Duress Flashcards
Duress/ Duress of circumstances/ Necessity
Definition
D has effectively been forced to commit crime by being threatened by death or serious violence
what 5 steps are they
- Threat
- Test for duress
- Relevant characteristics
- Immediacy
- Self Induced duress*
- Valderama Vega
Cole
- Threat must be to kill or do serious bodily harm (GBH)
- Threat must be specifically related to the crime committed
2.
Graham( test)
- Was the D compelled to act as he did because he reasonably believed he had good cause to fear serious injury or death (subjective)
- Would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the accused of responded in the same way (objective)
- Bowen
(examples)
-characteristic which might make the D less able to resist pressure than people without these characteristics
- Examples:
age
gender
pregnancy
serious physical disabilities that inhibit self protection
4.
Abdul- Hussain
Gill
Hudson and Taylor
-threat was imminent in the sense it was hanging over them
- defence not available if there is a safe avenue of escape
- available police protection may not always be effective
- *
Sharp
Shepherd
Hasan
- Defence not available if D knew gang was violent
- Defence available if D did not know gang was violent
- Defence not available if D voluntary associates with others engaged in criminal activity and could foresee the risk of being threatened with serious violence
- Intoxication
if D becomes voluntary intoxicated and mistakenly believes he is being threatened the defence will fair
- if there is no mistake the defence is available intoxication is irrelevant.
Duress of circumstances
situation the D find themself that dictates the crime rather than a person, no requirement that a person specifies a crime must be committed
Willer
Cairnes
Pammell
- jury should consider whether they did their actions under compulsion or duress
- threat does not have to be real
- available to all crimes but murder, attempted murder and treason
Necessity
conduct not harmful because of a choice of two evils therefore the choice of not avoiding the greater harm was justified
Dudley v Stephens
R & A
- refused to recognise the defence
- recognised in civil law