Automatism

Question 1

What is automatism a defence to?

Answer 1

All crimes except absolute liability crimes (larsonneur 1933, winzar 1983)

Question 2

What does bratty v AG of Ni 1963 (epilepsy case) tell us?

Answer 2

Actus Reus needs to be voluntary

Question 3

What are the elements of automatism?

Answer 3

Total loss of voluntary control and caused by an external factor

Question 4

What cases show that it has to be a total loss of voluntary control?

Answer 4

1.Hill v Baxter 1958​
2. Broome v Perkins 1987​
3. Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1992)

Question 5

What cases show that it has to be an external factor and what did they say inside them?

Answer 5

1. R v quick 1973: Diabetic injured someone in hypoglaecemic state. 2. R v Hennesy 1989: Guy stole car in hypoglaecemic state and was said to be insanity because he didn’t take his insulin

Question 6

What Happened in r v thomas 2009 and r v burgess 1991

Answer 6

1. Thomas: Injury during sleepwalking caused by children screaming (external)
2. Burgess: Injury Caused internally (Insanity: internal)

Question 7

What does r v t 1990 say?

Answer 7

Rape causing PTSD can be external (still was convicted)

Question 8

What doees R v Antoniuk (1995) say??

Answer 8

Violent sudden shock can be automatism. Her lover banged her head off the stairs and raped her and this caused her to stab him.

Question 9

What are the cases for self induced automatism?

Answer 9

R v Bailey 1983
R v Hardy 1984
R v Lipman 1970

Question 10

What did the judge say in r v Bailey 1983??

Answer 10

Bailey didn’t eat anything while being diabetic and the judge said that it was reckless for him knowing his state.

Question 11

R v Lipman 1970?

Answer 11

D voluntarily took PTSD so it was self induced.

Question 12

What happened in r v hardy 1985

Answer 12

D took someone elses prescribed valium tablets. They turned out to be out of date and D set a closet on fire. The judge said that valium is usually meant to calm someone down so this was not self induced.

Question 13

What happened in Att Generals ref. No2 of 1992?

Answer 13

Defendant was “driving without awareness” and killed two people. Court of appeal said his condition was only a partial loss.

Question 14

Points for reform in the law of automatism (1)

Answer 14

1. Law commission paper on defences of insanity and automatism (2013): If one is reformed the other must be also since they’re so closely related

Question 15

Cases for Diabetes and what happened (2)

Answer 15

1. R v quick 1973: Took insulin but didn’t eat (external)
2. R v Hennessy 1989: Didn’t take insulin so internal

Question 16

Insanity as medically outdated (Paragraph points)

Answer 16

1. MIND says 0.5% of the Population has epilepsy and lead lives not compatible with insanity claims as in (R v Sullivan 1984)
2. Means Outdated links and terminology
3. Evidential Since it hasn’t been updated in nearly 2 Centuries (M’naughten Rules 1843)
   4.