This document contains 12 questions and answers about legal cases related to criminal defenses. Each answer cites a legal authority or case that establishes precedent for issues like intoxication as a defense, involuntary versus voluntary intoxication, automatism, insanity, self-defense, and epilepsy as a form of insanity. The document appears to be notes from a study of criminal law cases and defenses.

1. A Question of Cases!!!

2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

3. Question 1 ANSWER

4. Answer Beard Authority for – intoxication is only a defence if you’re incapable of forming mens rea BACK TO THE BOARD...

5. Question 2 ANSWER

6. Answer Allen Authority for: involuntary intoxication must be completely involuntary BACK TO THE BOARD...

7. Question 3 ANSWER

8. Answer Gallagher Authority for: Dutch courage can never be a defence BACK TO THE BOARD...

9. Question 4 ANSWER

10. Answer Majewski Authority for: voluntary intoxication is only a defence to crimes of specific intent BACK TO THE BOARD...

11. Question 5 ANSWER V

12. Answer Broome v Perkins Authority: it’s not automatism if you can swerve to avoid collisions BACK TO THE BOARD...

13. Question 6 ANSWER V

14. Answer Hill v Baxter Authority – a swarm of bees could be an involuntary act and equal automatism BACK TO THE BOARD...

15. Question 7 ANSWER

16. Answer M’Naghten Authority for: rules on insanity BACK TO THE BOARD...

17. Question 8 ANSWER

18. Answer Hennessy Authority for: Diabetic who hadn’t taken insulin was insane BACK TO THE BOARD...

19. Question 9 ANSWER

20. Answer Williams Authority for: in self defence belief just has to be honest BACK TO THE BOARD...

21. Question 10 ANSWER

22. Answer Sullivan Authority for epilepsy equals insanity BACK TO THE BOARD...

23. Question 11 ANSWER

24. Answer Bratty Authority for: definition of automatism BACK TO THE BOARD...

25. Question 12 ANSWER

26. Answer Kingston Authority for – even if involuntary intoxication you must be incapable of forming mens rea BACK TO THE BOARD...