Duress and Necessity
- Created by: BethPilsbury
- Created on: 11-11-20 14:39
View mindmap
- Duress and necessity
- A) Threat- R V Valderrama Vega- quashed conviction as jury was entitled to look at the cumulative threats, other threats not enough w/o threat of death
- Hurley and Murray- girlfriend is sufficient
- Shalyer- even if not previous connection e.g. threat bomb will go off harming others
- C) No safe avenue of escape:Immediate threat- R V Hasan- HL reinstated conviction
- Hudson and Taylor- doubtful D can rely on defence as there was an opportunity to go to the police
- D) Self induced duress- R V Sharp-is gang D associated with overtly violence, D ought reasonably known he would be subject to threats
- R V Shepherd- if gang not overtly violent, left to jury
- Duress by Circumstance-R V Willer- convicted of reckless driving, CoA agreed jury should have considered if he drove under compulsion i.e. duress
- R V Conway-quashed conviction, ruled defence available if objectively D acting in order to avoid threat of death or serious injury
- R V Pommell-confirmed duress by circumstance follows same rules as duress by threat
- B) D’s belief in threats and response is reasonable - R V Graham- 1)did D reasonably believe in circumstances of threat and was it good cause for D’s fear? 2)was D’s response one that might be expected of sober and reasonable person?
- Objective test- Bowen- ability to resis pressure and threats- age, pregnancy, serious physical disability, recognised mental illness, gender
- Actions CAUSED by threat- R V Cole- couldn’t rely on duress as the threat was not to get D to commit the robberies
- Subjective test- Martin-CA allowed appeal- D’s mental state is relevant deciding if he reasonably believed he/his family’s safety was at risk
- Necessity- R V Dudley and Stephens- claim of necessity to save themselves from dying rejected
- Re F - lawful under necessity and be a duty for Drs to do do (mental difficulties, sexual relationship, sterilisation)
- Overlaps with necessity and duress in circumstance-R V Quayle
- Duress and mistake- quashed conviction and ruled defence available if D acting in order to avoid threat of death or serious injury
- Duress= another person threatens harm if D does not commit a crime. Necessity= d forced by natural circumstances to choose between two evils, crime is the lesser evil
- A) Threat- R V Valderrama Vega- quashed conviction as jury was entitled to look at the cumulative threats, other threats not enough w/o threat of death
Similar Law resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made