Slides for teaching G153 Duress and Necessity A2 Law OCR

1. Starter:
Could D argue duress in each of these situations?
D is told that unless he does as
asked, he may be killed and/or his
family informed of his debts and
his homosexuality. He imports
drugs to the UK.
D is told that unless he pays back
his debt to the local money lender,
he, his girlfriend and his child may
suffer physical harm. He robs two
post offices
D is told that unless he does as he
is asked, his affair with another
woman will be revealed. He takes
part in a robbery
DD hijacked a plane in
Afghanistan, forcing it to fly to
the UK, and claiming they were
fleeing the Taliban after fearing
for their lives. The plane stopped
in Moscow and then flew on the
UK. They held 150 people hostage
at a UK airport for 3 days.
D is married, and living with his
gay lover, who can be violent. One
night the lover puts a thin wire
round the neck of the wife and
hands the other end to D, telling
him to pull. D, worried that the
lover may attack him, does so.

2. DPP for NI v Lynch
Scope of the Defence
Thinking back to AS...
There are two offences to which duress cannot be a defence...
or
Why does the Law Com want to change the
law back?

3. Key Case:
R v Howe 1987
1. Why does Hailsham think that duress should not
be a defence to murder?
2. How does he explain the anomaly of duress being
a defence to an s.18 wounding, but not to murder,
where the s.18 wounding is sufficient for MR
(“intention to commit GBH”)?
3. Why does Griffith think that there should be no
defence to murder?
4. Why does he say that attempted murder should
also be excluded from the defence?
5. Is this ratio or obiter? Why?
6. What is the ‘compromise’ solution? What do you
think of it? Why?

4. Applying the Law
R v Ashlea Wilson 2007

5. ... Applying the persuasive precedent
R v Gotts 1992
“intent of attempted murder is more evil
than that required of a murderer”
Sentencing should be used instead
Student Thinking (AO2):
How fair is this approach to the law? Should the court be able to take into
account the characteristics of D and who is doing the threatening in
assessing whether or not D may use duress as a defence to attempted
murder?

6. Duress of Threats
What is it? How does it work?
Mr Button calls me into his
office and tells me that if I
don’t steal all the exam papers
from the examination office in
the next 24 hours, so that I
can help all the Law students
cheat and get fantastic grades,
he will:
Scenario:
Kill my sister?
Take my ID card from me and chop it up in front
of me?
Ban me from drinking coffee for the next 6
months?
Break both my legs?
Rather than telling me to steal the papers, Mr
Hill tells me to do everything in my power to make
sure that the Law students do brilliantly or he’ll
break my legs. I decide to steal the papers.
Threatens to shoot three people passing the
school, if I do not steal the papers
Tells me that I have two months to accomplish
the theft, or he’ll kill me
Tells me he’ll kill me, but as I am schizophrenic, I
do not realise that he is joking and think that he is
acting on behalf of the little green men who talk to
me, and steal the papers.

7. Can you work out the seven key rules governing duress?
Challenge: One of the rules is not covered in the scenario,
but is still illustrated by HOWE – can you work it out?

8. Graham Test
Branch One:
Was D compelled to act as he did
because he reasonably believed
he had good cause to fear
serious injury or death as a
result of what X says or does;
Branch Two:
If so, would a sober person of
reasonable firmness, sharing the
characteristics of D have
responded in the same way.
Student Thinking:
 It was a case of murder, so why was Graham even able to argue duress?
 One of these branches is subjective... and one is objective – can you spot which is which?
 What problem(s) can you spot with the test so far?
 What kind of characteristics might affect D’s perception of a duress?

9. Can you apply the Graham test accurately?
James steals a diamond
ring, claiming he was
threatened with breaking
his legs by his elderly
grandmother, who is
confined to a wheelchair
Adam robs a bank after
Jill threatens him with a
gun, claiming she’ll pull
the trigger if he doesn’t.
Ida is told by Joey, the
local thug, to steal her
mum’s car. He is joking,
but she steals it anyway.

10. Graham Test
R v Martin (DP) 2000
Is a mental disorder relevant to
the first branch?
Does the threat have to be real?
R v Cairns
What about R v Hasan?
What charactersitics?
R v Bowen
What about self-induced characteristics
e.g. drug taking, alcohol etc.?
Why do you think that the courts have
created these exceptions?
Are they in line with the law on loss of
control as a partial defence to murder? Why?
Why not?
CHARACTERISTICS ALLOWED CHARACTERISTICS NOT
ALLOWED.
Branch One:
Was D compelled to act as he did
because he reasonably believed
he had good cause to fear
serious injury or death as a
result of what X says or does;
Branch Two:
If so, would a sober person of
reasonable firmness, sharing the
characteristics of D have
responded in the same way.

