Flashcards
DEFENCES: duress
Cards in this deck (25)
- 1DPP FOR N.IRELAND V LYNCH (1975) (duress and murder/attempted)Defence is available for those who have participated in the murder but not actually killed
- 2HOWE (1987) (duress and murder/attempted: not available to anyone involved with murder)D took part in torturing and abusing of a man strangled by another. D said he had been threatened but HOL held duress wasn't available
- 3WILSON (2007) (duress and murder/attempted: can't be used even where D is young and less able to resist pressure)D was 13 and said he helped his father because he was too scared to disobey. C of A said duress can't be used as a defence no matter how susceptible the D is
- 4GOTTS (1992) (duress and murder/attempted)D was a 16 year old boy who was threatened with violence by his father. D attacked his mother but didn't kill her. It was held that duress cannot be used for attempted murder
- 5VALDERRAMA-VEGA (1985) (duress by threats: cumulative threats can be considered if they're serious enough)D illegally imported cocaine and said he'd been sent death threats and threats to disclose his homosexuality. The conviction was quashed as jury should've been able to consider the cumulative effects of all threats
- 6MARTIN (1989) (duress by threats: threats to family/friends can be the basis)wife threatened to commit suicide if D didn't drive while he was disqualified.
- 7CONWAY (1988) (duress by threats: threats to family/friends can be basis)D was driving with another who had been the intended victim of a shooting before but narrowly escaped. D saw a car following him and feared it'd be the shooter so drove off recklessly. On appeal the conviction was quashed as duress of circumstances should've been put forward
- 8GRAHAM (1982) (two stage test)This case established the tests. The D lived with his wife and a homosexual man (K). K was violent and bullied D, he told D to injure his wife. D said he only did so because of his fear of K. Conviction was upheld
- 9HOWE (1987) (two stage test)Tests were approved in this case by HOL. D took part in torturing and abusing of a man strangled by another. D said he was threatened by it was held the defence wasn't available
- 10MARTIN (2000) (subjective test: may consider special characteristics)D had a condition which made him believe threats. He claimed he had been forced to carry out robberies. Judge said the disorder was irrelevant in the first part of the test but may be considered in the second part. Conviction was quashed as it was held that D's condition is relevant in deciding if he reasonably believed his safety was at risk
- 11HASAN (2005) (subjective test: D's belief about threats must be reasonable and genuine)D tried to burgle a safe after he was threatened and it was held he should've seeked police protection
- 12BOWEN (1996) (objective test: can consider certain characteristics)D had low IQ and stole goods after being told he'd be petrol bombed. It was held that only certain things are relevant to be considered. These include age, pregnancy, serious physical disability, recognised medical illness or psychiatric disorder
- 13GILL (1963) (no safe avenue of escape)D claimed to ne threatened if he didn't steal a lorry. However, he was left alone for a period of time so could've called for help therefore the defence failed
- 14HUDSON V TAYLOR (1971) (no safe avenue of escape: some exceptions to the police being found)D's lied in court as they were threatened to be 'cut up'. The C of A quashed the conviction as police couldn't give effective protection and jury should consider the circumstances of effects
- 15ABDUL- HUSSAIN (1999) (imminence of threat)Hijacked a plane to escape persecution. Held the threat must be imminent and operating on the D's mind
- 16COLE (1994) (threats must be to commit a specific offence)No connection between the threats and crime committed. D was told to get money, not commit robbery
- 17SHARP (1987) (self induced)D joined a gang who carried out robberies. D said he wanted to withdraw but knew when he joined that violence was likely therefore duress couldn't be used
- 18HEATH (2000) (self induced)D owed money to drug dealer and was threatened. He knew that being in debt to a drug dealer meant that violence was likely therefore duress couldn't be used
- 19SHEPHERD (1987) (self induced)D was in a shoplifting gang and said he wanted to withdraw but was threatened unless he continued. C of A quashed the conviction as he had no knowledge the gang may use violence therefore the defence could succeed
- 20HASAN (2005) (self induced)D was associated with a violent drug dealer. The drug dealer told D to burgle a house to get money and threatened the D with harming his family. D broke into the house but couldn't open the safe. Conviction was quashed but said " if he foresees the risk of being subject to threats/violence and the offence committed is the same as the offence foreseen to be committed he'll be guilty". The HOL reinstated the conviction
- 21WILLER (1986) (duress of circumstances)D and passenger were driving when they were threatened. The only way to get away was to drive on the pavement. It was held the jury should've been able to consider if he drove under duress
- 22CONWAY (1988) (duress of circumstances)Followed Willer. Passenger in D's car was intended victim of a shooting before. D was stationary when 2 men came after them. D believed it to be the shooters so drove off recklessly but it was instead police men. C of A said duress under circumstances is available if objectively there's a threat of serious injury or death to be avoided
- 23MARTIN (1989) (duress of circumstances)D's wife became hysterical and threatened suicide unless D drove while disqualified. D drove and it was held that duress under circumstances is available and the two part test identified in Graham would be applied
- 24POMMELL (1995) (duress of circumstances: can't be used for murder/attempted and some forms of treason)D was found lying in bed with a gun and told police he took it off someone who said they were going 'to do some damage'. Judge said as he didn't go to police straight away he had no defence. It was held the defence couldn't be used for murder/attempted and some forms of treason
- 25CAIRNS (1999) (duress of circumstances: reasonably perceived a threat of serious injury/death)V threw himself off D's car and V's friends began shouting and D felt threatened so drove off. It turned out the friends were trying to help, not threaten D. The V fell under the car and got seriously injured. Judge said jury had to consider whether D's actions were actually necessary . Conviction was quashed as he reasonably perceived a threat of physical injury
Information
- Description
- AS - Level Law (year 13) Flashcards on DEFENCES: duress, created by Lucy Sheard on 03/02/2017.
- Created by
- Lucy Sheard
- Views
- 1
- Rating