Source: Common Law
General defence – all crimes including those of SL
Complete defence – if successfully raise, it results in a complete acquittal and the def walks free
Definition: The law is defined in Bratty (1963), Lord Denning said that a defendant is an automatic state when…
1) The defendant’s mind is not in control of their muscles, such as a spasm or reflex action or
2) The defendant is in a state of unconsciousness (unaware of what they are doing) e.g concussion.
There must be an external factor – this is essential in proving automatism. Examples include being struck on the head
by an object/slipping on ice/being overcome by a sudden illness/coughing fit/hiccups/temporary loss of control due
to a radical event such as being attacked by swarm of bees
ELEMENT 1: D must have complete loss of voluntary control
Defendant will not get the defence if they retain (keep) any degree of control (AG’s Ref No 2 1992)
- Where def was a long distance lorry driver who had been driving along the motorway without a break.
Veered onto the hard shoulder, hitting stationary car, killing the passengers. It was held that the defendant
still had partial control and this was not enough
Broome v Perkins – A diabetic driver drove a stolen car while banned, hitting several cars before stopping. He claimed
he was driving without awareness but failed to get the defence due to evidence of partial control, implying a
complete loss of control must be present
ELEMENT 2: CAUSED BY AN EXTERNAL FACTOR
Lord Denning also explained that
1) An automatic state which has an internal cause = insane automatism/insanity
2) An automatic state which as an external cause = non insane automatism/ (true) automatism
The courts will accept the following as external factors…
Sneezing (Whoolley)
Exceptional and extremely shocking events will be treated as an external factor (R V T 1990)
- Def took part in violent robbery where she stabbed v before stealing her handbag – claimed she was in
dissociative state caused by PTSD – victim of rape few days earlier – court confirmed that automatism would
be available in situation like this
Being attacked by a swarm of bees (Hill v Baxter)
A prescription drug – if the defendant has wholly unexpected reaction to taking a legitimate (legal) prescription drug
(providing D had not taken it recklessly) – self induced automatism
Sleep walking is NOT AUTOMATISM
- Dissociative state, caused by the normal stresses and strains in everyday life, will not get the defence of
automatism
- Falls into the defence of insanity (internal cause)
Example case: Burgess – man fell asleep next to girlfriend and attached her with a wine bottle and video recorder
whilst sleeping
NOTE: Psychomotor epilepsy, where the cause comes from within the defendant is insanity defence BUT if the
epileptic fit was caused by strobe or flashing lights it could be automatism (external cause)
General defence – all crimes including those of SL
Complete defence – if successfully raise, it results in a complete acquittal and the def walks free
Definition: The law is defined in Bratty (1963), Lord Denning said that a defendant is an automatic state when…
1) The defendant’s mind is not in control of their muscles, such as a spasm or reflex action or
2) The defendant is in a state of unconsciousness (unaware of what they are doing) e.g concussion.
There must be an external factor – this is essential in proving automatism. Examples include being struck on the head
by an object/slipping on ice/being overcome by a sudden illness/coughing fit/hiccups/temporary loss of control due
to a radical event such as being attacked by swarm of bees
ELEMENT 1: D must have complete loss of voluntary control
Defendant will not get the defence if they retain (keep) any degree of control (AG’s Ref No 2 1992)
- Where def was a long distance lorry driver who had been driving along the motorway without a break.
Veered onto the hard shoulder, hitting stationary car, killing the passengers. It was held that the defendant
still had partial control and this was not enough
Broome v Perkins – A diabetic driver drove a stolen car while banned, hitting several cars before stopping. He claimed
he was driving without awareness but failed to get the defence due to evidence of partial control, implying a
complete loss of control must be present
ELEMENT 2: CAUSED BY AN EXTERNAL FACTOR
Lord Denning also explained that
1) An automatic state which has an internal cause = insane automatism/insanity
2) An automatic state which as an external cause = non insane automatism/ (true) automatism
The courts will accept the following as external factors…
Sneezing (Whoolley)
Exceptional and extremely shocking events will be treated as an external factor (R V T 1990)
- Def took part in violent robbery where she stabbed v before stealing her handbag – claimed she was in
dissociative state caused by PTSD – victim of rape few days earlier – court confirmed that automatism would
be available in situation like this
Being attacked by a swarm of bees (Hill v Baxter)
A prescription drug – if the defendant has wholly unexpected reaction to taking a legitimate (legal) prescription drug
(providing D had not taken it recklessly) – self induced automatism
Sleep walking is NOT AUTOMATISM
- Dissociative state, caused by the normal stresses and strains in everyday life, will not get the defence of
automatism
- Falls into the defence of insanity (internal cause)
Example case: Burgess – man fell asleep next to girlfriend and attached her with a wine bottle and video recorder
whilst sleeping
NOTE: Psychomotor epilepsy, where the cause comes from within the defendant is insanity defence BUT if the
epileptic fit was caused by strobe or flashing lights it could be automatism (external cause)