11. How serious does the threat have to be?
Valderrama-Vega
What if there are other threats as well?
General Feelings of pressure are not
sufficient: A
What
about
adultery?
Singh
1973
What about
imprisonment?
Dao 2012

12. Who can be threatened?
R v Wright
“someone you would feel reasonably responsible for”
Thinking: Does that include a stranger?
Case Facts Outcome Relationship?
Martin
Conway
Cole

13. Student Thinking (AO2):
What if the threat is to a stranger?
Jim wants someone to plant a bomb, but doesn’t want to do it himself. He
grabs Bob and holds a gun to his head. Whilst Bob has the gun pointed at his
head Fred walks by. Jim tells Fred to plant the bomb or he will kill Bob.
Is this sufficient? Would Fred have a defence if he planted the bomb?

14. What if you have the chance to
tell someone?
 General Rule:
R v Gill
What if the help doesn’t
help?
R v Hudson v Taylor
... but guess which case has
something to say about this
all?
R v Hasan

15. How soon must it be carried out?
imminence or immediate
R v Abdul-Hussain confirmed in R v Safi
Imminent peril of death or serious
injury to those D is responsible for.
The peril must be operative on D’s mind
at the point of committing the act, such
that it overbears their will. [this is
judged by the jury]
Not necessarily immediate execution.
...but “immediately or almost immediately” R v Hasan

16. Crime...what crime?
General Rule:
R v Cole
... But what about this?
D had been drinking in the pub, and his
friend Y offered to drive him home. D
fell asleep in the car, and woke up to
find that Y had vanished. He leaned over
and pulled the car over to the side of
the road, when he was arrested for
drink driving.

17. Can you beat Miss Hart and tell us what the law on duress actually
is?
... is it right?
Duress is a general defence, and applies to all offences apart from murder. There,
according to Whybrow, it results in a partial defence and reduces D’s liability. This
is because D should be willing to sacrifice themselves. This can lead to unfairness,
as D can have no defence even when he is young (Gotts; Wilson).
There are three overlapping defences: duress of threats, consequences and
necessity.
According to the courts, the threat must be that of death. If D is threatened with
anything else e.g. revealing sexuality, it doesn’t count.
In addition the threat must be to D or someone that D feels responsible for. This
includes the immediate family and spouse. However, it does not include the
stranger on the street, which seems in line with the approach of the Court to
murder and the ‘sanctity of human life’ principle.
Finally, in order to establish whether D was operating under duress, the Graham
test should be applied. This is subjective and determines whether the threat really
was real.
Duress is a general defence, and applies to all offences apart from murder and
attempted murder. There, according to Howe, it results in no defence and reduces D’s
liability. This is because D should be willing to sacrifice themselves. This can lead to
unfairness, as D can have no defence even when he is young (Gotts; Wilson).
There are three overlapping defences: duress of threats, circumstances & necessity.
According to the courts, the threat must be that of death or serious injury. If D is
threatened with anything else e.g. revealing sexuality, it doesn’t count unless there
are threats of GBH or death as well.
In addition the threat must be to D or someone that D feels reasonably responsible
for. This includes the immediate family and spouse. However, it does not include the
stranger on the street, which seems out of line with the approach of the Court to
murder and the ‘sanctity of human life’ principle.
Finally, in order to establish whether D was operating under duress, the Graham test
should be applied. This is subjective and objective and determines whether the threat
really was real to D.

18. A specific problem:
Self Induced Duress
General rule: No defence, if you knew that you were likely to be subject to threats of violence.
Member of a criminal gang
Consort with those with a propensity
for violence.
R v Sharp
but R v Shepherd
R v Heath
R v Hasan
R v Ali

19. James is emailed by Louis, the
local thug, from his holiday in
Italy.
Louis tells James that he will kill
him when he gets back in a week,
if James doesn’t rob the local post
office.
Has he got a defence?
Applying the law so
far:

20. Check your AO1
Complete the sheet to show your
understanding
You should be able to
complete the revision sheet
with the key definitions and
ideas...
Remember ask if
you are not sure.

