The defendant appealed a conviction for unlawful wounding, claiming a defence of automatism. Witnesses described his behaviour during the incident in ways which suggested this not to be the case. Medical evidence suggested he was capable of acting subject to automatism.
Held: The judge had not left to the jury the defence of non-insane automatism, and had been insufficiently clear as to the burden of proof on the prosecution.
Lord Justice Potter, Mrs Justice Rafferty, And, His Honour Judge Zucker Qc
[2001] EWCA CRIM 2698
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Burgess 1991
. .
Cited – Regina v Quick CACD 18-Apr-1973
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assault. He had pleaded guilty after a ruling by the judge as to the meaning of the phrase ‘a defect of reason, from disease of the mind’ within the meaning of the M’Naughten Rules. More particularly . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.166968 br>