Duress

Hasan (2005)

the test= (i) was the def impelled to act as he did because he reasonably feared that, if he didn’t, he would be subjected to deathj or serious personal injury? (ii) would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the def’s characteristics, have

1 of 20

Bowen (1996)

the reasonable man in (ii) may share certain characteristics of the def

2 of 20

Howe (1987)

duress is no defence to murder

3 of 20

Wright (2000)

The threat of death or serious injury need not be directed at the def himself, but may be directed at his immediate family or someone close to him

4 of 20

Hasan (2005)

The harm must reasonably be expected to follow immediately or almost immediately

5 of 20

Hudson and Taylor (1971)

The threat would be imminent simply if it were operating on the def’s mind at the time of the offence

6 of 20

Abdul-Hussain (1999)

In order to rely on duress, the def must have had no reasonable opportunity to take evasive action

7 of 20

Valderrama-Vega (1985)

Where there are accumulated threats, the defence is still available to def provided he would not have acted had it not been for the threats of death/serious injury

8 of 20

Cole (1994)

There must be a link between the duress and the offence for defence to succeed-e.g.def told by money lenders to get money or they will harm def, def’s gf and baby- def robbed bank-def didn’t have to-could have used other lawful options

9 of 20

Aikens (2003)

A threat to punch may not be sufficient

10 of 20

Graham (1982)

The def’s age and sex can be taken into account

11 of 20

Bowen (1996)

The def’s timidity is an irrelevant characteristic

12 of 20

Flatt (1996)

The def’s self-induced drug addiction is an irrelevant characteristic

13 of 20

Hegarty (1994)

Emotional instability and a grossly elevated neurotic state are irrelevant characteristics

14 of 20

Hurst (1995)

Possible effects of sexual abuse as a child is irrelevant

15 of 20

Horne (1994)

Vulnerability is an irrelevant characteristic

16 of 20

Emery (1993)

PTSD is a relevant characteristic

17 of 20

Fitzpatrick (1977)

Defence of duress was not available as the def voluntarily joined an organisation which he knew to officially categorised as a terrorist organisation

18 of 20

Sharp (1987)

Where def voluntarily joins an criminal organisation or gang which he knows to be violent., or might pressure def, the defence of duress is not available for offence committed as active member

19 of 20

Shepherd (1987)

Duress will be available if the def voluntarily associate with a criminal gang not known to use violent methods

20 of 20

Get Revising

Duress

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Similar Law resources: