SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 15
Non-Fatal Offences (3)Self Defence G153 Criminal Law 2009-10
What’s the problem?Look at the following situations. In which could you argue self-defence in the law? Someone walks up and hits your friend in the face so you hit them back Someone walks up to you and hits you in the face so you hit them back You see someone about to break a shop window so you hit them to stop them Someone walks up and you think they are about to hit you so you hit them first Someone is irritating you so you hit them to shut them up Someone walks up to you and you think they’re going to hit your friend, so you hit them first. You see someone put an item in their pocket and start to walk out of a shop without paying, so you hit them to stop them getting away. Someone threatens to attack your friend if you do not beat another person up. Someone is taunting you so you lose your temper and hit them.
What do you think?  What happened in the Hussain case? What were they convicted of? What was the sentence? Which type of actions may be excluded from self defence? Which word governs the actions of D if they are to successfully argue self-defence? What role did their actions in self-defence have on their sentence? Do you agree?
What is ‘self defence’? Self Defence This was the common law defence, which is now consolidated in statute. D may use reasonable force to defend himself or others or property Criminal Justice andImmigration Act 2008 s.76 Prevention of a crime A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large. s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 Defence of property We’ll come back to this in the next unit! s.5(2) Criminal Damage Act 1971 Private Defence Our Focus Public defence
So which is this? D thought that there was a contract out on his life. Armed with a double-barrelled shotgun he went round to the house of the father of the man he thought issued the contract. When asked what he intended to do, D replied, “I want to see Kelly. I’m going to kill him. I’m going to blow his brains out.” R v Cousins 1982
Reasonable Force? Reasonable in all the circumstances as they appear to D! R v Palmer 1971 R v Whyte 1987 R v Owino 1996? OR R v Scarlett 1993
CharacteristicsWhich can we take into account in assessing whether the force was reasonable or not? Physical? Mental?
How much force can you use? “excessive self-defence is no defence at all” X threatens you with a knife and you pick up a stone and knock it out of their hand. Someone runs at you waving a giant pencil and you shoot and kill them X runs at you waving an axe and you shoot them in the leg. X threatens you with a penknife and you split their head open with an axe. X points a gun at you and you stab them in the arm. X backs you against a wall and you hit them over the head with a glass. X threatens you with a knife and you hit them with a spoon. X punches you in the face, and you punch them in the arm
Should excessive self-defence reduce murder to manslaughter? Pte. Lee Clegg “There is no halfway house. There is no rule that a D who has  used a greater degree of force than was necessary in the circumstances should be found guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. The defence either succeeds or it fails. If it succeeds, D is acquitted. If it fails, he is guilty of murder.”  Lloyd LJ No... Yes...
Ooops! But I thought you were...Mistake? R v (Gladstone) Williams R v O’Grady R v O’Connor
Other Rules? Can I pre-empt? Do you have to retreat? Imminence? Revenge?
Self-defence
How much do you understand?
Evaluate
Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76 76 Reasonable force for purposes of self-defence etc.  (1) This section applies where in proceedings for an offence—  (a) an issue arises as to whether a person charged with the offence (“D”) is entitled to rely on a defence within subsection (2), and  (b) the question arises whether the degree of force used by D against a person (“V”) was reasonable in the circumstances.  (2) The defences are—  (a) the common law defence of self-defence; and  (b) the defences provided by section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (c. 58) or section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 (c. 18 (N.I.)) (use of force in prevention of crime or making arrest).  (3) The question whether the degree of force used by D was reasonable in the circumstances is to be decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be, and subsections (4) to (8) also apply in connection with deciding that question.  (4) If D claims to have held a particular belief as regards the existence of any circumstances—  (a) the reasonableness or otherwise of that belief is relevant to the question whether D genuinely held it; but  (b) if it is determined that D did genuinely hold it, D is entitled to rely on it for the purposes of subsection (3), whether or not—  (i) it was mistaken, or  (ii) (if it was mistaken) the mistake was a reasonable one to have made.  (5) But subsection (4)(b) does not enable D to rely on any mistaken belief attributable to intoxication that was voluntarily induced.  (6) The degree of force used by D is not to be regarded as having been reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be if it was disproportionate in those circumstances.  (7) In deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3) the following considerations are to be taken into account (so far as relevant in the circumstances of the case)—  (a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action; and  (b) that evidence of a person’s having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.  (8) Subsection (7) is not to be read as preventing other matters from being taken into account where they are relevant to deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3).  (9) This section is intended to clarify the operation of the existing defences mentioned in subsection (2).  (10) In this section—  (a) “legitimate purpose” means—  (i) the purpose of self-defence under the common law, or  (ii) the prevention of crime or effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of persons mentioned in the provisions referred to in subsection (2)(b);  (b) references to self-defence include acting in defence of another person; and  (c) references to the degree of force used are to the type and amount of force used.