21. Duress of Circumstances
Thinking:
Why isn’t duress of threats
alone good enough?
R v Willer
D was charged with reckless driving. D&P
were in a narrow alleyway and were
surrounded by youths. To escape they
drove on the pavement slowly (at about
10MPH). As they were good citizens, they
went to the police station to report the
incident and guess what… they arrested
and charged!
“[D was] wholly driven by force of
circumstances into doing what he did and
did not drive the car otherwise than under
that form of compulsion i.e. under duress”
Watkins LJ
R v Conway
R v Martin (Colin)
Is it just confined to driving offences?
Does the threat have to be real?
R v Pomell
R v Saif;
R v Abdul Hussain
R v Cairns

22. Joseph, who is of a timid nature and low
intelligence, is told by Katya that she will beat him
up unless he obtains good by for her from a shop
using a stolen credit card. He does this and obtains
a DVD player for her.
Natasha’s boyfriend, Ross, is a drug dealer. She
also knows that he has convictions for violence. He
threatens to beat her ‘senseless’ unless she agrees
to take some drugs to one of his ‘customers’. She
is caught by the police and charged with
possessing drugs with intent to supply.
Sanjeet’s wife has tried to commit suicide
previously. She is very depressed because they are
heavily in debt. She tells Sanjeet that she will
throw herself under a train unless he can get the
money to pay off the debts. Sanjeet obtains the
money by robbing a local off-licence.
Tamara is due to give evidence against Alexia’s
boyfriend who is facing trial for attempted
murder. A week before the trial is due to take
place. Alexia sends Tamara a text message saying
that Tamara will be killed if she gives evidence.
Tamara attends the court but lies in evidence
saying, untruthfully, that the man she saw was
much shorter than Alexia’s boyfriend.
Clancy is threatened by Neil, a fellow employee, who tells
Clancy that he will tell their boss about Clancy’s previous
convictions for theft. Neil says that Clancy has to help him
shoplift from a small corner shop by distracting the counter
staff whilst Neil steals. Clancy feels obliged to do this as he
doesn’t want to lose his job.
Example answer…
Applying the Law
Remember:
Start with the Graham test!

23. Evaluate…
Area Explanation Cases to
illustrate
Not available for
murder
No allowances for low
IQ
Police Protection
Self-induced
Duress of
Circumstances
‘Person D feels
reasonably
responsible for’
Imminence or
immediate?
A-B
Look at both sides, and develop your
point with a relevant case
C
Develop your point from a single
sentence, into an argument
D-E
Clearly explain your point, giving
a reason.

24. Can you manage the trionomoes of doom?

25. Introduction
Should you have a defence in the following
situation?
You are climbing a mountain with two
friends. You are all tethered together.
Sophie, who is tethered below you, slips
and falls off the edge. You can’t see her and
have tried calling but can’t hear anything.
There is no way to pull her back up. Her
weight is pulling the other two of you
down, and pulling your fixtures out.
You decide to cut the rope, knowing that
she has a long way to fall and will probably
die.
Would your answer change if she replied?

26. Necessity:
An alternative approach?
“A choice between two evils”
Dudley & Stephens
Traditional approach…
Necessity, if allowed would
“be made the legal cloak for
unbridled passion and
atrocious crime”
An alternative, medical, development…
Re: F (Sterilisation)
“In many cases it will not only be
lawful for doctors, on the ground
of necessity to operate on or give
other medical treatment to adult
patients disabled from giving
consent, it will also be their
common duty to do so.”

27. Re: A
A civil case…with a criminal outcome?
What principle[s]
underlie the use of
necessity as a defence?
What offences is
necessity a defence to?
Is this binding
precedent on the Criminal
Courts? Why/why not?
Is the decision of the
Court of Appeal a general
one, applicable to all other
cases?
Thinking…

28. Starter:

29. Development of the law from there…
R v Shayler
Is necessity
actually a separate
defence?
R v Quayle
R v Rodger
Can the threat
come from
within?

30. A More Modern Approach
Pipe v DPP 2012
When might it be necessary to do this?

31. Finally…
LAMB
Your homework this week is to read
the edited case report, which is
emailed to you, and answer the
following question, using this and at
least one other case:
Should the defence of
necessity be open to health
professionals who seek to end
the life of another, with their
consent?

32. Criticism of the law on necessity…
Complete the sentences to
show your understanding
of the topic.
Remember:
 Explain why
 Develop your argument
 Illustrate with a case
 Consider the
alternative.
Struggling? There are some
points to help on the slide!
The courts have consistently
referred to it alongside
duress of circumstances.
The decisions in Quayle and Roger
seems to make it sound far too
similar to duress.
Although the obiter of Re: A suggests it could be a
defence to murder, the clear decision of Dudley &
Stephens seems to say otherwise.
It has the potential to be a much
wider defence than duress, as it is
much more of a subjective
approach.

