Facts and Judgment
R v Woods (1982) 74 Cr App R 312
The appellant committed rape whilst intoxicated. He sought to rely on the defence of intoxication.
The crime of rape is one of basic intent and therefore defence of intoxication was not open to the appellant.
Griffiths LJ:"If Parliament had meant to provide in future that a man whose lust was so inflamed by drink that he ravished a woman, should nevertheless be able to pray in aid his drunken state to avoid the consequences we would have expected them to have used the clearest words to express such a surprising result, which we believe would be utterly repugnant to the great majority of people. We are satisfied that Parliament had no such intention." Back to lecture outline on intoxication and criminal liability