Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
presentation for crmin (In relation to Samantha’s death the judge rules…
presentation for crmin
In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:
was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and
Samantha may have had a golf club, but she is 5 feet 3 inches and is petite, therefore does she really pose any real threat.
especially to Ross who is a large man, over six feet tall.
-
In relation to Samantha’s death the judge rules that there is insufficient evidence of self-defence for it to be put to the jury.
the judge was correct in this statement because in the context of the wife seeing ross over her injured husband, It can be argued that it was actually samantha who attacked in self-defence. Samantha was defending her husband's life, due
(b) Prevent an attack on another person, eg R v Rose (1884) 15 Cox 540, where
-
murderous attack on the defendant’s mother, was acquitted of murder on the
-
A witness to violent crime with a continuing threat of violence may well be justified in using extreme force to remove a threat of further violence.
Samantha was acting lawfully when swinging the golf club at Ross. Ross cannot use the defence of self-defense because Ross was in fact who was the agressor.
Ross cannot have defended himself from an agressor, because Samantha was merely trying to defend her husband from a killer.
Samantha, who had remained at home, hears the escalation in noise and decides to go next door. Fearing violence she grabs a golf club from the closet, as at 5 feet 3 inches she is petite and not well able to defend herself physically. When she approaches Rebekah’s house the front door is open. She walks in to see Ross on top of David at the fireplace. David is clearly seriously injured and Rebekah is crying. Believing he might still be alive, Samantha runs toward David and attempts to hit Ross with the golf club in order to prevent him from injuring David further.
Furthermore, due to IMMINENCE OF THE
THREATENED ATTACK
-
-
-
-
-
the defence of self defence should have not been put to the jury and this judgment was correct because
-
Furthermore, due to the factor that Defence will be lost if D provoked the attack in order to use violence in response, we can say that ross maybe did
-