Where there is a statutory defence that allows for an honest belief, the defendant will be able to use this defence even if his belief is due to his voluntary intoxication (see [ case ]on the defence in the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s 5(2)(a): covered further in section 11.1.3.1). Similarly, a defendant who believes that the owner would consent to D’s appropriation of the owner’s property will not be dishonest, by virtue of s2(1)(b) Theft Act 1968, so will not be liable for theft.
Answer
Jaggard v Dickinson [1980] 3 All ER 716
Tags
#crime #defences #law
Question
Where there is a statutory defence that allows for an honest belief, the defendant will be able to use this defence even if his belief is due to his voluntary intoxication (see [ case ]on the defence in the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s 5(2)(a): covered further in section 11.1.3.1). Similarly, a defendant who believes that the owner would consent to D’s appropriation of the owner’s property will not be dishonest, by virtue of s2(1)(b) Theft Act 1968, so will not be liable for theft.
Answer
?
Tags
#crime #defences #law
Question
Where there is a statutory defence that allows for an honest belief, the defendant will be able to use this defence even if his belief is due to his voluntary intoxication (see [ case ]on the defence in the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s 5(2)(a): covered further in section 11.1.3.1). Similarly, a defendant who believes that the owner would consent to D’s appropriation of the owner’s property will not be dishonest, by virtue of s2(1)(b) Theft Act 1968, so will not be liable for theft.
Answer
Jaggard v Dickinson [1980] 3 All ER 716
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it Where there is a statutory defence that allows for an honest belief, the defendant will be able to use this defence even if his belief is due to his voluntary intoxication (see Jaggard v Dickinson [1980] 3 All ER 716 on the defence in the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s 5(2)(a): covered further in section 11.1.3.1). Similarly, a defendant who believes that the owner would consent to D’s appropriation
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.