33. …Section C

34. Section C application…
• Duress is when D reasonably believes that he will be threatened with
death or serious injury if he does not commit a serious crime, and a
reasonable person with his characteristics would think the same.
•Although Angelo is threatened, the revealing of his debts alone is not
enough to provide a defence.
•In addition, he has only been told to repay the money, not commit a
specific crime (Cole) and so Angelo would not be successful ain pleading
duress and the statement is false.

35. Finally:
How well have you understood?
Consider whether the case of Hasan has changed the law on
duress of threats and why.
Justify the decision not to afford those who kill a defence of duress
Describe the approach of the courts to the problem of those who
‘consort with those with a propensity for violence’.
Explain what is meant by the Graham test, and its purpose.
Describe three of the limitations on the law of duress of threats
A
B
C
D
E

36. Do you know the
cases and their
importance?
All of you should be able
to untangle the cases
Most of you should be
able to assign them to
one of the areas of duress
and necessity
Some of you should be
able to explain the
importance of the case to
duress and necessity

37. Recap of duress….

38. …and the others?
Means:
Introduced to deal with:
Why?
Expanded in:
Now applies to:
Means:
Traditional Rule:
Also used in:
Case example:
Which case might have changed the rules?
Why?
Subsequent Limitations:
Circumstances Necessity

39. ... And finally your end of unit assessment:
'The defence of duress is essential but, in its present form, unsatisfactory.'
Critically evaluate the accuracy of this statement. [OCR Section A, June 10]
Intro
Aim:
Define the key terms, identify the
origin, reason and link to AO2

40. Subheading or
Area
Means/Cases etc. Evaluation & Criticism
Essential... Satisfactory,,,
Scope
Key test for
duress:
Other rules:
YOU are going to complete this
section... definitions... key cases...
How have the
courts confirmed
the test or
modified it?
Can you spot
any problems?
What has
Hasan got to say
about this?
Model Plan:
Applies to all crimes except murder
(Howe) and attempted murder (Gotts)
Model Plan:
 Ensures ‘sanctity of human life’
 Inconsistent with Law Commission & obiter in
necessity (Re A)
 Requires too much from D and can be unfair (Lynch)
 Consistently applied – Wilson (Ashlea)
 Too absolute a rule - doesn’t matte r age or
threatener

41. Self- Induced
Duress of
Circumstances

42. Reforms or
alternatives?

43. Conclusion
Your conclusion should address the
quote and answer it, using a case or
evidence in support.
'The defence of duress is essential but, in its present form, unsatisfactory.'
Critically evaluate the accuracy of this statement. [OCR Section A, June 10]

44. Finally...
Do you know what a good answer looks like?
Or what makes it adequate or even limited or
wide-ranging?
Challenge:
Look at the paragraph below. Which of those
words would you use to describe it? Why?
Duress is not a defence to murder or attempted
murder. This is because of the sanctity of human life.
The House of Lords said this in Howe where he
tortured a man to death and tried leave the gang but
they threatened him and he helped them to kill
another. He was convicted of murder. They also said
that it shouldn’t be a defence to attempted murder.
This is what happened in Gotts, where he killed his
mum. The Law Commission thought it should be a
defence like in Lynch.
This is an answer.

45. Plenary:
What’s the case… what’s the problem?
You need to answer one from each of the boxes… which one is up to you!
What’s the case?
…and the ratio (C+)
1. I don’t think that’s a ffair ruling!
2. He’s gotta be one of the worst sons
ever (almost)
3. If only he’d put a ring on it…
4. He was so wired, I was scared!
5. Just speaking ain’t no crime.
What’s the problem?
1. Children who try to kill
2. Saving a stranger by robbing a bank.
3. Being objective in the test for
duress.
4. The threat is in another country
5. Sacrificing yourself for others.

46. What’s the case?
All of you
should be able to
identify the case
(name or facts)
Mostof you
should be able to
identify the legal
importance or
ruling from the
case.
Someof you
will be able to spot
the odd one out
from each row, and
explain why!
The odd one out is: because...
The odd one out is: because...
The odd one out is: because...
But you don’t
know how
they ganged
up on me
I r a daft driver
for stopping in
the first place
I’ve got to be
a good son...
2 become 1 Missing but
still here.
James Bond
wouldn’t have
had it this
hard.

47. Look at your causation essay.
Read the feedback and
information!!!
 What do you need to focus on to
make sure you are fabulous?
How does your mark relate to your
aspirational grade?
 The green section is a section I am
really pleased with, and the pink an
area I think you need to improve...
Can you spot the difference? Can you
work out how to improve?
Complete the feedback to set your
focus for this.
Gotta get better...