intoxication evaluation

• Brief intro reword the question
• Must conclude
• 8 marks for knowledge 12 for discussion
• 8 marks for knowledge 12 for discussion
• Voluntary and involuntary good- Kingston

  Specific and basic good clarity 

  Intoxication defence is very complicated lots of grey areas (Hardie- due to the rare reaction was classed as intoxication but how can it not be voluntary when taking someone else’s’ prescription) should be simpler 
• Allen argued that he didn't know the strength of what he was drinking, trying to argue that it was involuntary, but the court ruled against him, which is a good thing as he chose to drink alcohol.
• If Allen had chosen to have a beer and someone put three shots of vodka in it, the court would need to determine if the alcohol or the drugs caused his actions.
• If the only reason Allen committed his actions was because he drank one beer, it makes it complicated for the courts to determine liability.
• Not fair for courts to say that illegal drugs and alcohol are protected the same, treated the same even though alcohol is legal. Taking an illegal drug and choosing to break the law wherever that lands you u should take responsibility.
• Been a suggestion to bring in the defence of ‘dangerous intoxication’ but was rejected 
• Recklessness to have a drink in the pub when u then commit a battery there is no defence- Majewski multiple shots can be considered reckless but one drink surely isn’t
• A large proportion of crime is committed due to violent crimes due to alcohol like domestic abuse and fights

  Drug users shoplift to fund their habit 

  Law makers r aware of this and want to be careful not to make it a defence- we need to treat people harshly if you choose to go out and have 12 shots and commit a crime law will not protect u as reckless cause of conduct it should be rly restrictive can destroy ppls lives a huge problem in british culture 
• When courts understand theres no mens rea as your so drunk there is a partial defence so you wont be convicted of murder but manslaughter instead good thing
• However if so drunk you cant form mr for there there is complete defence very unfair we need some sort of committing a crime whilst intoxicated offence so that there are more substitution offences then the drunks that rob steal and burgle don’t get away with it  
• Other countries have a fall back offence similar to dangerous intoxication idea which would be almost impossible to bring in in uk due to have frequently alcohol is used in offending theft robbery and burglary vary from 7 years up to life no fall back offence would work for all three of those when they are very different.