| Hint | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| Which crimes can the defence not be used for if the D was reckless in getting into a state of self induced automatism? | Basic Intent Crimes | 0%
|
| Which case established that automatism must be caused by an external factor? | Bratty v AG for Northern Ireland | 0%
|
| Establishing if the act was voluntary: must be a total loss of control; case: | Browne v Perkins | 0%
|
| which cases established that self induced automatism can not be used if it was caused by intoxication as it is seen to be reckless? | DPP v Majewski & R v Coley | 0%
|
| Self induced automatism: Case that established the defence may not be available if the automatism was caused by the defendants own fault: | R v Bailey | 0%
|
| Case that stated automatism can be used if the D hadn't realised their actions would put them in a self-induced automatic state: | R v Hardie | 0%
|
| External Cause: Inability to control actions must be external- Case: | R v Quick | 0%
|
| Establishing if the act was voluntary: Can include PTSD- Case: | R v T | 0%
|
| May be available for these types of crime as recklessness is not an MR element: | Specific Intent Crimes | 0%
|
| 2nd Factor to prove for automatism: | Was it caused by an external factor? | 0%
|
| 1st Factor to prove for automatism: | Was the act voluntary? | 0%
|
| 3rd Factor to prove for automatism: | Was the automatism self induced? | 0%
|