intoxication

• R v Sheeran and Moore (voluntary intoxication and specific intent)


  We have to test whether the defendant formed the intent. If they didn't have the required mens rea, the prosecution must look at convicting D for an alternative basic intent offence
• AG for Northern Ireland v Gallagher (voluntary intoxication and specific intent)


  If D forms the mens rea prior to the crime, the defence cannot be used
• DPP v Majewski (voluntary intoxication and basic intent)


  Becoming intoxicated is a reckless course of conduct. It satisfies the mens rea of basic intent crimes meaning intoxication cannot be used
• DPP v Allen (voluntary intoxication and basic intent)

  If D didn't know the strength of the substance, intoxication potentially may be used, as long as D was not reckless
• R v Kingston (involuntary intoxication and specific intent)


  If D is able to for the mens rea of the offence then they will be guilty
• R v Hardie (involuntary intoxication and basic intent)


  If D doesn't have the necessary intent or has not been reckless in getting intoxicated they will not be guilty
• R v Hatton


  Drunken mistakes cannot be relied upon as a defence