More Related Content

What's hot

Lecture 9 offences against property 1
Lecture 9 offences against property 1Lecture 9 offences against property 1
Lecture 9 offences against property 1
fatima d
 
Self defense 2
Self defense 2Self defense 2
Self defense 2
107750
 
LAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
LAW 201 - Ch 1 FundamentalsLAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
LAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
rharrisonaz
 
Principles of criminal liability
Principles of criminal liabilityPrinciples of criminal liability
Principles of criminal liability
sevans-idaho
 

What's hot (20)

Types of crime and violence
Types of crime and violenceTypes of crime and violence
Types of crime and violence
 
The Elements of a Crime
The Elements of a CrimeThe Elements of a Crime
The Elements of a Crime
 
Lecture 9 offences against property 1
Lecture 9 offences against property 1Lecture 9 offences against property 1
Lecture 9 offences against property 1
 
Rape
RapeRape
Rape
 
Criminal law :Culpable homicide & Murder:
Criminal law :Culpable homicide & Murder:Criminal law :Culpable homicide & Murder:
Criminal law :Culpable homicide & Murder:
 
Self defense 2
Self defense 2Self defense 2
Self defense 2
 
LAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
LAW 201 - Ch 1 FundamentalsLAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
LAW 201 - Ch 1 Fundamentals
 
Criminology powerpoint one
Criminology powerpoint oneCriminology powerpoint one
Criminology powerpoint one
 
Obiter dicta
Obiter dictaObiter dicta
Obiter dicta
 
Culpable homicide & murder
Culpable homicide & murderCulpable homicide & murder
Culpable homicide & murder
 
Ppt crime prevention talks ppt
Ppt crime prevention talks pptPpt crime prevention talks ppt
Ppt crime prevention talks ppt
 
Mens Rea
Mens ReaMens Rea
Mens Rea
 
Theft LLB Part 1 Pakistan Penal Code
Theft LLB Part 1 Pakistan Penal Code Theft LLB Part 1 Pakistan Penal Code
Theft LLB Part 1 Pakistan Penal Code
 
History of Criminology
History of CriminologyHistory of Criminology
History of Criminology
 
Principles of criminal liability
Principles of criminal liabilityPrinciples of criminal liability
Principles of criminal liability
 
Theft
TheftTheft
Theft
 
Organized crime
Organized crimeOrganized crime
Organized crime
 
Stages in Commission of a Crime
Stages in Commission of a CrimeStages in Commission of a Crime
Stages in Commission of a Crime
 
Presentation on Mens-rea
Presentation on Mens-reaPresentation on Mens-rea
Presentation on Mens-rea
 
Week 1: What is terrorism?
Week 1: What is terrorism?Week 1: What is terrorism?
Week 1: What is terrorism?
 

Similar to Self defence

Lecture 7 fatal offences
Lecture 7 fatal offencesLecture 7 fatal offences
Lecture 7 fatal offences
fatima d
 
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
SusilPaudel
 
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
Haig Gary Apoian
 
Invol mtr 2013 142
Invol mtr 2013 142Invol mtr 2013 142
Invol mtr 2013 142
Miss Hart
 
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
jesusamckone
 
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared ResourceLaw-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
lawexchange.co.uk
 
Secondary parties overview
Secondary parties overviewSecondary parties overview
Secondary parties overview
LegalEyres
 
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptxIPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
BiswaranjanRout19
 
Intoxication
IntoxicationIntoxication
Intoxication
Miss Hart
 
Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughterInvoluntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter
Gemma Chaplin
 

Similar to Self defence (20)

Mr 2013 14
Mr 2013 14Mr 2013 14
Mr 2013 14
 
Lecture 7 fatal offences
Lecture 7 fatal offencesLecture 7 fatal offences
Lecture 7 fatal offences
 
Involuntary Manslaughter
Involuntary ManslaughterInvoluntary Manslaughter
Involuntary Manslaughter
 
Mens Rea
Mens ReaMens Rea
Mens Rea
 
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
7 General Defenses (Unit VII) (2).pptx
 
