Defences to criminal charges

general defence

specific defences

alibi defence

lack of mens rea and actus reas

accused provides evidence (alibi) proving he/she was somewhere else

says the accused was not there at the time of the crime

mental disorder

lack of mens rea

replaced defence of insanity

says a person cannot be held criminally responsible because a mental disorder has diminished their ability to know the difference between right and wrong

person is presumed to be sane until proven otherwise

a person can have a mental disorder, but not necessarily a legal mental disorder

results of a successful plea of mental disorder

set free (if not a threat to society)

sent to a mental institution

fit to return to society

completes maximum time if given a jail sentence

intoxication

partial lack of mens rea

review

specific intent

planned and deliberate

general intent

swerve the moment

intoxication may only be used as a defence for crimes requiring specific intent, eg. murder, aggravated assault, break and enter with intent

cannot use this defence if you become intoxicated for courage

results of a plea of intoxication

crime will be lowered to one requiring general intent, eg. murder to manslaughter, aggravated assault to assault

provocation

partial lack of mens rea

says you were so provoked you didn't know what you were doing

can only be used if charged with murder

results of a successful plea of provocation

murder is reduced to manslaughter

necessity

lack of mens rea

occurs when a person is forced to act because he/she had no other choice, eg. had to drive with suspended license because father had heart attack and no way to get help

cannot be used if

homeless (trespassing)

hunger (steal food)

human jettison (sacrifices one life to save another

results to necessity is set free

duress/compulsion

lack of mens rea

forced to commit a crime because of threats of immediate death or serious injury to yourself or a member of your family

threat must be immediate and present

cannot use this defence if you are the principle offender in a violant act

results of a successful plea of duress/compulsion

Double jeopardy

basic idea is that the crown cannot make repeated attempts to convict a perosn

3 basic areas

a)autrefois acquit - previously acquitted of the crime

b) autrefois convict - previously convicted of the crime

results of a successful plea of autrefois acquit/convict - set free

2) kienapple - a person cannot be tried for more than one offence arising from the same cause or matter or a person cannot be charged with more than one offence if they are basically the same eg. theft and robbery

results of of a successful plea of kienapple principle - some charges will be dropped

res judicata - "there has been an issue and that issue has been decided"

this means evidence from one trial cannot be used at another if the evidence is basically the same

eg. - case of grill

accused of killing his wife & son

found not guilty of killing his wife

put on trial for sons death

since evidence was basically the same, it was not allowed

results of a successful plea of res judicata - evidence will be disallowed