Everyone is familiar with the concept of an alibi whether it is from television, the news, or movies. An alibi can make the difference between a person being immediately free from charges and an innocent person having to spend lots of time, energy, and money trying to clear his or her name. This type of defense can be used when the accused individual has a person or evidence verifying that he or she could not have been present at a particular place at a particular time. Simply put, you were somewhere else so you could not have committed the crime.

It is important to note that you cannot simply have a person vouch for you and expect to be set free with no questions asked. If there are any weaknesses with the alibi, the prosecution may continue forward with a case. When someone provides an alibi, it can be expected that the authorities will take the time to investigate its validity. Once all parts of the alibi have been investigated, the authorities will make a decision as to whether or not the information is reliable. If it a decision is made favoring the accused, the case will be dropped. Keep in mind that this process is somewhat subjective and as such, the people providing your alibi can be disregarded leading to a trial.

Alibi Proof and Testimonials in U.S. Court

If the authorities do not believe an alibi you have presented, the testimony can still be useful in setting up a successful defense in court. For the record, defense attorneys can make their own assessment of the alibi witness. This means that a motion to dismiss can still be entered before court so that a trial does not need to take place. Criminal defense lawyers are experts at finding and using alibi testimonies in court.

This is especially useful if a possible alibi witness is not discovered until after a trial begins. Attorneys have the resources necessary to track down unknown individuals who may have information crucial to establishing your innocence. It is always better to attempt to get the charges dropped as soon as possible because it will save everyone involved a lot of money and time, not to mention all the stress that will be avoided.

So let us say you have an alibi, but you still have to go to trial. The alibi witness can still be called to testify in court on your behalf. An expert defense attorney will thoroughly interview the witness so that any possible problems can be anticipated early and handled. Prosecutors have no problems digging into a person’s past in order to discredit any testimony, especially since the defense is required to disclose the contact information of each alibi witness.

This can be a major problem for anyone with a questionable past or if the witness is personally vested in the outcome of the case. As long as the defense counsel takes the time to ensure that the alibi is bulletproof, the judge or jury will issue a verdict of not guilty. Rely on an experienced defense lawyer to do everything possible to find an alibi. The witness will be interviewed and the information analyzed in order to determine the best way for the alibi to be presented to a judge or in court. Getting reliable legal counsel will help your trial have the desired outcome.

Common Defenses

When a person is accused of a crime and stands trial, the prosecution must find a way to prove to the jury or judge that the person is indeed guilty. This means that the defendant and the defense must do everything within their power to ensure that the prosecution is not successful. If a case against your innocence can not be efficiently presented, you will be found not guilty. There are a number of different ways to create a solid defense against charges. Some of the defenses try to prove that a person is completely innocent while other defenses revolve on providing a justification for committing the crime.

Innocent Defendants

These defenses are common among people who claim to be innocent. Regardless of whether or not the person in question committed the crime, these defenses are based on the fact that the defendant is claiming that he or she is not responsible for the crime.

• Alibi: An alibi is used to show that a defendant could not be responsible for the crime because he or she was doing something else. As long as the alibi witness or evidence is believable, many people will be free to go with the assumption that you cannot be in two places at once.

• Reasonable Doubt: In order to find someone guilty in the United States, the prosecution must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the particular person committed the crime. This means that the judge or the jury must not have any inkling of doubt when convicting someone. If there is any possible way that someone else could be the perpetrator, a not guilty verdict should be handed down. Along the same lines, a person is assumed innocent until proved guilty. If the defense feels that the prosecution does not have a strong case, they may not present any evidence or call any witnesses. This leaves everything on the shoulders of the prosecution and if they have a weak case, it will fail.

Guilty Defendants

There are many cases where everyone knows the defendant is guilty and the defendant admits to committing the act. Some common defenses for getting reduced sentences or dropped charges include:

• Insanity: This is a very complex defense and requires expert opinions from professionals such as a psychologist. It must be proved that at the time of the crime, a person was not in his or her right mind or that there is a psychological condition preventing someone from fully understanding the circumstances surrounding the committed crime. If the insanity defense is successful, people are rarely set free to the public and must undergo psychiatric care until sanity can be established.
• Self Defense: Commonly used in violent crimes or murders, a successful self defense claim can get charges dropped or severely reduced. The principle of the defense is that people have the right to protect themselves from imminent danger. The key to self defense is that the actions of the defendant must have been within reason.
• Entrapment: This occurs when the authorities essentially set someone up to fail. The crime is encouraged and then when it occurs, the perpetrator is punished. Entrapment can be a tricky defense to pull off especially if the defendant has a history of committing similar crimes.

