Self-Defence Flashcards

  • Created by: bananaaar
  • Created on: 04-05-15 12:45
Where does the law allow reasonable force?
Self-defence, defence of another, prevention of crime/lawful arrest and defence of property.
1 of 36
What statutes govern self defence?
S76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 and S43 Crime and Court Act 2013
2 of 36
What did s76 CJ&I 2008 do?
Clarified the common law of self-defence regarding the protection of their homes from burglars. It did not amend the common law, just helped people to under stand the law by consolidating the common law into a statute.
3 of 36
What did s43 Crime and Courts Act 2013 do?
Extended the law and gave wider rights to householders. Force can be used as long as it is not 'grossly disproportionate'.
4 of 36
What kind of defence is self-defence?
Full defence to all crimes, i.e. leads to acquittal.
5 of 36
What is the 2 part test for self defence?
1) The need to use force must be necessary 2) Degree of force used must be reasonable
6 of 36
What part of the test is subjective?
Need to use force. D must think that the use of force was necessary. [Hussain]
7 of 36
D's house was burgled. D chased the men and attacked them causing GBH. Conviction was upheld as when burglars were on the floor, D's were not acting in self-defence. The purpose of the D's violence was seen as revenge.
8 of 36
What is the law regarding mistake and self-defence?
D may make an honest but reasonable mistake about the necessity to use self-defence. [Williams] [Gladstone] [Yaman]
9 of 36
D grabbed and injured police office who he mistakenly thought was attacking a youth. CA quashed D's assault conviction a jury had been directed mistake to be reasonable but it need only be honest.
10 of 36
D witnesssed a man attack a youth. He hit the attacker, but it turned out that the attacker had wrestled him to the ground following a mugging to stop him escaping. Conviction quashed.
11 of 36
D's ran a late night kebab shop. Some people entered the premises to execute a distress warrant to disconnect the gas meter. D noticed and hit V with a hammer causing s18. The hammer was not reasonable and the D must do what he thought was necessary.
12 of 36
Rulles on mistake and vol intox?
Drunken mistake is no basis for self-defence. [O'Grady] [Hatton]
13 of 36
D and friend were drinking heavily and fell asleep. D woke to find being so he hit his friend with an ashtray. Next morning the friend was dead. D was convicted of manslaughter as intoxication negates self-defence.
14 of 36
Two friends had been drinking. D battered V to death with sledgehammer. A stick belonging to V was found under the body, so was acting in self defence. However murder conviction was upheld.
15 of 36
D's characteristics are not relevant to a mistaken belief. [Martin]
16 of 36
D shot and killed burglar as he ran away and wounded another. D had no defence of self-defence as he was firing at a person running away. Excessive force although he had a psychiatric condition and perceived greater danger than the average person.
17 of 36
Perception of danger?
D's perception of danger is relevant to a mistaken belief [Oye]
18 of 36
D had been discovered behaving oddly. He hid in ceiling when police arrived and threw crockery at them. He caused GBH to officers and pleaded self defence and insanity. Medical experts said he had a psychotic episode. Conviction was quashed.
19 of 36
Pre-emptive striked?
Are allowed [Beckford v Queen]
20 of 36
[Beckford v Queen]
Police officer shot and killed a fleeing man who he believed to be armed and a terrorist. Was established that it is not necessary for an attack to have begun, D may use pre-emptive force.
21 of 36
Preparing for an attack?
[AG reference No 2 of 1983]
22 of 36
[AG reference No2 of 1983]
Mans shop was attacked during riots so he made petrol bombs for protection. CA held that preparations can be made in self-defence.
23 of 36
Self induced self-defence?
24 of 36
D stabbed V in the chest in an argument over a trivial matter. Held that if D started villein by provoking or entering into it willingly he could still rely on self defence if V retaliated. However this was not the case in this case.
25 of 36
Duty to retreat?
No duty to retreat [Bird]
26 of 36
D gouged out ex-boyfriend's eyeball during a heated arument and after he hit D. D's conviction was quashed as evidence of retreat was helpful but not essential.
27 of 36
Threat of force need not be unlawful?
[Re A]
28 of 36
{Re A]
Declaration to separate conjoined twins was granted as the operation would be akin to withdrawal of support. The twin without organs was killing other, so it was self-defence to detach them or they would have both died.
29 of 36
What must the threat be?
30 of 36
What part of the test is objective?
Second part, the degree of force must be reasonable.
31 of 36
Objective Test for jury
[Palmer v The Queen]
32 of 36
[Palmer v Queen]
D were chased by men after stealing ganja. During chase D fired shots and one of the men chasing died. Established that the defence succeeds or fails, no manslaughter charge is available. Up to jury to decide whether it was reasonable.
33 of 36
Murder and lethal force?
34 of 36
D was a soldier on check-point duty who fired bullets at passing car mistakenly thinking it was terrorists. Last bullet killed joyrider. D was not allowed self-defence as final bullet was excessive force.
35 of 36
Reform Proposals in Murder, Manslaughter and Infanticide 2006?
LC proposed reducing murder in self-defence when excessive force occurs to a special and partial defence to murder like DR and loss of control.
36 of 36

Other cards in this set

Card 2


What statutes govern self defence?


S76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 and S43 Crime and Court Act 2013

Card 3


What did s76 CJ&I 2008 do?


Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4


What did s43 Crime and Courts Act 2013 do?


Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5


What kind of defence is self-defence?


Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Self-defence resources »