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
People v. Lockett, 82 Ill.2d 546, 413 N.E.2d 378, 45 Ill.Dec. 900 (Ill., 1980)
 
Invol mtr 2013 142
Invol mtr 2013 142Invol mtr 2013 142
Invol mtr 2013 142
 
Intox2014
Intox2014Intox2014
Intox2014
 
Duress & Necessity
Duress & NecessityDuress & Necessity
Duress & Necessity
 
E DIGEST U/S 279, 337, 338,304 A, 304 II of India penal codes
E DIGEST U/S 279, 337, 338,304 A, 304 II of India penal codesE DIGEST U/S 279, 337, 338,304 A, 304 II of India penal codes
E DIGEST U/S 279, 337, 338,304 A, 304 II of India penal codes
 
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
150 words agree or dis agree to each question Q1.Good even.docx
 
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared ResourceLaw-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
 
General defense
General defenseGeneral defense
General defense
 
Defences under International Criminal Law
Defences under International Criminal LawDefences under International Criminal Law
Defences under International Criminal Law
 
Secondary parties overview
Secondary parties overviewSecondary parties overview
Secondary parties overview
 
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptxIPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
IPC-1st class INTRO- BY BR ROUT-PPT.pptx
 
Private defence
Private defencePrivate defence
Private defence
 
Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughterInvoluntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter
 
Intoxication
IntoxicationIntoxication
Intoxication
 
Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughterInvoluntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter
 

More from Miss Hart

IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
Miss Hart
 
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
Miss Hart
 

More from Miss Hart (20)

Catcher [AQA B Lang Lit Cwk Notes]
Catcher [AQA B Lang Lit Cwk Notes]Catcher [AQA B Lang Lit Cwk Notes]
Catcher [AQA B Lang Lit Cwk Notes]
 
IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
IGCSE (San Bushmen Qu3 iGCSE)
 
Igcse reading paper
Igcse reading paperIgcse reading paper
Igcse reading paper
 
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
L4 (qu1 empathetic interview) iGCSE summer 2014
 
L3 (qu3 summary)
L3 (qu3 summary)L3 (qu3 summary)
L3 (qu3 summary)
 
L1 (intro to paper & qu2)
L1 (intro to paper & qu2)L1 (intro to paper & qu2)
L1 (intro to paper & qu2)
 
iGCSE Quiz on the Skills for Paper 2
iGCSE Quiz on the Skills for Paper 2iGCSE Quiz on the Skills for Paper 2
iGCSE Quiz on the Skills for Paper 2
 
iGCSE Jan Mock Prep Lesson [Question 2 Extended]
iGCSE Jan Mock Prep Lesson [Question 2 Extended]iGCSE Jan Mock Prep Lesson [Question 2 Extended]
iGCSE Jan Mock Prep Lesson [Question 2 Extended]
 
iGCSE Extended "Create your own Paper"
iGCSE Extended "Create your own Paper"iGCSE Extended "Create your own Paper"
iGCSE Extended "Create your own Paper"
 
Loss Of Control Intro Lesson
Loss Of Control Intro LessonLoss Of Control Intro Lesson
Loss Of Control Intro Lesson
 
Attempts
AttemptsAttempts
Attempts
 
Causation
Causation Causation
Causation
 
Actus Reus
Actus ReusActus Reus
Actus Reus
 
Causation End of Unit Assessment
Causation End of Unit AssessmentCausation End of Unit Assessment
Causation End of Unit Assessment
 
Mechanics of Precedent EoU 2014
Mechanics of Precedent EoU 2014Mechanics of Precedent EoU 2014
Mechanics of Precedent EoU 2014
 
Loss of Control
Loss of ControlLoss of Control
Loss of Control
 
Diminished Responsibility
Diminished ResponsibilityDiminished Responsibility
Diminished Responsibility
 
Detention
DetentionDetention
Detention
 
Aims and Factors of Sentencing
Aims and Factors of SentencingAims and Factors of Sentencing
Aims and Factors of Sentencing
 