Peter J. Scuderi is among the top criminal lawyers in Philadelphia with over three decades of experience in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He also publishes his own Philadelphia lawyer blog.

Securities fraud consists of deceiving investors through illegal activities and manipulation of financial markets. Some of the most common types of fraudulent activity are stock fraud, Ponzi schemes, insider trading, and high yield investment fraud, among others.

• Stock fraud occurs when a stockbroker or other person convinces an investor to buy stock by giving information that is deceptive or incorrect. False information may be included in the financial statement submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
• Insider trading is another way stock fraud is committed. Stock is bought or sold based on information that is not available to the public. When investors benefit from insider information to buy or sell stocks, they are participating in stock fraud.
• A Ponzi scheme uses money that has been collected from new investors to pay the high rates of return that was earlier promised to other investors. When investors receive payouts, it looks like a legitimate company, but actually, the money collected from the new investors is the only source of money.
• High yield investments are basically too good to be true. They offer a high rate of return with almost no risk. They usually involve securities, real estate, commodities and precious metals. These offers are unsolicited and the perpetrator will contact the investor by phone, email or in person.
• Another kind of fraud is the creation of a dummy corporation that has a similar name as a genuine company. The people perpetrating the fraud sell securities in the dummy corporation by misleading investors into believing they are buying shares of the genuine company.

It is estimated that securities and commodities fraud involves close to 40 billion dollars annually. The trading volume grew dramatically during the 1990s which also included more fraud by executives, shareholders and investors. This has a devastating impact on these markets in general and eventually on the whole economy.

There are many laws that prohibit deceptive or inaccurate practices to convince investors to purchase the securities. A person who believes they have been tricked into buying worthless stocks can take legal action against the stockbroker or person who sold them the stock. Stockbrokers who are convicted of committing fraud will have their license to trade securities revoked.

Stock fraud can be pursued through a civil lawsuit, and if they win the case, they will be awarded a monetary judgment. If criminal charges are filed against a stockbroker and he or she is convicted, they may face imprisonment or probation. For these reasons, it is advisable that a qualified criminal fraud lawyer be retained if charged with securities fraud.

Securities Fraud in the United States

In the U.S., the sale and transfer of securities is regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). There are severe criminal penalties for security fraud violations. There are also civil fines imposed on people convicted or securities fraud by the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), formerly known as the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). The Securities Exchange Act is a U.S. federal law and gives investors a way to recover losses and attorney’s fees.

Securities fraud is becoming more and more complex with complicated investment schemes and globalization. The internet also gives wide access to unsuspecting individuals. People over 50 years old are the most often victimized by perpetrators of security fraud.

International companies are also subject to securities fraud litigation. Suits can be filed in the U.S. as well as other countries. These suits are often settled out of court, because these cases are extremely complex and can take years to resolve.

Peter J. Scuderi is an experienced Philadelphia criminal lawyer specializing in crimes such as forgery, identity theft, fraud, and embezzlement. He also publishes his own criminal defense blog.

At the focal point of this dispute is the UK’s largest residential freehold portfolio, worth an estimated £2bn and the complexities associated with many civil fraud cases. It was from this Vincent was able to make payments needed for his extensive network of offshore and UK based companies.

In 2008 Vincent pledged shares in his offshore holding companies to the bank Kaupthing. This was done for two reasons; to make up the deficit in an existing loan agreement Kaputhing had with his brother Robert – this shortfall was estimated to be to the tune of £200m. At the time Robert was one of the bank’s primary customers receiving over £1.5bn in loans from the bank. This helped him to build up major stakes in such companies like Sainsburys and the pub group Mitchell & Brothers. However both of these investments had fallen sharply, which meant that Robert Tchenquiz was left in substantial negative equity with Kaupthing. The second reason was for Vincent’s own business operations which saw him borrow £100m. He put the shares up as part of a security deal against that loan.

After the collapse of Kaupthing it was taken over by administrators who took a different view to these two business deals with Tchenguiz. The administrators fired the executives dealing with Vincent’s account and upon closer examination of the deals that had been made, the administrators were quite shocked the bank was willing to make the deal on the contractual terms and conditions in place. For instance, there was already a considerable amount of priority creditors who Vincent borrowed money from for his business operations. This meant that other banks such as Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch and HBOS, to name a few, were priority creditors above them. This meant the value of security in the holding company’s share, in reality, may have been considerably less than the £222m and £100m they were supposed to be.

