Chronus
With the deepest respect, while amnesia may be considered grounds for not commencing proceedings if a defendant is incapable of mounting a defence against the charges and there is no independent supporting evidence, amnesia in and of itself is no defence against charges being brought, nor a defence against conviction in English Law. Amnesia may be taken into consideration when deciding any sentence upon conviction.
The reasons behind this are that amnesia can be faked. There is no way or reliable medical procedure for determining if the claimed amnesia is genuine or not.
Remember that a trial is intended to determine whether the accused is guilty of the offence and whether they had an intention of committing the offence before or at the time it happened. The fact that you hit your head and suffered amnesia escaping from the scene of an armed robbery would be no defence in law. Having been convicted of the offence through forensic or CCTV evidence, a judge may rule that the person so convicted serve a reduced sentence in the grounds that they couldn't remember the event. BUT at the time the event happened, that person clearly had it in mind to commit a robbery, or other offence.
So I reiterate, amnesia is no defence, in English Law and in most other jurisdictions around the world.
Last edited by G0ULI; 21st Mar 2017 at 01:49.