ABSTRACT
The provision of defences in the criminal law is perhaps the first and most basic requirement of equality of arms. General defences create defined mechanisms in terms of which the accused may put forward 'good' or legally recognised reasons for his/her conduct. Ultimately, automatism, coercion and necessity accord with the traditional structure of criminal law and procedure which postpones consideration of any defence until the offence elements. Automatism is an interesting defence for a number of reasons. The reference to provocation is perhaps unhelpful here in that automatism. Coercion could be established where there was an immediate danger of death or great bodily harm. Necessity builds, in some respects, on the principles of coercion. This demonstrates the separation between mens rea and necessity. The view taken here is that the separation of defences is most conducive to fairness in the administration of justice. No matter its effect on actual mental state, voluntary intoxication is not a defence in Scots law.
