Cases Flashcards
Howe
Facts- D’s murdered 2 people after they were threatened with death
Ratio- Defence of murder not available to those who murder first degree, second degree or third party
Overruled R v Lynch and Gotts followed their ruling
Area- Duress not available for murder or attempted murder
Gotts
Facts- 16yr old boy was threatened by his father to kill his mother. He stabbed his mother but she survived. D convicted of attempted murder
Ratio- Followed ruling in R v Howe
Area- Defence for duress can’t be used for murder or attempted murder
Graham
Facts- D had been drinking and taking drugs when he and his homosexual partner killed his wife. D claimed he was under duress as his co-defendant was a violent man.
Ratio- He was charged with first degree murder. He appealed against the conviction on the basis that the trial judge applied a subjective test to the defence of duress.
Area- Whether a subjective test or objective test should be applied
Baker and Ward
Facts- D’s were made to rob a shop which they were convicted of, as they were threatened by a drug dealer which they were indebted to
Ratio- A person cannot rely on the defense of duress if he has voluntarily and with full knowledge of its nature, joined a criminal group which he is aware might bring pressure on him of a violent kind
Area- Duress not available to gang members
Ali
Facts- D sold his drugs for X, his dealer and became indebt to him. X forced him to commit a armed robbery
Ratio- One who is to voluntary associate himself with someone of known violence and criminal activity shall not be allowed the defence of duress
Area- Duress not available to members of violent gangs
Hegarty
Facts- D committed a robbery and claimed duress in that he was under a grossly elevated neurotic state and was therefore susceptible to threats more than others
Ratio- Judge used a objective test and claimed that psychiatric is not to be ascribed to the ordinary person of reasonable firmness
Area- Person of reasonable fortitude
Fitzpatrick
Facts- D was a member of the IRA who shot and killed a man during a robbery. He had tried to resign from the IRA when serious threats had been made against himself and his parents
Ratio- A person who joins an illegal organisation with criminal objectives and coercive methods cannot rely on the duress to which he has voluntarily exposed himself to
Area- Duress not available to gang members
Lynch
Facts- D was an accessory to a murder in which he drove a car to a place under threats from an IRA gunman, M. D waited whilst M and his associates killed a policeman and then drove them away
Ratio- 3-2 majority in the HoL allowed the defence
Since been overruled by R v Howe
Area- Duress not available for attempted murder
Singh
Facts- D was forced to have a arranged marriage
Ratio- To expose D’s adultery would not be sufficient grounds for duress
Area- Personal threats
Willer
Facts- D was driving down a narrow country lane and was surrounded by a group of youths, shouting death threats, he mounted the curb and was charged with reckless driving
Ratio- Defence of duress should be available to defence of necessity because the defendant was wholly driven by force of circumstances into doing what he did and did not drive the car otherwise than under that form of compulsion
Gill
Facts- D was threatened with violence unless he stole a lorry
Ratio- D can not rely on defence of duress if there is a period of safe avenue of escape
Area- Safe avenue of escape
Valderamma-Vega
Facts- D was found with cocaine at customs and claimed he was threatened with his homosexuality being exposed and death to him and his family
Ratio- Threats to reveal his homosexuality alone would be insufficient to find the defence but could be taken into account when coupled with threats of serious personal violence.
Area- All the threats should be taken into account
Wright
Facts- D was arrested with cocaine and said acted because boyfriend was threatened
Ratio- Person subject to threat beyond immediate family
Area- Personal threats
Bowen
Facts- D with IQ of 56 obtained goods by deception of men who threatened to petrol bomb D and his family
Ratio- D’s IQ was not a relevant characteristic as not part of ability to resist pressure and threats
Area- Characteristics that can be ascribed to D
Hudson and Taylor
Facts- Two teenage girls were charged with purgery after giving false evidence in court after serious threats of injury
Ratio- CoA quashed their conviction. They could have got police protection but this wasn’t realistic to the case
Area- Safe avenue of escape
Abdul-Hussain
Facts- D;s hijacked a plane after fear of being deported by the government
Ratio- The execution of the threat may not be immediate
Area- Immediacy of threat
Cole
Facts- D robbed several building society’s. He claimed money lenders had threatened to harm him if he did not repay the money he had borrowed
Ratio- This was a case of lack of casual between nexus between the threat and the commission of the offence, it raised the question of imminence
Area- Duress not available to D, who put himself in that situation
Sharp
Facts- D joined a gang who carried out a series of armed robberies at sub-post offices. In the last of these robberies, the sub postmaster was shot and killed by X
Ratio- The defence was not available to a person who voluntarily and with knowledge of its nature join a criminal organisation or gang
Area- Duress not available to gang members
Sheppard
Facts- D was a member of a gang of shoplifters. He and his family had been threatened with violence when he tried to give up
Ratio- While a person who joins a parliamentary organisation or a violent gang may be threatened the same is not necessarily true of every criminal enterprise
Area- Duress possibly available to gang members where the gang is non violent
Health
Facts- D was charged with possessing cannabis with intent to supply. He argued duress that he was a heroin user and had become indebted to his own supplier who had threatened serious injury if he did not assist
Ratio- D had voluntarily placed himself in a situation where it was likely that he would be subjected to threats
Area- Defense of duress unavailable to gang members
Hassan
Facts- H associated with a violent drug dealer and told to burgle a house and open the safe or he and his family would be harmed. D was convicted of aggravated burglary when he returned to the house armed with a knife and attempted to steal the contents of the safe
Ratio- The defendant may not rely on duress to which he has voluntarily laid himself open.
Area- Duress not available to gang members
Wilson
Facts- D was 13 and his father threatened to harm him if he didn’t kill his mother
Ratio- Defence not available for murder/attempted murder
Dao
Facts- Defendants were duped into attending a unit where they were locked in with the growth of cannabis
Ratio- Courts ‘strongly declined’ to accept that a threat of false imprisonment was sufficient for the defence of duress without an accompanying threat of death or serious injury
Area- The extent of the defence of duress; namely whether it extends to false imprisonment.
Bradford
Facts- D was arrested for smuggling drugs for B and claimed she was scared for B’s saftey
Ratio- A threat can be conveyed indirectly
Area- Personal threats
Coats
Facts- D was caught smuggling drugs at a airport on the way back from Jamaica
Ratio- Threats can be conveyed indirectly
Area- Personal threats
MacGrowther
Facts- D was charged with taking part in a rebellion. He claimed the defence of duress, saying that the commander forced his taking part, threatening that if he did not, he would burn down all the houses in his town
Ratio- The threat relied on must be to cause threat or serious injury
