Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In criminal law, the intoxication defense is a defense by which a defendant may claim diminished responsibility on the basis of substance intoxication.Where a crime requires a certain mental state (mens rea) to break the law, those under the influence of an intoxicating substance may be considered to have reduced liability for their actions.
Accordingly, it only possible to say that the defence cannot argue that intoxication provides a defence, where recklessness has been shown on the fact, in crimes of basic intent. It is possible that the prosecution would be allowed, in certain circumstances, to dispense with the original mens rea entirely and rely solely on the voluntary ...
Strictly speaking, however, it could be argued that intoxication is not a defense, but a denial of mens rea; [10] the main difference being that a defense accepts the mens rea and actus reus of an offence are present. With intoxication, there is no acceptance of the mens rea of the offence. For offences of basic intent, the act itself is ...
DPP v Majewski [1976] UKHL 2 is a leading English criminal law case, establishing that voluntary intoxication such as by drugs or alcohol is no defence to crimes requiring only basic intent. The mens rea requirement is satisfied by the reckless behaviour of intoxicating oneself.
Instead, intoxication may assist the defence arguing that the defendant lacked the appropriate mens rea (mental element) for the crime. [1] However, it has been recognised at common law that those who would not intend to commit a crime if sober cannot be held to the same level of culpability as those who would.
Avoiding water intoxication. Although relatively rare, water intoxication can become a risk under extreme circumstances. In Summers’ case, her family said that, while on vacation, she’d was ...
Some of the injuries victims suffered included a broken eye socket, a dislocated shoulder and a broken nose. The men were held captive while their phones were used to transfer large sums of money ...
Automatism is a defence even against strict liability crimes like dangerous driving, where no intent is necessary. There are several limitations to the defence of automatism in English law. Prior fault generally excludes automatism. Intoxication generally excludes automatism, even when involuntary.