Self Defence cases

Question 1

Palmer

Answer 1

• [1971]
• convicted of murder and subsequently sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of Jamaica.
• In both instances, a defense of self-defense was raised and presented to the jury for consideration.

Question 2

R v Gladstone Williams

Answer 2

• [1987]
• The appellant was convicted of assault causing actual bodily harm. His defence was that he had honestly believed that the person he assaulted was acting unlawfully and that it was irrelevant whether his mistake was reasonable or unreasonable. .
• The reasonableness or otherwise of the defendant’s belief was only material to the question of whether the belief was in fact held by the defendant at all.
• Accordingly, the appeal would be allowed and the conviction quashed.

Question 3

Beckford v R

Answer 3

• [1987]
• The defendant, a police officer, took the life of a man, believing he posed a serious threat as a dangerous gunman firing at the police.
• The defence asserted self-defence, and the jury focused on evaluating whether the defendant’s actions were justified based on the reasonableness of their belief in the necessity to resist an imminent attack.
• The correct test for self-defense should be based on the defendant’s honest belief in the necessity to resist an attack.

Question 4

O’Grady

Answer 4

• [1987]
• The appellant was an alcoholic. He had spent the day drinking large quantities of alcohol with two friends. The friends then retired to the appellant’s home and went to sleep.
• The appellant claimed he was woken by one of the friends, McCloskey, hitting him on the head. He said that he picked up some broken glass and started hitting McCloskey in order to defend himself
• The appeal was dismissed and the appellant’s conviction upheld. A defendant is not entitled to rely, so far as self-defence is concerned, upon a mistake of fact which has been induced by voluntary intoxication

Question 5

Owino

Answer 5

• [1996]
• Defendant committed actual bodily harm against his wife, Victim, and he was convicted after the judge gave the standard direction on self-defence .
• Defendant appealed on the basis that Defendant’s force was only unlawful if he intended to use more force than HE BELIEVED was necessary.
• CA said that while the court had to take the circumstances as Defendant believed them to be (subjective) the actual force permitted had to be “reasonable” by objective standards.

Question 6

Hussain

Answer 6

• [2010]
• On returning Home Munir Hussain and his family were taken captive by three masked men wielding Knifes. His wife and children were bound and forced to crawl from room to room under the threat of death for their invaders amusement while Munir was beaten.
• However, he broke free, armed himself with a cricket bat and drove away the intruders.
• He chased, caught one of the intruders, Walid Salem and assaulted him with the bat leaving him brain-damaged.

Question 7

R v Tony Martin

Answer 7

• [2002]
• 2 men broke into the farm. Tony Martin armed with a 12 bore shot gun went downstairs and fired indiscriminately at where he thought the disturbance came from.
• He shot both the intruders killing one by a gunshot wound to the back. At his trial his plea of self defence was rejected by the jury and he was convicted of murder.
• He appealed on the grounds that his personality disorder should be taken into account in assessing whether he had used reasonable force for the purposes of self defence.

Question 8

Collins v. Secretary of State for Justice

Answer 8

• [2016]
• Mr. Collins was involved in an incident where he used force to defend his home against an intruder
• The court found that Section 76(5A) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 does not alter the law on self-defence but emphasizes the requirement that the degree of force used by a householder must be reasonable in all the circumstances as the householder believed them to be

Question 9

R v Ray (Steven)

Answer 9

• [2017]
• Following an altercation, within his home, between the appellant and the deceased, the appellant fatally stabbed the deceased.
• The appellant was subsequently charged with murder and tried at the Crown Court, where he admitted stabbing the deceased, but contended he had acted in self defence.
• Appeal was dismissed