Automatism

General D must show that act was: Involuntary; and Due to an external factor Automatism was not self-induced

An Involuntary Act D’s mind is not controlling his limbs in a purposeful manner Bratty – involuntary means an act which is done by the muscles without any control by the mind such as a spasm, reflex action, convulsion Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 2 of 1992) – D killed 2 people whose car was on the hard shoulder of the motorway. He claimed he was driving his lorry “without awareness”, caused by driving for a long time on the motorway, and was in a trance-like state. Court held – D was still partly in control so automatism did not apply – needs to be a total lack of awareness

Due to an External Factor Must be caused by an external factor – e.g. a blow to the head, rather than an internal factor – e.g a disease. Hill v Baxter – court gave the example of a swarm of bees causing a driver to crash R v T – exceptional stress can be an external factor – D suffered PTSD after being raped See next slide for difference between internal factor (insanity) and external factor (automatism) Examples of external factors – blow to the head (concussion), attack by a swarm of bees, sneezing, hypnotism, effect of a drug

External Factor - Difference between Insanity and Automatism Insanity results from factors internal to D Automatism results from factors external to D Hennessey – Diabetic had taken a car and driven while disqualified. Failed to take his insulin and this caused him to lost control of his actions. Pleaded automatism. Court held his failure to take insulin meant it was the diabetes which caused his defect of reason – so internal - insanity Quick – diabetic nurse at a psychiatric hospital attacked one of the patients. He had failed to eat after taking insulin and said this had caused him to lose control of his actions. Court held that failure to eat meant that the insulin caused his loss of control – external – automatism

Automatism was not Self-Induced Automatism must not be self-induced – e.g. voluntary intoxication, or resulting from D’s actions or failure to take action Bailey – D, a diabetic, failed to eat and hit a man over the head with an iron bar. Court held that self-induced automatism would not be acceptable

Consequence of Defence Successful defence leads to an acquittal

Questions on Automatism Is D’s act involuntary? Is D’s act caused by an external factor? (if it is internal consider insanity) Is the automatism NOT self-induced?