Force that is not disproportionate in the circumstances as the defendant honestly believed them to exist, assessed objectively by a jury or magistrates ($\text{s 76(6) CJIA 2008}$).

Householder Case

A situation where a defendant (who is not a trespasser) uses force in a dwelling ($\text{s 76(5A) CJIA 2008}$); force is considered reasonable unless it is 'grossly disproportionate.'

Grossly Disproportionate

The legal threshold for unreasonable force in householder cases; householders can use disproportionate force as long as it does not cross this extreme limit.

Pre-emptive Strike

The legal principle that a person about to be attacked is not required to wait for the first blow before using force in self-defence ($\text{Beckford v R [1988]}$).

Duty to Retreat

There is no rule of law stating a defendant must retreat; however, the possibility of retreating is a factor taken into account when deciding if the use of force was reasonable ($\text{s 76(6A) CJIA 2008}$).

Heat of the Moment

A legal consideration acknowledging that a person acting for a 'legitimate purpose' may not be able to 'weigh up to a nicety' the exact measure of necessary action while under pressure ($\text{s 76(7) CJIA 2008}$).