Posted on December 12, 2008 by norman baird
“The Court of Criminal Appeal certified that their decision in dismissing the Appellant’s appeal involved two points of law of general public importance. The first was ” whether, his plea of insanity having been rejected by ” the jury, it was open to the accused to rely upon a defence of automatism “. This raises [...]
Filed under: Automatism, Case link, Defences, Insanity | Leave a Comment »
Posted on December 12, 2008 by norman baird
“What are the relevant characteristics of the accused to which the jury should have regard in considering the second objective test in duress. This question has given rise to considerable difficulty in recent cases. It seems clear that age and sex are, and physical health or disability may be, relevant characteristics. But beyond that it [...]
Filed under: Defences, Duress, Sexual offences | Leave a Comment »
Posted on December 11, 2008 by norman baird
“This is a reference to the Court by the Attorney General under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972. The point of law upon which the Court is asked to give its opinion is as follows: “Where two persons fight (otherwise than in the course of sport) in a public place can it be [...]
Filed under: Case link, Consent, Defences | Leave a Comment »
Posted on October 5, 2008 by norman baird
“This appellant was convicted in the Crown Court at Maidstone of an offence of sexual assault contrary to section 3 Sexual Offences Act 2003. The issue to which his conviction gives rise is whether he can or cannot be heard to say that by reason of voluntary intoxication he did not have the necessary state [...]
Filed under: Defences, Sexual offences | Leave a Comment »
Posted on October 5, 2008 by norman baird
“It is well established that a genuine but mistaken belief can be relied upon as a defence to a criminal charge such as false imprisonment where the Crown have to prove that the defendant’s conduct was unlawful. This principle is well illustrated by the case of R v Gladstone Williams [1984] 78 CAR 276 where [...]
Filed under: Case link, Defences | Leave a Comment »