Crime CLII-Insanity IX
With
regards to the defense of automatism, in instances of hypoglycemia, it is worth
asking the question if the defense should still be allowed, given the fact that
medical science has come forward in leaps and bounds and almost everyone on
insulin or other types of medication to reduce sugar levels in the body is
warned beforehand of what could happen if they take these medications without
eating.
A
defendant on insulin could always knowingly commit a crime and then seek to
rely on the defense of automatism but we have to look at it in light of Sir
William Blackstone’s principle i.e. “it is better to let ten guilty persons
escape than to let one innocent man suffer”.
It
is up to the prosecution on a criminal charge to proof beyond reasonable doubt
(burden of proof) that the defendant did indeed commit the crime and all the
defense has to do, is to raise reasonable doubt.
Because
the courts cannot risk wrongfully convicting someone, the defense of automatism
is allowed. To do otherwise might lead to a grave injustice.
Copyright
© 2019 by Dyarne Ward
Comments
Post a Comment