Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
duress of threats (about duress of threats (limits of the defence (The…
duress of threats
about duress of threats
-
the defence covers situations where, although the defendant has the actus reus and the mens rea of the offence, the defendant only committed the crime bceause they had no choice (fear of death or serious violence)
-
limits of the defence
-
- For crimes of murder, attempted murder or for an accessory to murder
-
- Where the defendant voluntarily, with knowledge of its nature, joined a violent criminal gang
- Where the defendant voluntarily joined a terrorist organisation
- Where the defendant became indebted to drug dealers
- Where the defendant could reasonably have taken evasive action
2. Objective Element
A sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the defendant (Bowen) - ie.e sex, age, mental imaprement ect, might have acted as the defendant did.
(Sharp) = even if the requirements of the defence have been satisfied it is not availible to those who voluntarily joined gangs or people who are associated with criminals, if they know that they might be put under pressure to committ an offence
(Shepard) = as long as their is no evidence of violence prior to the threats the defence will be succesful. in (Hassan) = it was held that the question is whether the D should have known, rather tha whether he did know
(Hassan) = association with those with a propensity for violence may also render the defence invalid
1. Subjective Element
D must reasonably believe that as a result of threats (things said or done) that there was good cause to fear death or serious injury if they didn't committ the crime
(Wright) = duress will only apply if the threat is directed at D, a clsoe member of his family or to anyone he is regarded as being responsible for
POSSIBLE REFORM = the postion as to wether it covers threats to strangers is uncertain, though the law commision considers that it should
(Hassan) = the threat must be of death or serious injury and the D must reasonably believe that it is capable of being carried out 'immediatley' or 'almost immediatley'
(Valderrama-Vega) = financial pressure or a threat to disclose secrets, such as sexual orientation are insufficient on their own, as are threats to property, however, the threat of death or serious injury doesn't have to be the only motivation behind the D's acts
the offence must be a nominated one e.g. 'do ... or else' (Cole) where the threat is 'sufficiently serious' is a question of fact for the jury to decide
-