Deck 13: Defences I: Incapacity and Negating the Elements of the Offence

Question 1

Johnny, aged 11, steals a DVD from a music shop. Which ONE of the following statements is true?

A) Johnny may be prosecuted because the age of criminal responsibility is 10.
B) Johnny may not be prosecuted because the age of criminal responsibility is 14.
C) Johnny may be prosecuted if the prosecution successfully rebut the presumption of doli incapax by proving that Johnny knew that his conduct was wrong or that he had "mischievous discretion".
D) Johnny may not be prosecuted because of the presumption of doli incapax for children aged 10-13.

Answer 1

A

Question 2

Who decides whether a defendant is fit to plead in the Crown Court (i.e., fit to stand trial)?

A) The jury
B) Two registered medical practitioners
C) The judge
D) The defence lawyer

Answer 2

C

Question 3

Which of the following is NOT a suitable disposal for a defendant who is deemed to be not guilty by reason of insanity?

A) A hospital order
B) Imprisonment
C) A supervision and treatment order
D) An absolute discharge

Answer 3

B

Question 4

Which of the following conditions is NOT likely to amount to a defect of reason caused by a disease of the mind for the purposes of insanity?

A) A seizure due to epilepsy
B) A hyperglycaemic attack due to diabetes
C) Absentmindedness due to depression
D) Sleepwalking

Question 5

Which ONE of the following cases is an authority for the principle that a defendant who commits an offence while suffering a hypoglycaemic attack may plead automatism?

A) Quick and Paddison (1973)
B) Hennessy (1989)
C) Sullivan (1984)
D) Kemp (1957)

Question 6

Marie's drink is spiked with a drug which causes her to lash out and attack Scarlet. Which of the following statements is true?

A) Marie was voluntarily intoxicated and may use the evidence of intoxication to negate her mens rea for any offence
B) Marie was voluntarily intoxicated and may only use the evidence of intoxication to negate her mens rea for a specific intent offence
C) Marie was involuntarily intoxicated and only has a defence to a specific intent offence provided the mens rea is not proved
D) Marie was involuntarily intoxicated and has a defence to any charge provided the mens rea is not proved

Question 7

Bill takes some tablets which usually have a sedative effect but they actually cause Bill to become violent and he attacks his girlfriend whilst in an intoxicated state. Which of the following statements is true?

A) Bill was voluntarily intoxicated and has a defence to any charge
B) Bill may use evidence of his voluntary intoxication to negate the mens rea for a specific intent offence
C) Bill may use evidence of his voluntary intoxication to negate the mens rea for a basic intent offence
D) Bill was involuntarily intoxicated and has a defence to any charge provided the mens rea is not proved

Question 8

Which of the following cases is the authority for the proposition that dutch courage is no defence?

A) DPP v Majewski (1977)
B) Attorney General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher (1963)
C) Hardie (1985)
D) O'Grady (1987)