*R v Taj

Criminal law – Defence. The judge had not erred in withdrawing the defence of self-defence from the jury, where the defendant had been suffering from drug induced psychosis, as the words 'attributable to intoxication' in s 76(5) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 were broad enough to encompass a mistaken state of mind immediately and proximately consequent on earlier drink or drug-taking, so that, even though the person concerned was not drunk or intoxicated at the time, the short-term effects could be shown to have triggered subsequent episodes of, for example, paranoia. Accordingly, the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed the defendant's appeal against conviction for attempted murder.

Category: