Automatism

• In bratty v attorney general for Northern Ireland automatism was defined as

  An act done by the muscles without any control by the mind such as spasm, a reflex action or a convulsion; or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing such an act done while suffering from concussion or whilst sleepwalking
• Definition come from R v Bratty; an act done by the muscles without any control by the mind
• Insane automatism


  Where the cause of the automatism is a disease of the mind within the M’Naghten rules. In such case the defence is insanity and the verdict not guilty by reason of insanity.
• Non-insane automatism


  Lack of control is external - such a defence succeeds it is a complete defence and defendant is not guilty
• Rv T

  suffering from PTSD because of the rape

  exceptional stress can be an external factor
• AG’s Ref (2 of 1992); must be total destruction of voluntary control
• Hill v Baxter; involuntary ar, (external factors - a blow to the head, sneezing (whooley), hypnotism, effect of a legal drug)
• Self induced automatism


  Key Question- was the defendant reckless and getting themselves into an automatic state

  If no, not reckless- defence is available to crimes of specific and basic intent e.g. hardie

  if yes, reckless - defences available for specific intent crimes but not available for basic intent
• Self-Induced Automatism

  Baily; taken insulin but failed to eat