levo

Criminal Law: Defences

Evaluating the capacity and necessity defences

  • 3 things to know
  • A2 Units 3 and 4

Overview

Why the internal and external cause distinction is criticised, criticism that the intoxication rules involve a legal fiction and criticism of the specific and basic intent classification.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Evaluation

Give one argument for retaining a special verdict for the mentally ill.

Evaluation

Explain the criticism that the intoxication rules involve a legal fiction.

Evaluation

Give one argument in defence of the rule in Majewski.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    Give three criticisms of the M'Naghten Rules.

    Model answer

    They date from 1843 and use legal rather than medical concepts, they exclude a defendant who knows an act is wrong but cannot stop themselves, and the insanity label is stigmatising and inaccurate.

  2. 2

    Explain why the internal and external cause distinction is criticised.

    Model answer

    Two defendants with identical loss of control are classified as insane or as automatons depending only on whether the cause came from inside the body, which has no medical justification.

  3. 3

    Why is it criticised that a diabetic's classification depends on insulin?

    Model answer

    A diabetic whose blood sugar falls after taking insulin is acquitted while one whose blood sugar rises without it is labelled insane, although both lack control for the same underlying reason.

  4. 4

    What reform has been proposed to replace the insanity defence?

    Model answer

    The Law Commission has proposed a defence of not criminally responsible by reason of recognised medical condition, resting on medical evidence rather than on the Victorian test.

  5. 5

    Give one argument for retaining a special verdict for the mentally ill.

    Model answer

    A simple acquittal would release a defendant who remains a danger, while the special verdict allows the court to order treatment and to protect the public.

  6. 6

    Explain the criticism that the intoxication rules involve a legal fiction.

    Model answer

    Recklessness in getting drunk is substituted for the mens rea of the offence charged, so a defendant is treated as having a state of mind about the crime that they never in fact had.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

Roles v Nathan ( ).
196319411945

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe defendant owed the victim a duty of care and breached it.
BThe breach carried a reasonably foreseeable risk of death.
CThe breach caused the death.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Pecuniary loss is financial and measurable.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Criminal Law: Defences, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.