- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law-Sheehan and Moore (1975) CA
Case Summary
Case Summary
- Case Name: Sheehan and Moore (1975) CA
- Context: Criminal Appeal (CA) case regarding intoxication as a defense.
- Defendants (D): Suspected the victim (V) of stealing.
- Actions:
- Bought petrol.
- Went to V's house.
- V was later found dead, having been doused with petrol and set alight.
- Defense Claim: Both defendants alleged they were intoxicated at the time of the incident.
- Legal Argument: Claimed they lacked the necessary mens rea (guilty mind/intent) due to intoxication.
- Judge: Lane LJ
- Key Principle: "A drunken intent is nevertheless an intent."
- Explanation:
- The mere fact that a defendant's mind was affected by drink is not a sufficient defense.
- This holds true even if the defendant acted in a way they would not have if sober.
- The crucial factor is "provided the necessary intention is there."
- Intoxication does not automatically negate mens rea.
- If the defendant, despite being intoxicated, still formed the specific intent required for the crime, they can be held liable.
- The court will assess whether the requisite intention was present, regardless of the defendant's state of sobriety.
0 Comments