R v Kemp
A disease of the mind can be a physical disease that affects the functioning of the mind, such as arteriosclerosis.
Facts
Mr Kemp, a man of good character, attacked his wife with a hammer, causing her serious injuries. He suffered from arteriosclerosis, a hardening of the arteries, which caused a congestion of blood in his brain and a temporary lapse of consciousness, so he did not know what he was doing. He was charged with causing grievous bodily harm with intent. The question was whether his condition was a disease of the mind for the purposes of the M'Naghten Rules.
Legal principle
Devlin J held that it was. The law is not concerned with the brain but with the mind, in the sense that the term is ordinarily used in relation to the mental faculties of reason, memory and understanding. A disease of the mind can be a physical disease that affects those faculties, and it does not matter whether the condition is curable or temporary. Mr Kemp was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
Related cases on defences: insanity, automatism and intoxication
- Attorney General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher [1963] AC 349
- Attorney General's Reference (No 2 of 1992) [1994] QB 91
- DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443
- Hill v Baxter [1958] 1 QB 277
- M'Naghten's Case (1843) 10 Cl & F 200
- R v Bailey [1983] 1 WLR 760
- R v Burgess [1991] 2 QB 92
- R v Coley; R v McGhee; R v Harris [2013] EWCA Crim 223
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
