defences - intoxication + recklessness

Question 1

Q: What does intoxication cover in criminal law?

Answer 1

A: Excessive drinking or drug-taking (self-induced or caused by someone else).

Question 2

Q: Is intoxication itself a defence?

Answer 2

A: ❌ No but it can affect whether mens rea is formed.

Question 3

Q: What factors determine if intoxication can affect a defence?

Answer 3

A: 1. Voluntary or involuntary
2. Basic or specific intent offence

Question 4

Q: What is a basic intent offence?

Answer 4

A: Offence where recklessness is enough for mens rea.

Question 5

Q: Can voluntary intoxication be a defence for basic intent offences?

Answer 5

no

Question 6

Q: Examples of basic intent offences?

Answer 6

A: Assault
Battery

Question 7

Q: What is a specific intent offence?

Answer 7

A: Offence requiring intent beyond recklessness.

Question 8

Q: Can voluntary intoxication be a defence for specific intent offences?

Answer 8

yes, if it stops mens rea forming.

Question 9

Q: Examples of specific intent offences?

Answer 9

murder, GBH with intent (s.18)

Question 10

Q: What is involuntary intoxication?

Answer 10

A: When D didn’t know they were being intoxicated or didn’t know the effect.

Question 11

Q: Can involuntary intoxication be a defence?

Answer 11

A: ✔️ Only if mens rea is absent.

Question 12

Q: Case: Kingston (1994) – key point?

Answer 12

A: D drugged without knowledge → guilty because mens rea formed.

Question 13

Q: What is self-induced intoxication?

Answer 13

A: D intentionally becomes intoxicated.

Question 14

Q: Rules for self-induced intoxication?

Answer 14

A: Specific intent → ✔️ possible if no mens rea; Basic intent → ❌ no defence

Question 15

Q: If D was reckless in becoming intoxicated can they use it as a defence?

Answer 15

A: Basic intent → ❌ no; Specific intent → ✔️ possible

Question 16

Q: Case: Bailey (1983) – key point?

Answer 16

A: Jury decides if D was reckless (e.g. skipping meals after insulin).