Duress Flashcards
1
Q
What type of conduct is this?
A
- Excused and therefore not justified
2
Q
What are the two types of duress?
A
- By threats
- By circumstances
3
Q
Conflicts with what principle?
A
- Principle of Autonomy
4
Q
DPP v Lynch 1975
A
- Was an IRA driver party to killing a police officer as he drove the murder to scene of crime
- Sets out why and when the defence would be allowed
- People find themselves in ‘miserable, agonising plights’ through no fault of their own
- Showed that reasonable standards of people are important in regards to duress
- Found that the threat must be of death of GBH
- Overturned in Howe
5
Q
R v Howe 1987
A
- 2 boys tortured and killed v under threat they would be killed if they didn’t
- Created a two part test
- Appeal failed as duress not a defence for murder
6
Q
What is the 2 part test created in Howe?
A
1- Was or might D have been induced to act as he did as a result of believing if he did not he would be killed or GBH. if yes move to second part.
2- Would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing D’s characteristics have done the same? if yes the defence may succeed.
7
Q
R v Hasan 2005
A
- He was a minder for an escort company
- D was made to commit a burglary on someone otherwise him and his family would suffer
- He was convicted of aggravated burglary
- COA quashed conviction
- Crown appealed to HOL and conviction was reinstated as he had voluntarily exposed himself to threat
- The policy of the law should be to discourage association with a known criminal and it should be slow to excuse the criminal conduct of those who do so.
8
Q
R v Baker and Ward 1999
A
- Serious bodily harm does not include psychiatric harm.
9
Q
Is rape sufficiently serious harm?
A
- since 2012 yes
10
Q
Valderrama-Vega 1985
A
- Financial pressure and sexual blackmail is not serious enough to raise defence
11
Q
Dao 2012
A
- False imprisonment is not serious enough
- Here they were trafficked in and made to work in cannabis factory
- House was raided when he was in charge and he claimed duress
- Raised the question of the defence being too narrow
12
Q
R v Hudson 1971
A
- Giving evidence in court and someone known to them showed up to threaten them to not tell the truth
- She told untruths and tried use duress
- Threat was not immediate and duress was left to the jury
13
Q
Abdul- Hussain 1999
A
- Hijacked plane as he feared he would be deported and killed
- It was said by Lord Bingham that the threat must be immediate and unavoidable
14
Q
R v Sharp 1987
A
- Lord lane said ‘ no one could question that if a person can avoid the effects of duress by escaping from the threats, without damage to himself, he must do so’
15
Q
R v Graham 1982
A
- D helped gay lover kill his wife
- claimed he was under duress due to his anxious disposition
- ’ threat must have been enough that a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of D would have responded in the same way’