Bail and PreTrial
Bail and PreTrialBail and PreTrial
Bail and PreTrial
 

Self defence

  • 1. Non-Fatal Offences (3)Self Defence G153 Criminal Law 2009-10
  • 2. What’s the problem?Look at the following situations. In which could you argue self-defence in the law? Someone walks up and hits your friend in the face so you hit them back Someone walks up to you and hits you in the face so you hit them back You see someone about to break a shop window so you hit them to stop them Someone walks up and you think they are about to hit you so you hit them first Someone is irritating you so you hit them to shut them up Someone walks up to you and you think they’re going to hit your friend, so you hit them first. You see someone put an item in their pocket and start to walk out of a shop without paying, so you hit them to stop them getting away. Someone threatens to attack your friend if you do not beat another person up. Someone is taunting you so you lose your temper and hit them.
  • 3. What do you think? What happened in the Hussain case? What were they convicted of? What was the sentence? Which type of actions may be excluded from self defence? Which word governs the actions of D if they are to successfully argue self-defence? What role did their actions in self-defence have on their sentence? Do you agree?
  • 4. What is ‘self defence’? Self Defence This was the common law defence, which is now consolidated in statute. D may use reasonable force to defend himself or others or property Criminal Justice andImmigration Act 2008 s.76 Prevention of a crime A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large. s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 Defence of property We’ll come back to this in the next unit! s.5(2) Criminal Damage Act 1971 Private Defence Our Focus Public defence
  • 5. So which is this? D thought that there was a contract out on his life. Armed with a double-barrelled shotgun he went round to the house of the father of the man he thought issued the contract. When asked what he intended to do, D replied, “I want to see Kelly. I’m going to kill him. I’m going to blow his brains out.” R v Cousins 1982
  • 6. Reasonable Force? Reasonable in all the circumstances as they appear to D! R v Palmer 1971 R v Whyte 1987 R v Owino 1996? OR R v Scarlett 1993
  • 7. CharacteristicsWhich can we take into account in assessing whether the force was reasonable or not? Physical? Mental?
  • 8. How much force can you use? “excessive self-defence is no defence at all” X threatens you with a knife and you pick up a stone and knock it out of their hand. Someone runs at you waving a giant pencil and you shoot and kill them X runs at you waving an axe and you shoot them in the leg. X threatens you with a penknife and you split their head open with an axe. X points a gun at you and you stab them in the arm. X backs you against a wall and you hit them over the head with a glass. X threatens you with a knife and you hit them with a spoon. X punches you in the face, and you punch them in the arm
  • 9. Should excessive self-defence reduce murder to manslaughter? Pte. Lee Clegg “There is no halfway house. There is no rule that a D who has used a greater degree of force than was necessary in the circumstances should be found guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. The defence either succeeds or it fails. If it succeeds, D is acquitted. If it fails, he is guilty of murder.” Lloyd LJ No... Yes...
  • 10. Ooops! But I thought you were...Mistake? R v (Gladstone) Williams R v O’Grady R v O’Connor
  • 11. Other Rules? Can I pre-empt? Do you have to retreat? Imminence? Revenge?
  • 13. How much do you understand?
  • 15. Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76 76 Reasonable force for purposes of self-defence etc. (1) This section applies where in proceedings for an offence— (a) an issue arises as to whether a person charged with the offence (“D”) is entitled to rely on a defence within subsection (2), and (b) the question arises whether the degree of force used by D against a person (“V”) was reasonable in the circumstances. (2) The defences are— (a) the common law defence of self-defence; and (b) the defences provided by section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (c. 58) or section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 (c. 18 (N.I.)) (use of force in prevention of crime or making arrest). (3) The question whether the degree of force used by D was reasonable in the circumstances is to be decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be, and subsections (4) to (8) also apply in connection with deciding that question. (4) If D claims to have held a particular belief as regards the existence of any circumstances— (a) the reasonableness or otherwise of that belief is relevant to the question whether D genuinely held it; but (b) if it is determined that D did genuinely hold it, D is entitled to rely on it for the purposes of subsection (3), whether or not— (i) it was mistaken, or (ii) (if it was mistaken) the mistake was a reasonable one to have made. (5) But subsection (4)(b) does not enable D to rely on any mistaken belief attributable to intoxication that was voluntarily induced. (6) The degree of force used by D is not to be regarded as having been reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be if it was disproportionate in those circumstances. (7) In deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3) the following considerations are to be taken into account (so far as relevant in the circumstances of the case)— (a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action; and (b) that evidence of a person’s having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose. (8) Subsection (7) is not to be read as preventing other matters from being taken into account where they are relevant to deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3). (9) This section is intended to clarify the operation of the existing defences mentioned in subsection (2). (10) In this section— (a) “legitimate purpose” means— (i) the purpose of self-defence under the common law, or (ii) the prevention of crime or effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of persons mentioned in the provisions referred to in subsection (2)(b); (b) references to self-defence include acting in defence of another person; and (c) references to the degree of force used are to the type and amount of force used.