duress Flashcards
what are the two forms of duress?
- duress by threats
- duress by circumstances
what type of defence is duress?
general (full) defence
who is the burden of proof on for duress?
prosecution
what is duress?
Duress is based on the fact that the defendant has been effectively forced to commit the crime
what must the threat be about for duress?
The threat MUST be death/serious injury (GBH)
It was held in Macgrowther’s Case (1746) that a threat to burn buildings was not enough to be duress
Macgrowther’s Case
Macgrowther’s Case
threat to burn buildings was not enough to be duress
who must be threatened for duress?
R v Wright – includes anyone you feel responsible for
R v Wright
boyfriend was threatened unless she smuggled drugs, she did so and was convicted.
LP - threats can be against anyone you feel responsible for
legal point - threats can be against anyone you feel responsible for
does duress include a threat of serious psychological injury?
R v Baker & Wilkins – CoA refused to extend the defence to include this
does it have to be the only threat?
No, provided there are serious threats (death/serious injury), the cumulative effect of the threats can be considered
Valderrama-Vega (1985)
Valderrama-Vega (1985)
D illegally imported cocaine. He claimed he did it because of death threats made by a mafia-type organisation and also because of threats to disclose his homosexuality plus financial pressures.
LP – jury was entitled to look at the cumulative effects of all the threats
must there be a link between the threat
and the crime committed? (duress)
There must be a sufficient nexus between the threats and the offence
committed
R v Cole (1994)
R v Cole (1994)
Moneylenders pressured D for money. Threatened his GF and child. He
robbed two building societies. Charged with robbery. Pleaded duress but was unavailable because duressors had not told him to rob the building societies. He had chosen that means of obtaining the money.
There was an insufficient nexus between the threats and the offence.
what if there is an opportunity to escape? (duress)
if D had an opportunity to escape, they cannot use the defence of duress
Made clear in R v Gill (1963)
R v Gill (1963)
- D/family threatened unless he stole a lorry
- Left alone in yard and could have escaped but didn’t
- LP - could not use duress - if D had an opportunity to escape, they cannot use the defence of duress
what if D believed police protection was unreliable or not sufficient? (duress)
R v Hasan (2005) said D MUST seek police protection if an opportunity arises.
R v Hasan
(police protection)
D involved with a violent drug dealer who ordered D to steal money
from a house safe. D claimed he and family threatened with
death/serious injury. D broke into house but couldn’t open the safe – said D MUST seek police protection if an opportunity arises.
how imminent does the threat have to be?
R v Hasan (2005) – preferred the threat to be “immediate or almost immediate”
R v Hasan (2005) - imminent or immediate
Law Lords rejected the idea of “immediate or imminent” – they preferred “immediate or almost immediate” – lower courts obliged to follow this now
what if the duress is self-induced?