The method used to value these loans by the former bosses of Kaupthing also seemed to leave the administrators bewildered. The complex calculations used to value the shares to cover Robert’s negative equity showed the shares being valued at £222m. This was founded on assumptions regarding cash flow which in turn were based on a hundred and fifty years span plus inflation and interest rates within that same period. Vincent argued these calculations where of the norm and was commonly practiced by Oliver Wyman, an actuarial firm.  The administrators, however, also felt that Vincent was not in a financially secure position in 2008 to be offering his brother a helping hand, as Vincent was under pressure from his own business operations.

They stated that by the end of January 2008 the Family Trust companies (both indirectly and directly owned) needed loans to pay off the rising defaults and this could not have been done by refinancing money from any of their existing lenders.  Vincent’s response to this allegation included believing not only was this just the opinion of the administrators, they also failed to take into consideration the global credit crunch.

After Kaupthing collapsed the administrators, about a month later, gave notice on the loan Robert had taken out with the bank. The administrators terminated the loan after it had defaulted, with Grant Thornton becoming the receiver for the property holding company shares.  Conversely, the Tchenguizs believed by appointing receivers their actions had bigger implications for them as other lenders have called time on their loans with several priority creditors calling defaults on their loans.

This culminated in a costly and acrimonious legal battle with the Tchenguiz brothers blaming Kaupthing  for destroying  approximately £1.5bn of value in their business.  The legal battle ended in an out-of-court arrangement and with Vincent putting his ground rent portfolio on the market. It has been stated by the lawyers of Vincent that this was a forced sale triggered by the meddling of the SFO.  The SFO used information supplied by people, such as Grant Thornton, to partition the High Court in March 2011, to search Vincent’s homes and offices. This in turn, according to Vincent’s lawyers, forced the Tchenguiz Family Trust to restructure and sell parts of its core business which could work out to cost £2bn. This was caused by the disruption of key access to credit which alas had an effect on their trading ability.

Being a mom, as you all know, can easily lead you into the theatre industry, depending on the role you’re playing for the minute or the day. Only, it’s not acting – it’s real life. We’re forced into being chameleons, taking on multiple jobs as a nurse, teacher, cheerleader, and the list goes on.

I recall when I became a first-time mom, I stopped driving like a road raging maniac, and went on to become a slow coach, driving no more, and no less than 40 miles per hour. This of course, is because I was now carrying very special cargo.

Then, as time went on, I realized my calendar became loaded with activities: including school drop-offs and pick-ups, chauffeuring to lessons and doctor’s appointments. You get the drill. There’s a lot of driving involved as a mom – for both stay-at-homers, and those who work as well. Ultimately, you’re bound to be late at times with little kids who always show up with the unexpected.
The point is, when things get hectic, as it has for me, don’t speed while driving. It’ll cost you extra, in terms of finances, driver’s license points and the risk of injury.

Take a breather. Then realize that ALL can wait. So what if you spend an extra 15 minutes waiting at the doctor? It happens. Ask yourself before you speed, is that on-sale item really worth the cost of these risks? While frugal living and extreme couponing is something to get motivated about, it’s counterproductive when you end up spending more on a speeding ticket.

Getting to the point… a ticket will set you back a couple hundred dollars. And therefore, frugal moms will save when they obey traffic laws.

In the United States, when you or a member of your family is in jail and about to be arraigned, you may be set free if you are able to “post bail”. Once the bail amount is established by the court, unless the crime is severe you likely have the option of posting bail, which releases you from jail under the commitment that you will show up for your criminal hearing.

Why Bail Bonds?

Most of the time, the bail figure is fairly steep, at least too steep for most people to afford in a day’s notice. Bail can range from pocket-change to the value of a home (or higher), and to post bail in a short period of time, many people need to hire a person who is called a bail bondsman.

A bail bondsman is a person who works for a bail bond company. The company issues a bond to the court, which is a pledge that they will pay the bail amount to the court should the defendant fail to show up in court on the appointed date. Most bail companies have a borrowing arrangement form a bank or insurance company, which provides them with the capital they need to operate. Bail bonds are for the full amount of bail, but bail bond companies charge the defendant a fraction of that amount, generally between 10 and 20% of the bail.

