• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The essence of the defence of duress by threats is that a defendant would not have committed a crime but for the threats of another person - Consider how and why the courts have limited the availability of the defence.

Extracts from this document...


The essence of the defence of duress by threats is that a defendant would not have committed a crime but for the threats of another person. Consider how and why the courts have limited the availability of the defence. The defence of duress is a common law defence, which has long been recognised as excusing the defendant completely from liability, being a 'true defence'. D argues that a supervening factor should preclude liability. The force or threat of force is employed specifically for the purpose of compelling D to commit a criminal offence. The Australian case of Hurley and Murray (1967) gave a summary of the requirements and restrictions of the defence. D must be threatened with death or serious injury, the threat must be imminent and impending, D's belief in the threat must be reasonable, and a person of 'ordinary firmness' must similarly have yielded to the threat. In addition, D cannot rely on the defence if he has voluntarily exposed himself to the treat, is intoxicated, or he is on a charge of murder or attempted murder. The first condition hare concerns the Nature of the threat. The threat must be 'operating upon the mind of the defendant at the time of the alleged act' Hudson and Taylor (1971). ...read more.


However, individual characteristics that have a direct bearing on the ability of D to resist the threats are to be excluded. Consequently, if D is more pliable, vulnerable, timid or susceptible to threats than a normal person, these characteristics will not be legitimate to invest the ordinary person for the purpose of considering the objective test. In Horne (1994) the judge stated that if the standard for comparison is a person of reasonable firmness, it must be irrelevant for the jury to consider ant characteristics of D, which show that he is not a person of reasonable firmness. 'It would be a contradiction in terms to ask the jury this question and then ask them to take into account, as one of D's characteristics, (mental instability).' Following Flatt, self induced characteristics are not relevant in determining whether a person of ordinary firmness would similarly have succumbed to a threat like the defendant did, therefore this would include voluntary intoxication. A major restriction of duress is that it does not provide a defence where the defendant is on a charge of murder or attempted murder, Howe (1987) and Gotts (1992). These cases confirmed the decision made over a hundred years earlier, in Dudley and Stephens (1884). ...read more.


Restrictions also apply where D associates with people known to be violent criminals such as drug dealers, Baker and Ward (1999), Heath (1999). Due to the restrictions analysed in the defence of Duress, the Law Commission recommended the abolition of the objective test in the first part of the Graham test, which would make it easier for the defendant to gain the defence. However, to compensate for this it has been suggested that the burden of proof be reversed so that D has to prove his honest belief of the threat. However, this has been controversial as it effectively goes against a whole line of authority in the criminal law (Woolmington), and might been seen as too high a price to pay. It has also been suggested that the objective test be abolished in the second stage of the test as well, with the jury being able to take into account all circumstances that affect the gravity of the threat to the defendant, including factors such as suggestibility. This would bring the defence in line with the special defence of provocation following the decision in Smith (2000). This may possible leave the defence of duress open to abuse as a result, however the jury would still have the ultimate decision. Laura Westwood 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Automatism is generally considered to be a state in which a person has no ...

    5 star(s)

    The second approach that has been used by the courts is the 'External Factor' theory. The inability of the defendant to control his or her acts must result from the operation of some external factor upon the working of

  2. Marked by a teacher

    In order to decide whether or not trial by jury should or should not ...

    4 star(s)

    This is consistent with the finding that some three-fifths of those who elected and eventually pleaded guilty were, at the time mode of trial was decided, actively considering contesting their cases.

  1. Offences against the person act 1861; criticisms and reforms.

    The Government therefore proposes that the law should only apply to those whom it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt have deliberately transmitted a disease, intending to cause serious illness. The offence of intentional serious injury, as described in clause 2 of LC218, will replace section 18 of the OAPA 1861.

  2. Criminal Law (Offences against the person) - revision notes

    Almost certainly the case of R v Bedder (1954) gave raise to this section of the act dealing with provocation. R v Bedder (1954) - Bedder was 18 and impotent. He attempted to have sex with a prostitute but couldn't and she taunted him and physically assaulted him about this.

  1. What is an indictable offence and how is it brought to trial?

    The Court of Appeal and House of Lords held that no national court had the power to suspend the operation of an Act of Parliament, but the Court of Justice disagreed. A national court, which, in a case before it concerning Community law, considers that the sole obstacle, which precludes

  2. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    or 'Account Mr. X only.' Thus, restrictive crossing may take any of the forms shown below: Figure 9: Restrictive Crossing The effect of 'Account Payee' crossing is that the collecting banker is supposed to credit the amount of the check to the Account of the payee only and nobody else.

  1. One of the greatest tragedies in life is the murder of a beautiful theory ...

    She then helped the others to strip her naked and helped to hold her down while she was raped first by 18 year-old Marvin Edwards, a brain damaged boy who was neglected and beaten by his mother, and then by a 14-year-old boy.

  2. Worlds Apart: Orientalism, Antifeminism, and Heresy in Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale

    preach them and shew them distinctly the law of Jesu Christ, and when they tell them of the prophecies. Daniel points out that favorable western commentary on the closeness of Islam to Christianity always had the ulterior motive of conversion, just as praise of a Saracen--usually the token figure, Saladin--

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work