Ca crim div lord lane lcj pill j rose j 27 01 1989.
Rv hennessy 1989.
This case considered the issue of automatism and insanity and whether or not a man who was suffering from diabetes and had failed to take insulin could raise the defence of automatism or if his condition satisfied the definition of legal insanity.
Hennessy 1989 1 wlr 287.
He was taken to the police station and at first felt well but later taken to hospital because he was unwell.
R v hennessy 1989 the defendant was charged with taking a car and driving whilst disqualified.
He claimed that he was suffering from.
Share this case by email.
The appellant a diabetic was apprehended while driving a stolen car.
Filed under practice and procedure.
Additionally if the person has anxiety or depression this.
Diabetes and defences automatism or insanity in hyperglycaemic cases.
R v hennessy 1989 1 wlr 297.
On 15th january last year on the second day of a trial in the crown court at lewes before his honour judge birks and a jury following a ruling on the defence of non insane automatism this appellant andrew michael hennessy now 27 years of age pleaded guilty and was sentenced as follows.
R v hennessy 1989 1 w l r 287 case summary last updated at 11 01 2020 18 08 by the oxbridge notes in house law team.
The defendant was charged with taking a motor car without authority and.
He was a diabetic and needed insulin to control this.
Judgement for the case r v hennessy.
He had not taken any insulin to stabilise his metabolism nor eaten properly for.
Diabetic claiming blackout through stress lack of insulin.
D was a diabetic and having neglected to eat or drink or taken insulin in several days and committed some crimes including driving without a license in a state of hypoglycaemia possibly.
Name email website.
In r v kemp 1957 1 qb 399 arteriosclerosis or a hardening of the arteries caused loss of control during which the defendant attacked his wife with a hammer.
First of all on count 1 for.
This was an internal condition and a disease of the mind.
He was a diabetic and was required to take two insulin doses per day.
0 comments add one.
R v hennessy 1989 1 wlr 287 court of appeal the appellant had stolen a car and was stopped by the police whilst driving it.
Epilepsy was an internal condition and a disease of the mind and the fact.
The lord chief justice.
The judge said that this was an internal factor and the defence was therefore insanity.
He stated that he had forgotten to take his insulin it caused him to suffer hyperglycemia.
He later collapsed at the police station it became apparent that he was having a diabetic episode and that he had not taken his insulin for several days at least.
In r v sullivan 1984 ac 156 during an epileptic episode the defendant caused grievous bodily harm.
Hyper glycaemia high blood sugar level caused by diabetes at the time because.
R v hennessy 1989 27 01 1989.
