Insanity

• What are the two main categories of defences in law?

  Partial Defences and Complete Defences
• What is the difference between partial and complete defences?


  Partial defences reduce liability, while complete defences eliminate it entirely.
• What are the special defences available only for murder charges?

  • Loss of Control
  • Diminished Responsibility
• What is the general defence available for all offences?

  General Defences include Voluntary Intoxication, Automatism, Self Defence, Consent, Intoxication (Involuntary), Insanity, and Duress.
• Under what condition can voluntary intoxication be used as a defence?

  It can be used if it is a specific intent offence and there is no mens rea.
• What does the term 'insanity' refer to in legal context?


  It refers to a legal definition of mental capacity, not a medical definition.
• What happens if the insanity defence is accepted by the jury?


  The jury returns a special verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity."
• Why might a defendant choose not to raise the insanity defence?


  It is often suggested by the prosecution or judge, not the defendant.
• What does the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 allow judges to do?


  It allows judges to make a hospital order, a supervision order, or an order for absolute discharge.
• What are the M’Naghten Rules related to insanity?

  They state that a defendant must be laboring under a defect of reason from a disease of the mind.
• What are the elements required to establish the defence of insanity according to the M’Naghten Rules?


  Defect of reason, disease of the mind, and not knowing the nature or quality of the act or that it was wrong.
• What does the burden of proof entail for the insanity defence?


  The burden of proving insanity is on the defence, which is a reverse onus.
• What is the significance of the case R v Clarke [1972] in relation to insanity?


  It established that absentmindedness due to a mental condition does not qualify for the insanity defence.
• How does the case R v Kemp [1957] relate to the definition of 'disease of the mind'?


  It established that an internal physical condition affecting mental faculties can be classified as insanity.
• What was the outcome of R v Sullivan [1984] regarding the insanity defence?


  The court ruled that epilepsy can support a claim of insanity if it causes a defect of reason.
• What distinguishes internal causes from external causes in the context of insanity and automatism?


  Internal causes relate to conditions affecting mental faculties, while external causes do not.
• What was the ruling in R v Quick [1973] regarding the cause of the defendant's actions?


  The court quashed the conviction because the cause was an external factor (insulin overdose), not an internal condition.
• What is the implication of hyperglycaemic and hypoglycaemic episodes in relation to insanity and automatism?


  Hyperglycaemic episodes are considered internal (insanity), while hypoglycaemic episodes are considered external (automatism).
• What was the outcome of R v Hennessy [1989] regarding the defendant's claim of automatism?


  The judge ruled that the evidence supported insanity rather than automatism due to the internal cause of hyperglycaemia.
• What was the ruling in R v Burgess [1991] regarding sleepwalking and the insanity defence?


  The jury returned a special verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" due to the internal cause of sleepwalking.
• What was the outcome of R v Lowe [2005] regarding the defendant's actions while sleepwalking?


  The defendant was found not guilty by reason of insanity and detained in a secure hospital.
• What is the significance of the case Codere [1916] in relation to the insanity defence?


  • Defence applies if D was not aware of their actions.
  • Example: D thought he was slicing bread instead of cutting a throat.
• What is the key takeaway regarding the application of the insanity defence?


  The defence applies when the defendant is deprived of the power of reasoning due to a defect of reason.
• What happened to V while she was asleep in D's flat?


  D attacked her with a wine bottle and a video recorder
• What was D's reaction after attacking V?


  D showed considerable distress at what he had done
• What defense did D plead in response to the s20 OAPA 1861 charge?


  Automatism based on sleepwalking
• What was the trial judge's ruling in R v Burgess regarding sleepwalking?


  There was no evidence of any external cause for sleepwalking
• What was the jury's verdict in R v Burgess?


  Not guilty by reason of insanity
• What was the outcome for D in R v Burgess?


  D was ordered to be detained in a secure hospital
• What happened in R v Lowe?


  D killed his father while sleepwalking
• What does the 2014 UK study suggest about sleepwalking?


  One in 10 people are somnambulists, equating to approximately 6.7 million people
• What is the defense applicable if D was not aware of their actions?


  • Example from Codere [1916]: D thought he was slicing bread, not cutting a throat.
  • It involves a defect of reason, not just a moral understanding of wrongness.
• What did D say after killing his wife in R v Windle?


  "I suppose they will hang me for this."
• What did D's words in R v Windle indicate about his awareness?


  He knew that what he did was legally wrong
• What is the significance of knowing the nature and quality of the act in insanity defense?


  Insanity is available if D does not know that what they did was legally wrong
• What was the initial jury direction regarding irresistible impulses?


  • If D was unable to control their actions, it was open to return a special verdict.
  • By 1925, inability to resist an impulse was deemed irrelevant if D knew their actions were wrong.
• Which case suggested adding irresistible impulses as a third limb to the insanity test?


  The Royal Commission on Capital Punishment (1953)
• What does R v Kemp (1957) illustrate regarding disease of the mind?


  It involves physical or mental conditions affecting the defendant's actions
• What distinguishes R v Quick (1973) from R v Hennessy (1989)?


  Quick involved an external cause (hypoglycemia), while Hennessy involved an internal cause (hyperglycemia)
• What is the legal point from R v Windle regarding the insanity defense?


  D knew it was legally wrong, so he was unable to use the defense