This amount is non-refundable and is the commission charged by the bail bond entity for posting the bond. In some instances, the bonds can accrue interest as well.

Therefore, on a $10,000 bail, the bondsman will collect $1,000-2,000 from the defendant and issue the court a bond for the full $10,000. When the defendant presents themselves at court at the appointed time, the bond is returned and the agent keeps the fee. Many people also use the services of a bail bondsman to avoid having to liquidate long-term assets in a “fire sale”.

So, how can you find the right one for your needs?

Talk to Jailors

Bail bondsman may be the only option in many situations, but there are ways to make sure that you pick the right bondsman for you and that you avoid getting scammed. One thing that you should definitely do is talk to the employees at the courthouse and see if there are any sketchy companies to avoid. Some bondsman representatives solicit prisoners, employees, and desperate jail visitors advertising their services, and the employees who work in the jail will know who these people are and that they should likely be avoided.

Review Licenses and Certifications

You should check for licenses and certifications. Bail agencies are just like any other business- the best ones are recognized. Reputable agencies will usually have their information readily available to guests in their offices and on their company websites. Any bail agency that is not straightforward about their work should be avoided. Knowing the terms of the bail bondsman, seeing customer reviews, and having specific details about the company regulations and processes will help you know some companies are better than others.

Government agencies can help you determine which bail agencies are the best as well. Many bonds agencies will advertise it when they are certified through the local state or federal government regulatory offices, and professional societies. If they don’t and licenses or certificates for their business, ask if they participate in any sort of licensing. If not, you may want to visit a new place, and look for someone who is certified.

Shop

Go to at least a few different offices and websites, and don’t just settle for the first bondsman you find. You should trust the person helping you, and the agency should be polite and professional to you when you are interacting with them. There is no reason to go with an agency and a bondsman that makes you uncomfortable in any way, and if they do, you walk out and find someone else. There are many resources in the yellow pages, online, and at the jail to find different options. Options will also let you compare rates and find the best deal.

Even though finding a bondsman can be a stressful process, once you find a bail bonds agent that you can rely on, you will be happy you took a few more minutes and really thought about your decision.While the agent directly across the street from the courthouse may be perfectly respectable, location doesn’t make it so.

Below is a guest criminal law blog post from Jim Loxley regarding stalking laws in Scotland.

Following the success of Scotland’s change in law on stalking, an alliance of UK stalking groups will be announced at Holyrood to celebrate. The event was put together by the Scottish National Stalking Awareness Group (SNSAG) and the alliance will seek to bring together organisations and agencies from across all countries in the United Kingdom. The new group will work with a view to promote a zero-tolerance approach to the crime. New anti-stalking laws got introduced to Scotland back in 2010 in order to both help protect the victims and to help reflect the seriousness of stalking offences.

Prior to the laws being updated, stalking was considered to be a less serious crime by Scotland and people prosecuted as stalkers were done so on charges of harassment. This punishment came under a ‘breach of the peace’ rather than anything more serious. Prime Minister David Cameron has recently announced that in the future, stalking will be recognised as a fully fledged criminal offense in both England and Wales.

The Holyrood-based event launching the alliance is expected to be attended by a number notable individuals such as Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, Ann Moulds, who is the founder of both Scotland Against Stalking and the SNSG, the Solicitor General for Scotland Lesley Thompson QC and a number of others.

A second launch event will be held simultaneously at Westminster, London which will be hosted by the Baroness Brinton. Both events have been set to take place at this time in order to coincide with UK’s National Stalking Awareness Day. The national day will ensure that the spotlight is to stay on stalking, further highlighting it for the serious crime that it is and ensuring that it remains on high profile.

Ms. Thompson added that she was delighted to support National Stalking Awareness Day in order to raise the awareness which such organisations are working on in unison, ensuring the zero tolerance of such an unacceptable criminal act. Ms. Thompson went on to say that it gave her the opportunity to make it quite clear to Scotland’s prosecutors to understand the seriousness of the crime.

This was a guest article from Jim Loxley, Director at car accident compensation claims specialists, My Compensation. Head over to their website for a deluge of useful information on making personal compensation claims.

