ABSTRACT
Automatism is the defence of the person who was not a moral agent; who was effectively an automaton at the time of the illegal act. The defence of automatism has attracted controversy and press attention at times. The press has reported with frank disbelief the actions of defendants attributed to sleepwalking. The relevant case law does indicate that sleepwalking and therefore sexsomnia should be treated as an insane automatism. Many of the reported sexsomnia cases involve alcohol in circumstances where simple intoxication is far more likely than parasomnia. In some cases, the issue is that doctors who do not specialize in the relevant areas have commented on cases. The legal defences that can be argued when the defendant has suffered an episode of medicolegal automatism are: lack of the requisite actus reus, lack of the requisite mens rea and insanity.
