Abnormality: Bratty V. A-G For NI

By definition, automatism is where an external force takes control over the accused causing them to perform certain actions; however the instances where automatism is caused by internal factors and more often than not is associated with insanity. There are numerous examples in cases such as that of Bratty v A-G for NI [1963] AC 386 where the appellant killed a woman while giving her a ride and subsequently disposed of her body before returning to his residence. It was discovered that the appellant languished from psychomotor epilepsy and claimed not to be aware of his actions at the time of the killing. The judge denied his raising of the automatism defence and nudged the jury in the direction of that of insanity and the jury subsequently convicted the appellant of murder. He appealed but this was dismissed on the grounds that the judge was right in his direction.
Additionally, there is R v Hennessy [1989] 1 WLR 287 where the appellant stole a vehicle and upon apprehension by the police he claimed to be feeling ill. It was found that he was …show more content…
The stigma of insanity acquittal is attracted in instances where the traits of the internal automatism are that of an abnormality of the mind such as in Bratty or that of some other internal factor such as in Hennessy. As consequence of social ,and most pertinent in these instances, legal tradition, it has become somewhat of a trend that once internal automatism is brought up it is more often than not going to lead down to the road of insanity. In the past where the death penality was still existant the defence of insanity was brought about as preference of defendants to being institutionalized over being hanged. In the cases of diabetic defendants such as Hennessy where the categorization of diabetes is found to be hyper-glycemic the defence will always result in that of insanity, for it will fall under the non-insane defence the diabetes must be of the hypo-gylcaemic