* not completed

Which of the following statements is TRUE?

There is no lower age of criminal liability in English law. correct incorrect

The effect of s. 34 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 is that all children aged 10 and above are fully criminally capable. correct incorrect

Section 34 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides that if D raises his capacity as an issue, the prosecution must prove D was aware that what he was doing was seriously wrong. correct incorrect

The minimum age of criminal capacity in English law is 14. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which of the following is FALSE?

Insanity is a general defence which may be pleaded to all crimes. correct incorrect

Insanity is a legal defence, not a description of a mental or medical condition. correct incorrect

Insanity is satisfied where D was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know that he was doing what was wrong. correct incorrect

Insanity is where D's state of mind is so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal. It is wide enough to cover the mind's activities in all its aspects, not only the perception of physical acts and matters, and the ability to form a rational judgment as to whether an act is right or wrong, but also the ability to exercise will-power to control physical acts in accordance with that rational judgment. correct incorrect

* not completed

The defendant has a defect of reason for the purposes of the defence of insanity if …

He is totally deprived of the power of reasoning. correct incorrect

He is unable to exercise rational judgment. correct incorrect

He lacks will power. correct incorrect

He was absent minded. correct incorrect

* not completed

Disease of mind for the purpose of the defence of insanity is…

an internal bodily cause affecting D's mental faculties of reason, memory, and understanding. correct incorrect

an external bodily cause affecting D's mental faculties of reason, memory, and understanding. correct incorrect

a state of mind is so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal. correct incorrect

an internal mental disorder. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which of the following is FALSE?

In Quick (1973) D had taken insulin but had not eaten. The Court of Appeal held that hypoglycaemia caused by the application of medication to the body is an external factor. This was, therefore, not insanity. correct incorrect

In Hennessey (1989) D had not taken insulin and had also not eaten. The Court of Appeal held that hyperglycaemia caused by operation of the diabetes is an internal factor. This was, therefore, a case of insanity. correct incorrect

In Burgess (1991) the Court of Appeal concluded that sleepwalking is due to an internal disorder and the correct defence is, therefore, insanity. correct incorrect

In Kemp (1957) D's arteriosclerosis was a disease of the heart, not a disease of mind. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which of the following is a FALSE description of the operation of the defence of insanity?

The prosecution must prove D committed the actus reus. correct incorrect

The prosecution must prove D committed the actus reus and satisfied the mens rea. correct incorrect

D must prove on a balance of probabilities that he was legally (M'Naghten) insane. correct incorrect

D must adduce evidence from at least 2 registered medical practitioners (s. 1 Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991). correct incorrect

* not completed

Insanity and automatism (that is insane automatism and non-insane automatism) are similar defences. In which way, from those listed, do they differ?

D must have had a defect of reason. correct incorrect

The defect of reason must have been caused by a disease of mind. correct incorrect

D did not form mens rea. correct incorrect

D did not know what he was doing. correct incorrect

* not completed

In order to determine the effect of the defence of (non-insane) automatism, further questions need to be answered. Select the option below which is NOT a further consideration.

Whether the offence is specific intent correct incorrect

Whether the offence is basic intent correct incorrect

If the offence is basic intent, whether D was Bailey reckless in becoming an automaton correct incorrect

Whether D formed mens rea correct incorrect

* not completed

If D is involuntarily intoxicated at the time of the crime, which of the following statements is TRUE?

If D is charged with a specific intent crime, he is not guilty. correct incorrect

If he is charged with a basic intent crime, he is guilty. correct incorrect

If D formed mens rea he is guilty. correct incorrect

If D was not 'at fault' in forming the mens rea he is not guilty. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which is the best description of the rule governing voluntary intoxication from Majewski (1977) [ignoring for the moment the clarification of it in Richardson and Irwin]?

D is not guilty of a crime of specific intent if he did not form mens rea. correct incorrect

D is guilty of a crime of basic intent and the prosecution is relieved from proving mens rea. correct incorrect

D is not guilty of a crime of specific intent if he did not form mens rea but D is guilty of a crime of basic intent and the prosecution is relieved from proving mens rea. correct incorrect

Voluntary intoxication is only a defence to a crime of specific intent. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which is the best description of the rule governing voluntary intoxication from Majewski (1977) adding the clarification of the test by the Court of Appeal in Richardson and Irwin (1999)?

D is not guilty of a crime of specific intent if he did not form mens rea. correct incorrect

D is guilty of a crime of basic intent and the prosecution is relieved from proving mens rea. correct incorrect

D is not guilty of a crime of specific intent if he did not form mens rea but D is guilty of a crime of basic intent and the prosecution is relieved from proving mens rea. correct incorrect

D is not guilty of a crime of specific intent if he did not form mens rea but D is guilty of a crime of basic intent unless D would not have formed the mens rea of the basic intent crime if he had been sober. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which of the following is FALSE in respect of the self-administration of prescription medication?

Prescription medication is not a dangerous drug. correct incorrect

Case law is inconsistent as to the description of the defence which might apply if D had taken prescription medication. correct incorrect

If D knew the medication may lead to aggressive, unpredictable and uncontrollable conduct, and he nevertheless deliberately runs the risk, this will amount to recklessness so D will not have a defence to a basic intent crime. correct incorrect

Self-administration of prescription medication is no defence to a crime of basic intent. correct incorrect

* not completed

Which of the following is the BEST way to describe the legal effect of a (sober) mistake?

If D makes a mistake which prevents him forming mens rea, he is not guilty because he has a defence. correct incorrect

If D makes a mistake which prevents him forming mens rea, he is not guilty if he can prove he has a defence. correct incorrect

If D makes a mistake which prevents him forming mens rea, he is not guilty provided the mistake was reasonable. correct incorrect

If D makes a mistake which prevents him forming mens rea, he is not guilty because the prosecution cannot prove he is guilty of the offence. correct incorrect