The defendant had voluntarily consumed drugs to calm his nerves. Under the influence of the drugs, he had started shooting in the cottage in which he had been living, but claimed to have been unable to remember anything after taking the drugs. The defendant was convicted of causing criminal damage being reckless as to whether life would be endangered, following the trial judge’s direction to the jury that self-induced intoxication was not available by way of defence to a basic intent crime. The defendant appealed. What is the Court’s decision?

Тип ответа: Одиночный выбор • с выбором одного правильного ответа из нескольких предложенных вариантов

◯ The conviction was quashed on appeal on the grounds that he could not be expected to anticipate that drugs would have that effect upon him

◯ The conviction was not quashed on appeal on the grounds that he could have expected that dangerous drugs would have that effect upon him

◯ The conviction was quashed on appeal on the grounds that he could be expected to anticipate that drugs would have that effect upon him