P drugged an underage boy at his flat and invited K for the purpose of raping the boy. K was also drugged by P and argued in defence that his intention to rape was caused by intoxication by a third party. He was convicted by a judge, the CA allowed his appeal and the HL allowed the prosecution appeal, stating that K formed the intention to rape before being drugged, therefore intoxication by a third party was irrelevant. However the HL say that third party intoxication never negatives a mens rea, REGARDLESS of whether the intention existed prior to intoxication. This seems unfair where the intoxication is not by consent (e.g. spiking drinks), though in this case the jury did not believe that the drugs were taken involuntarily.