Intoxication

• Intoxication


  The effects of alcohol illegal drugs( Lipman) or prescribed drugs(Hardie)
• Link between intoxication and crime


  Common effects of drinking and/or drug use
• Statistics suggest that half of all violent crimes are committed where D is intoxicated
• Over one million violent crimes are committed each year by intoxicated defendants
• Intoxication is not a 'defence' in itself


  Not a defence for D to say 'but for the drink, I would never have behaved in that way'
• Intoxication may be the reason why D lacked the mens rea of the crime charged


  This is the point being argued when intoxication is raised as a defence
• Burden of proof


  Is on the Crown (Prosecution) to establish that despite the intoxication, D formed the mens rea
• 3 key distinctions drawn by the courts


  • Was D's intoxication voluntary or involuntary?
  • If voluntary, is the crime charged one of specific intent or basic intent?
  • If basic intent, is the drug involved one of a dangerous nature (is it one known to create states of unpredictability or aggression)?
• Voluntary intoxication


  D became intoxicated of his own free will, knowing that the substance is one that can have an intoxicating effect
• Involuntary intoxication


  D is unaware that he is taking an intoxicant (Hardie)
• Basic intent crime


  D is not permitted to rely on their intoxicated state to indicate that they lack the mens rea of the crime
• Specific intent crime


  D is allowed to rely on their intoxication to demonstrate that they lacked the mens rea of the offence
• Suggests that D's prior fault in becoming voluntarily intoxicated supplies the mens rea for the offence charged</b>
• Dutch courage


  Exception to the rule where D lacks mens rea for a specific intent offence, he is usually not guilty of that offence. Covers situations where D's intoxication is voluntary and he already has intention to commit the offence.
• Dangerous drug for a basic intent crime


  A drug is classified as dangerous where commonly known in society or by D personally, to cause unpredictability and/or aggression
• If not commonly known that intoxicant is dangerous and D is unaware, D will not face liability where harm is done
• New Zealand and Australia - abolished the basic and specific intent divide. Intoxication is a full defence. Demonstrated that it is very rarely the case that a D is so intoxicated that they couldn't form any MR.
• Formation of mens rea?

  • If d able to form Mr whilst intoxicated, then he will not have defence . if partially intoxicated- still capable of forming mr. Rv kingston- a drugged intent is still an intent.
• How to approach a problem question?

  1. is d intoxicated 2. is d's intoxication v or nv 3. Has d formed the necessary mr for the offence? if it is voluntary, is the crime one of basic or specific intent.