View mindmap
  • Duress
    • D may try to use the defence of duress due to the threats from ...
    • for this to work, the case of Valderama-Vega shows there must be threats of serious injury or death
    • Shayler shows the target of the threat must be D, or someone he is responsible for
    • R v Cole suggests that D must only commit an offence specified by the duressor, making a connection between the threat and D's acts
    • if there is a connection, D must pass both parts of the Graham test
    • the first part is if D acted because he reasonable believed he had good cause to fear he would suffer serious violence or death if he did not
    • R v Hasan clarified that this belief must be reasonable, rather than just genuine
    • the second part of the Graham test is that a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of D, would have responded to the threat in the same way
    • Bowen sets out some characteristics to be considered such as age and sex
    • Gill shows that if D has a safe avenue of escape, he cannot use the defence if he fails to take it
    • the threat must also be 'imminent'
    • according to Abdul-Hussain, this does not mean the threat will be carried out immediately, but it operates on D's mind at the time of the acts so that it overbears his will
    • Hasan, shows if D puts himself in a position where he could reasonable have foreseen the risk of threats of violence, the defence will fail due to self induced


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »