SQE1 sample questions

Question 33

A man was drinking in a public bar and became very intoxicated. He had an argument with another customer and suddenly smashed this other customer in the face with his empty glass causing a wound that amounted to grievous bodily harm. The man was so intoxicated that he did not know what he was doing. The man's intoxication was voluntary. The man was arrested by the police. He has been charged with wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

Which of the following best describes the man's liability for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm?

A. He is not guilty because he was so intoxicated that he did not form the necessary intention for the offence.

B. He is not guilty because intoxication provides a reasonable excuse for the attack.

C. He is guilty because his voluntary intoxication is sufficiently reckless to satisfy the mens rea requirement for this offence.

D. He is guilty because causing grievous bodily harm with intent is a crime of specific intent and intoxication is no defence to a crime of specific intent.

E. He is guilty because causing grievous bodily harm with intent is a crime of basic intent and intoxication is no defence to a crime of basic intent.