Marijuana possession amounts and penalties vary from state to state in the US. In some states simple possession of less than 1 ounce could be a simple misdemeanor and the same amount in another state could be a felony. Most Marijuana Lawyers will tell you that as more and more states are considering or have pass laws regarding medical marijuana the situation regarding marijuana laws is fluid. Not every state has medical marijuana laws on the books and even the states that do have guidance around medical marijuana their view often vary.

In the State of Arizona, we recently passed a medical marijuana law for terminally and chronically ill patients. These patients must be stricken by a debilitating disease or have a serious illness like cancer. The reason I bring this up is because they also have medical marijuana provisions in the State of California. That doesn’t necessarily mean that a California medical marijuana card will give you a free pass in Arizona. Another example of how the laws regarding marijuana are in flux is that in Arizona they have legalized the use of marijuana for medical use. You have two options for obtaining your prescription, 1) grow your own plants, and 2) purchase the pot from a licensed dispensary. Currently, the state has not licensed any dispensaries which means if you are to lawfully obtain your prescription you’ll need to grow your own plants.

For example, you are pulled over for speeding and the cop finds a marijuana cigarette in your car. As the law is currently written, you will need to prove that you obtained the cigarette through one of the legally afforded options and since there are no dispensaries you must have grown it yourself. A Phoenix drug lawyer will tell you that as things currently stand in Arizona, just because you have a medical marijuana card it does not mean you can purchase the pot off the street and still be legal. You can still be charged with unlawful possession of marijuana mainly because you did not acquire it in the appropriate manner.

As you can see from those examples, it is of utmost importance to understand the marijuana laws in your state. Do not take a medical marijuana card for granted, just because you have a card still means you need to understand and abide by the rules that govern the state no matter how absurd they may seem.

Blog post provided by Phoenix Criminal Lawyer, David Michael Cantor from Phoenix, AZ.

Before getting caught driving under the influence, think about the life-altering implications discussed in this article.  Apart from the risk of causing harm to yourself and others, there are financial  costs to consider, and also the overall toll it’ll have in your life.

Fines will have to be paid, and this will vary depending on the State you’re in. State DUI laws, fines and penalties can be viewed at DrunkDrivingLaws.org.

Regardless of the State you reside in, or were charged, here are some hidden fees you may not have considered:

• Increased Insurance Premiums – Each new traffic offense give insurance carriers a reason to believe you’re at risk. In addition, some insurance companies can refuse new enrollment applications.

• DUI Lawyer Fees – As DUI offenses are serious, and usually require a lawyer to minimize sentencing, this is an added cost to think about.

• Involuntary Manslaughter – According to  The United States Drunk Driving Accident Statistics (2010), 32 % of all fatalities were alcohol-related, while the average number of people who die from these accidents is at least one in every 48 minutes. This comes with additional fines and prison time.

• Serving Jail Time & Less Employment – Once you accumulate a criminal offense, it’s a lot harder to secure a job, especially in a challenged economy.

• License Suspension – What if you run a business or work with a company that requires driving on the road daily? This will be cut short if you’re convicted with a DUI offense. Regardless, a suspension of license means less convenience or freedom of movement for you.

• Travel Restrictions – Some countries enforce strong restrictions on individuals who have been convicted with a DUI arrest.

Other Factors to Consider:

• Prior convictions
• Alcohol content in your blood
• Age of driver and passengers
• Speedometer readings
• Accidents or injuries
• Refusal to take a breath test

These are all factors that a judge will consider to determine how high your fines and penalties will be.

Driving while drunk may cost you more than anticipated. So, before getting drunk, or in the driver’s seat, ensure that you secure a safe driver before heading out and drinking.

Below is a guest criminal law blog post regarding notices of intended prosecution based on the laws of England and Wales.

This is one of the questions that a road traffic solicitor is asked most often. The legal obligations of the recipient of a Notice of Intended Prosecution are deceptively simple yet can be frequently misunderstood or confused by the public.

Notices of Intended Prosecution are sent out by the Central Ticket Office or Constabulary where a driver has not been stopped at the roadside and where the offence alleged has not already been pointed out to the driver.

A Notice of Intended Prosecution is not required where a fixed penalty has been issued or where an accident is said to have taken place. They are most commonly sent to motorists accused of speeding and traffic light offences but they can also be sent where other offences (trigger offences such as driving without due care and attention) are alleged.

Notices of Intended Prosecution are initially sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle photographed, following a registration plate match via DVLA computer records. However, the driver and the registered keeper are not always the same person and confusion often arises here.

