Part 1- Was he forced to act as he reasonably believed he had cause to fear death or serious injury, Part 2- would the sober man of reasonble firmness, having D's characteristics acted in the same way
1 of 19
Graham-King
D was a homosexual lived with wife and king. King threatened D into killing wife. D was drinking and taking meds and in fear assisted King. Duress failed as threats were insufficiently grave
2 of 19
Valderram-Vega- Cocaine mafia
D imported cocaine because of death threats made towards his family by a mafia style gang who also threatened to expose homosexuality. Duress was allowed but only for threats of death or serious injury. Confirmed psychological duress not allowed
3 of 19
Threat must be closely linked to defendant
The evil must but directed at D or a person he is deemed reasonably responsible for
4 of 19
Ortiz- Family disappearance
D forced into taking part in cocaine smuggling after being told his family would disappear if he didn't. Family closely linked to D so duress allowed.
5 of 19
Wright- Boyfriend
D arrested with 4 kilos of cocaine, as boyfriend threatened with violence. On appeal the boyfriend was held to be sufficiently proximate therefore duress was allowed
6 of 19
The link between the threat and the crime
There has to be a direct link between the instructed threat and the final crime committed by D otherwise defence not allowed
7 of 19
Cole- Baseball bat
D had been attacked by a baseball bat by a gang he owed money too, his family was threatened by violence unless he repayed money. D committed two bank robberies. Duress failed as there was insufficient nexus between threat and crime committed
8 of 19
Timing of the threat
The threat must be effective at the time of the crime is committed. If D had chance to report threat to police the defence will fail. Hol have recently confirmed this
9 of 19
How has the timing of the threat changed?
Gill-Immediate Hudson&Taylor-Continuing Abdul Hussain- Imminent Hasan-Immediate
10 of 19
Gill- Lorry
D and wife had been violently threatened into committing theft of a lorry, which was carried out some time later. Duress failed since threat was not immediate. D had safe avenue of escape
11 of 19
Hudson&Taylor-teenage girls
D's were 2 teenage girls who had been witnesses to a fight and gave false evidence in court after been threatened with violence. COA held as the threat was continuing the defence of duress succeeded. Hasan disproved!!!!!
12 of 19
Abdul-Hussain-Hijacked plane
D travelled to Africa and hijacked a plane in order to escape Iraq fearing execution. COA held as the threat was imminent duress was available to D
13 of 19
Voluntary associations with violence (self induced duress)
Where D voluntarily exposes himself to risk of threats such as joining a violent organisation or associating with violent person, D unable to get defence
14 of 19
Fitzpatrick-IRA
Forced to commit robbery. As he associated himself with violent people defence failed
15 of 19
Sharp-Armed robbers
D joined gang of armed robbers but then decided to withdraw from the venture. Threatened into committing further robbery where a man was killed. As he joined the gang he knew they were violent so duress is not a defence.
16 of 19
Shepherd- Shoplifters
D joined gang of non-violent shoplifters. He tried to withdraw but was threatened with violence. As D could not see any violence duress was allowed as a defence
17 of 19
Ali, Flatt, Heath
Since D's put themselves in that position defence will fail
18 of 19
Hasan-Safe
D associated with violent drug dealerk
19 of 19
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
D was a homosexual lived with wife and king. King threatened D into killing wife. D was drinking and taking meds and in fear assisted King. Duress failed as threats were insufficiently grave
Back
Graham-King
Card 3
Front
D imported cocaine because of death threats made towards his family by a mafia style gang who also threatened to expose homosexuality. Duress was allowed but only for threats of death or serious injury. Confirmed psychological duress not allowed
Back
Card 4
Front
The evil must but directed at D or a person he is deemed reasonably responsible for
Back
Card 5
Front
D forced into taking part in cocaine smuggling after being told his family would disappear if he didn't. Family closely linked to D so duress allowed.
Comments
No comments have yet been made