La défense d'intoxication extrême pour nier l'intention de meurtre requiert de prouver l'incapacité de prévoir les conséquences de ses actes, laquelle s'évalue selon plusieurs facteurs factuels et comportementaux clés

R. v. Rogers, 2024 NSCA 100

Lien vers la décision

[56]         An accused may raise a reasonable doubt about their intent for murder through evidence of advanced intoxication. Where death is the consequence of the accused’s acts, the accused would have to establish a particularly advanced degree of intoxication to successfully avail himself of this defence. The inquiry is whether the accused’s ability to foresee the consequences of his actions was affected by intoxication.[22]

[57]         Factors that may be relevant in assessing advanced intoxication include:

1.                 The amount and type of intoxicant consumed;

2.                 Evidence of the accused’s ability to communicate, process information, and/or problem-solve;

3.                 Evidence of the accused’s fine and gross motor coordination skills and ability to perform divided-attention tasks;

4.                 Observations of the accused’s demeanour at or around the time of the offence;

5.                 Witnesses’ lay opinions of the accused’s level of intoxication;

6.                 Evidence of goal-oriented or rational behaviour by the accused;

7.                 Expert evidence linking the accused’s intoxication to the accused’s ability to foresee the consequences of his actions.[23]