If the registered keeper was not the driver they are still legally required to name the driver; as the registered keeper is deemed, in law, to have some knowledge of the identity of the driver. Simply, they are unable to say that they don’t know who the driver was and expect to succeed at trial if a prosecution for failing to identify the driver is brought against them. However, if the registered keeper is genuinely unable to say who the driver was at the time in question, due to the passage of time or the potential pool of drivers being large, they are able to claim at Court, once summonsed, that they did not know, and could not, with reasonable diligence, have established who the driver was. The question of whether someone has used their best endeavours to ascertain driver identity will ultimately rest with the trial Court.

If the registered keeper is a company, e.g. a lease company, and there are more potential drivers, it is possible to argue the defence of reasonable diligence but only where it is shown that no record has been kept of the drivers and that the failure to keep a record was reasonable.

The requirement for a motorist to be served with a Notice of Intended Prosecution derives from Section 1(c) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. This states that a person must be sent a Notice of Intended Prosecution within 14 days of the commission of the offence alleged. Where confusion often arises is when the Notice of Intended Prosecution is served outside the 14 days and road traffic solicitors are often asked to give advice in such cases.

The first thing to say is that even where a NIP is received late, a response must still be sent by the recipient of the Notice of Intended Prosecution to the Central Ticket Office or Constabulary. A response must be sent within 28 days of receipt of the Notice of Intended Prosecution. If the recipient fails to respond, or if they were to write back advising that they were not prepared to identify the driver as the Notice of Intended Prosecution was received late, the recipient can expect to receive a Court summons for failing to identify the driver, which carries a 6 penalty point endorsement (or a discretionary ban) on conviction. In the case where a Notice of Intended Prosecution is received late, the driver cannot be convicted of speeding (or other trigger offences) provided that the driver’s identity has been confirmed to the Central Ticket Office/ Constabulary.

Problems often occur where someone moves addresses and does not notify the DVLA as this will result in the Notice of Intended Prosecution being sent to the wrong, or last known, address. Problems also arise in cases where the Notice of Intended Prosecution does not reach the intended recipient as it gets lost in the post as there is no requirement to send Notice of Intended Prosecution by registered/recorded mail. In either scenario a person can often find themselves either convicted by a Court in their absence, or facing a prosecution, for failing to identify the driver. A motorist is advised to inform the DVLA promptly of address changes to avoid problems arising later.

For further legal advice on Notices of Intended Prosecution, your obligations and available defences, you can speak to a road traffic solicitor. They can assess your situation and determine if you have a defence to a summons.

This was a guest article from the specialist driving offence solicitors at Pannone LLP, for more information visit their website http://www.pannone.com.

Intoxication in general is not allowed as a defence under the criminal law; if this was the case then a person could imbibe alcohol or take drugs before committing an offence and use intoxication as a defence. However, intoxication can be a defence in some circumstances, for example as part of the defence of automatism.

In some cases, intoxication is the reason for the offence, for example if a person is found drunk in a public place, or drunk in charge of a vehicle. In other cases it may be that the intoxication causes the person to commit an offence or takes away the necessary intention to commit the offence. Whatever the reason, the criminal law cannot allow voluntary intoxication to be used as a general defence although involuntary intoxication is a different matter. A person may become involuntarily intoxicated by having a drink laced or taking prescribed drugs, this will negate the intent for specific intent offences and basic intent offences.

The only way that voluntary intoxication can be used as a defence is to negate the necessary mens rea (Latin for ‘guilty mind’) required for a person to be convicted of a crime. Even where the offence requires mens rea, voluntary intoxication will only be relevant where the offence is one of specific, rather than basic intent. Specific intent offences include offences such as murder, robbery, grievous bodily harm with intent, and attempt. Basic intent offences include manslaughter, rape, criminal damage, and assault offences.

When a person avoids conviction for a specific offence, there will usually be a basic intent offence that can be used against the person instead. So if a person avoids conviction for murder because they lack the necessary intent, they may still be convicted of manslaughter and if a person avoids the offence of causing grievous bodily harm, they can still be convicted of malicious wounding. Although this may seem like an easy way out, if a defendant claims intoxication at the beginning of their trial, then the prosecution will not be required to prove mens rea and they will only need to show that the act was committed.

For further legal advice on intoxication and its place in criminal law, you can speak to a criminal law solicitor. They can assess your situation and determine if intoxication can form part of your defence.