Self-Defence Essay & Case Cards AO1

Beschreibung

Karteikarten am Self-Defence Essay & Case Cards AO1, erstellt von abigail_rose am 11/01/2015.
abigail_rose
Karteikarten von abigail_rose, aktualisiert more than 1 year ago
abigail_rose
Erstellt von abigail_rose vor fast 10 Jahre
104
1

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

Frage Antworten
Self-Defence: Self-defence/defence of another Common Law - Consolidated in a statute: Criminal Justice & Immigration Act 2008
Self-Defence: Prevention of Crime S.3 Criminal Law Act 1967
Defence of Property Criminal Damage Act 1971
Scope of the defence Normally a defence for the NFO's Can be used for crimes such as murder
Burden of Proof D has a defence if he uses reasonable & necessary force The burden of proof lies with the prosecution once the defence has been raised
Reasonable Force Was the force necessary? - subjective Was the force reasonable? - objective
Subjective: Palmer Lord Morris: "...a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action"
Subjective: Scarlett D removed drunken man from a pub - believing he would attack him - and killed him Held D's aren't to be convicted even if the force wasn't objectively reasonable!
Objective: Owino D punched V in the face in order to restrain her Held he used excessive force and COA rejected his appeal
Martin D shot V's in the back and convicted of murder COA held psychiatric evidence showing he thought he was in more danger than he actually was was irrelevant!
Excessive Force Self-defence won't be available if the D uses excessive force
Clegg D shot 3 times at a car whilst on duty, at a check point, killing the V D couldn't use S.D. as excessive force was used - there was no danger when he fired the 3rd shot
Mistake and Self-Defence Works where the D makes an honest mistake & the force was reasonable
Williams (Gladstone) D mistakenly thought PC was assaulting youth & attacked him Held D should be judged according to his genuine mistakes - conviction quashed
Beckford PC shot D as he mistakenly believed he was armed Held the D is to be judged on the facts as he believed them to be
Mistake, Self-Defence and Intoxication D can't use self-defence if they make a mistake whilst voluntarily intoxicated
O'Grady D had been drinking & killed his friend after waking to find him attacking him S.D. failed & conviction upheld - voluntary intoxication can't form the basis of a defence for any crime!
Pre-Emptive Strikes Deana - a man isn't obliged to wait until he is attacked before acting in S.D. - he is entitled to get the first blow in if its reasonably necessary to do so!
Imminence of Threat: Attorney General's Reference No. 2 D made petrol bombs as he feared his shop would be attacked again Held someone fearing an attack can make preparations even if doing so breaks the law
Imminence Threat: Malnik D took a weapon with him to confront a violent man who stole from his friend Liable- S.D. isn't valid when the D makes preparations
Revenge: Rashford COA stated the fact the D acted in revenge isn't enough - must take into account the circumstances AND whether the D honestly thought it was necessary
Possibility of Retreat The D doesn't have to retreat from danger
Bird D's ex threw beer over her and she gouged his eye out with a glass S.D. was valid as she didn't need to show retreat
Reforms LC: This area of law needs re-examining!!!
Zusammenfassung anzeigen Zusammenfassung ausblenden

ähnlicher Inhalt

Functionalist Theory of Crime
A M
Realist Theories
A M
Carbohydrates
Julia Romanów
Control, Punishment & Victims
A M
Ethnicity, Crime & Justice
A M
AQA A2 Biology Unit 4: Populations
Charlotte Lloyd
AQA Physics: A2 Unit 4
Michael Priest
Coloured Compounds (AQA A2 Chemistry)
Filip Lastovka
Gender, Crime & Justice
A M
Theories, Theorists and Tests
sarahsing
A-Level Law: Theft
amyclare96