Explaining How Automatism Works in ACT Criminal Law

I couldn’t control myself, Your Honour! Explaining how Automatism Works in Criminal Law and How You Can Be Found Not Guilty Due to Automatism.

A question of whether an accused person acting in an involuntary manner means you are raising automatism. If automatism is successfully raised, it may result in a criminal lawyer creating reasonable doubt about whether the accused in the case acted voluntarily.

This goes to the core of the justice system, something that each trial tries to establish, which is that a guilty person committed a wrongful act out of their own free will.

How would you define Automatism?

Automatism is a behaviour exhibited by a person who had no control over their actions. This is not a medical condition or state, but it has a physiological component that impacts on whether criminal legal proceedings can be successful against the person. The key point when  automatism is raised is that the accused person’s behaviour occurred without their volition or against their will. It means establishing that the person’s behaviour was not deliberate.

For example, where a person is aware of what is happening, of what they are doing, but is unable to control their actions, and is essentially disassociated from the act, they may be acting involuntarily and as an ‘automaton’. The key aspect is the lack of the exercise of the person’s will, and not a lack of knowledge or consciousness.

How does an act qualify as an act of automatism?

Raising automatism is not putting up for debate whether or not a person was aware of what was happening. Some people can be physically aware of an act, but be dissociated from it; in cases like these, a criminal lawyer may raise that the defendant was acting as an ‘automaton.’

Automatism relies on the lack of apparent deliberation about the act. It is not about having no knowledge of the law and committing an act willfully. Not knowing that something is wrong but doing it anyway with premeditation cannot be considered automatism.

What are the categories of automatism?

There are two types of automatism raised in criminal trials. On the one hand, there is ‘insane’ automatism, which is caused by a ‘disease of the mind’. This is a phrase in case law that is equivalent to ‘mental impairment.’ Insane automatism means that a person’s unsound mind has reactions to its own delusions, external events, or stimuli in general.

On the other hand, there is ‘sane automatism.’ Claims of automatism are already rare—claims of this sort are even more so. There are only a few conditions that can be considered ‘sane’ automatism; one example of this is sleepwalking. Both voluntary and involuntary automatism go beyond momentary incapacity, though – it has to be more than just an instance of passion or stupidity.

What conditions fulfil the criteria of disease of the mind?

Neurological abnormalities have been raised in support of a claim of automatism. Examples are schizophrenia, tumours, injuries and congenital brain conditions. Conditions like hyperglycaemia have also been classified as diseases of the mind.

Other states like dissociation and epilepsy are less clear whether they amount to a disease of the mind. There have been examples where people have acted voluntarily while in a dissociative state; as such, it cannot be considered a disease of the mind. Furthermore, amnesia does not necessarily amount to automatism. What is ultimately considered is the state of mind of the accused at the time of the act, not their recollection of the act itself.

Similar to the situations in the previous paragraph, involuntary acts due to intoxication may be qualified as automatism. However, intoxication has other legal implications; a criminal lawyer would be able to untangle for you the issues that this condition brings to an automatism claim.

Who proves or disproves a claim of automatism?

When the claim is one of sane automatism, the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution. They must present evidence that the accused acted voluntarily and establish this element of the offence is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Failure by the prosecution to do so will result in an acquittal.

As for insane automatism, because the defence of mental impairment or insanity is being raised, then the defence must establish on the balance of probabilities that the accused had this mental impairment or insanity as a component of their automatism act in order to be found not guilty.

Sometimes, the distinction between sane and insane automatism is unclear, and this can make reaching a verdict regarding an automatism case difficult.

Conclusion

Automatism is not a defence as such. It is a claim about the prosecution’s case. The defence essentially questions whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is enough to prove that there was a voluntary action on the part of the accused. Several neurological conditions and chronic illnesses may become the basis for a claim of automatism; an expert in criminal law can help you figure out if the circumstances of a case allow for it.

For high quality, tailored legal representation in Canberra, get in touch with Andrew Byrnes Law Group. We provide results focused and deliberately different legal services to our clients. We are fearless fighters in criminal cases.

Book a free online or telephone conference with one of our lawyers today