Intoxication

• 3 elements

  1. Specific or basic intent

  2. voluntary or involuntary

  3. Whether they were so drunk they were unable to form intent
• intoxicant

  any substance known to produce intoxicating effects

  only if it gives expected (not unexpected) reaction during consumption R v Hardie
• voluntary intoxication

  DPP v Beard

  Lord Birkenhead - 'if D so drunk he was incapable of forming intent required, could not be convicted'
• specific intent offence becomes basic intent with defence of intoxication


  R v Lipman- hit his gf 2x and suffocated her during lsd trip. murder downgraded to uam
• mens rea despite intoxication is still intent 


  Attorney General for NI v Gallagher -drunk for "Dutch courage" before killing wife
• voluntary intoxicantion and basic intent

  DPP v Majewski - voluntary consumption is recklessness n provides mens rea
• not realising strength of intoxicating substance = defence 


  R v Allen
• involuntary intoxication

  R v Kingston - blackmailed by 2 business associates. filmed with a 15yr old boy, charged with indecent assault.

  claimed he and the boy were drugged by Penn and did not remember anything. convicted due to pedophilic tendencies
• intoxicated mistake (1)

  R v OGrady- drunk and killed V in mistake he was being attacked
• intoxicated mistake (2)

  R v Richardson and Irwin - assaulted victim in mistaken belief they had consented

  s76 criminal justice and immigration act - voluntary intoxication prevents from self defence
• intoxicated mistake (3) EXCEPTION

  Jaggard v Dickinson - was drunk and went into friends house and broke window. was correct in belief friend would consent and was allowed to use intoxication

  s5 criminal damage act
• if specific, is D so intoxicated he can't form mens rea

  R v Pordage