The aim of this article is to consider the way intoxication works within criminal law, and how the application can differ depending on the category of the crime.
science
Description
Introduction
The aim of this article is to consider the way intoxication works within criminal law, and how the application can differ depending on the category of the crime. In particular, it considers how the doctrine of intoxication applies to property offences, and how that application may be affected by the Supreme Court decision in Ivey v Genting Casinos. Due to the proportion of crimes committed containing an element of intoxication,1 it is important that the law in this area works effectively and consistently, in order for all members of the public to understand their legal position. Specifically, the law should be fair on defendants but also should be interpreted in a way that protects public safety. There have been numerous debates 2 amongst academics about the intoxication doctrine, and whether it works in the way that protects the people it should. Within England and Wales, many offenders commit crimes while under the influence of alcohol, making the law surrounding intoxication something of considerable importance. According to the March 2015 Crime Survey for England and Wales3; victims of violent incidents believed that the offenders were under the influence of alcohol in 47% of cases 4. Despite the vast amount of alcohol related violent incidents, there seems to have been a decreasing number over the last ten years. Violent incidents in general have also decreased suggesting the proportion has remained similar. Between April 2005 and March 2015, the figures fluxuated, but the proportion remained between 45% and 55%.5 In the 2013/14 Survey 6 , in 54% of alcohol-related violent incidents the offender was aged
Instruction Files
876-2706-1-PB.pdf
465.2 KB
