Crime CXXXXII– Intoxication XIII
The
rule in R v O’Grady (1987) with regards to a mistake of facts induced by
self-intoxication was reaffirmed in the 2005 case of R v Hatton, in that, a
defendant cannot validly raise the defense of self-defense when he caused the
death of another under a mistaken belief that was precipitated by the excessive
consumption of alcohol or the taking of drugs.
In
R v Hatton (2005) the defendant and the victim met at a pub. The victim was a
manic depressive and was prescribed lithium to keep his illness under control.
On the day in question the defendant had not taken his lithium and the alcohol
in is blood was above twice the legal limit.
The
defendant and the victim met in a pub. They did not know each other prior to
that and on the day, the victim was acting strangely and passed himself off as
a former member of the SAS and was exhibiting his martial arts skills. Both men
had been drinking heavily and left together in the defendant’s car. The
defendant drove the victim to his home and he could not remember what happened
next.
The
following morning the defendant called the police informing them that there was
a dead man in his house. The victim had been battered to death by a
sledgehammer and there was a long stick close to his body. The defendant was
charged and the trial judge directed the jury along the lines of R v O’Grady
(1987) and the fact that the defendant labored under a mistake of facts induced
by his drunkenness was not a defense and the jury convicted for murder. The
defendant appealed on the grounds that the jury should look at the facts as it
appeared to the defendant or as he believed them to be (subjective).
The
appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld. The defendant’s drunken
mistake cannot give rise to the defense of self-defense.
Copyright
© 2019 by Dyarne Ward
Comments
Post a Comment