Steven is on trial for the murder of a man named Joseph. At first glance, the case constitutes a crime and punishment under the law. It appears that Steven committed an unlawful act voluntarily and had the full intention of doing so. Based on this evidence alone, Steven has fulfilled the definition of committing a crime. The criminal court system intends to provide justice to those involved in the court process. Let’s take a closer look at the events that unfolded on the night that Joseph was killed. Steven was alone inside his one-bedroom apartment in the city. It was late at night, and he was almost asleep when he heard someone break the padlock on the door and enter his apartment. The man moved directly up to Stephen’s bedroom and forced the locked door open. Joseph had broken into Steven’s home with the intent to injure and possibly kill Steven. Once he had gained entry into the room, the intruder, Joseph, first tried to strangle the unsuspecting homeowner, but when it was clear that Steven might overpower him, Joseph removed a revolver from his back pocket and shot at Steven twice. To protect himself from serious bodily harm, Steven dislodged himself from his potential killer, moved to his kitchen, and stabbed Joseph with a kitchen knife. As Steven moves through the court process, his lawyer is likely to use the fact that the act was self-defense to prove that Steven is not legally guilty for his actions and should not be found guilty of murder under the law. Steven is on trial for the murder of a man named Joseph. At first glance, the case constitutes a crime and punishment under the law. It appears that Steven committed an unlawful act voluntarily and had the full intention of doing so. Based on this evidence alone, Steven has fulfilled the definition of committing a crime. The criminal court system intends to provide justice to those involved in the court process. Let’s take a closer look at the events that unfolded on the night that Joseph was killed. Steven was alone inside his one-bedroom apartment in the city. It was late at night, and he was almost asleep when he heard someone break the padlock on the door and enter his apartment. The man moved directly up to Stephen’s bedroom and forced the locked door open. Joseph had broken into Steven’s home with the intent to injure and possibly kill Steven. Once he had gained entry into the room, the intruder, Joseph, first tried to strangle the unsuspecting homeowner, but when it was clear that Steven might overpower him, Joseph removed a revolver from his back pocket and shot at Steven twice. To protect himself from serious bodily harm, Steven dislodged himself from his potential killer, moved to his kitchen, and stabbed Joseph with a kitchen knife. As Steven moves through the court process, his lawyer is likely to use the fact that the act was self-defense to prove that Steven is not legally guilty for his actions and should not be found guilty of murder under the law. For an act to be .

1. Steven is on trial for the murder of a man named Joseph. At
first glance, the case constitutes a crime and punishment under
the law. It appears that Steven committed an unlawful act
voluntarily and had the full intention of doing so. Based on this
evidence alone, Steven has fulfilled the definition of
committing a crime.
The criminal court system intends to provide justice to those
involved in the court process. Let’s take a closer look at the
events that unfolded on the night that Joseph was killed. Steven
was alone inside his one-bedroom apartment in the city. It was
late at night, and he was almost asleep when he heard someone
break the padlock on the door and enter his apartment. The man
moved directly up to Stephen’s bedroom and forced the locked
door open. Joseph had broken into Steven’s home with the
intent to injure and possibly kill Steven. Once he had gained
entry into the room, the intruder, Joseph, first tried to strangle
the unsuspecting homeowner, but when it was clear that Steven
might overpower him, Joseph removed a revolver from his back
pocket and shot at Steven twice. To protect himself from serious
bodily harm, Steven dislodged himself from his potential killer,
moved to his kitchen, and stabbed Joseph with a kitchen knife.
As Steven moves through the court process, his lawyer is likely
to use the fact that the act was self-defense to prove that Steven
is not legally guilty for his actions and should not be found
guilty of murder under the law.
Steven is on trial for the murder of a man named Joseph. At
first glance, the case constitutes a crime and punishment under
the law. It appears that Steven committed an unlawful act
voluntarily and had the full intention of doing so. Based on this
evidence alone, Steven has fulfilled the definition of
committing a crime.
The criminal court system intends to provide justice to those
involved in the court process. Let’s take a closer look at the
events that unfolded on the night that Joseph was killed. Steven

2. was alone inside his one-bedroom apartment in the city. It was
late at night, and he was almost asleep when he heard someone
break the padlock on the door and enter his apartment. The man
moved directly up to Stephen’s bedroom and forced the locked
door open. Joseph had broken into Steven’s home with the
intent to injure and possibly kill Steven. Once he had gained
entry into the room, the intruder, Joseph, first tried to strangle
the unsuspecting homeowner, but when it was clear that Steven
might overpower him, Joseph removed a revolver from his back
pocket and shot at Steven twice. To protect himself from serious
bodily harm, Steven dislodged himself from his potential killer,
moved to his kitchen, and stabbed Joseph with a kitchen knife.
As Steven moves through the court process, his lawyer is likely
to use the fact that the act was self-defense to prove that Steven
is not legally guilty for his actions and should not be found
guilty of murder under the law.
For an act to be considered a crime, the perpetrator of the act
must have a guilty state of mind. To prove that an individual
lacked a guilty state of mind when the act was committed,
defense attorneys might use one of a number of legal defenses.
George is a man accused of murdering his wife, similar to the
case of Scott Peterson, who was convicted of killing his wife
and their unborn child. However, in George’s case his wife, who
suffered from depression, threatened George with a knife—
George’s attorney might make an argument of self-defense.
What if George’s wife just happened to be holding a knife while
an argument broke out? In that case, what if George had a
history of mental illness? His attorney might then cite an
insanity defense. Prosecuting crimes is not always as simple as
it seems.

3. Legal Defenses
For an action to be considered a crime, the actor must have
mens rea, a guilty state of mind, There are ten legal defenses
used to argue that an individual lacked mens rea. If a court
recognizes a legal justification, an individual may not be held
legally responsible for his or her actions.
Infancy and Insanity
The infancy and insanity defenses are based on the idea that the
accused was not capable of determining right from wrong. Learn
more about each defense here.
Select each item to learn more.
Infancy
When a juvenile is too young (typically younger than seven
years) to be able to form the mens rea necessary to commit a
criminal act, the defense may be infancy. For example, if a five-
year-old child suffocates her little brother out of anger, infancy
could be used as a defense.
Courts decide on a case-by-case basis whether a child knows
right from wrong. As we know, laws are modified to
accommodate social change. Based on current trends of young
children committing crimes such as bringing weapons to and
using weapons in school, courts today are less inclined to use
the infancy defense than in the past. An increasing number of
young children are being tried in court, and some
are certified to be tried in adult courts.
Insanity
When an individual is proven to have a mental illness that

4. impairs the ability to form mens rea, the insanity defense can be
used. To use the insanity defense, it must be proven that the
individual suffered from such impairment when the crime was
committed.
Other considerations include the American Law Institute test,
which says that an individual must be able to comprehend
criminality and conform to legal standards, and the Irresistible
Impulse test, which states that an individual who is “irresistibly
compelled” to commit a crime may not be liable even if he or
she knows right from wrong. These considerations are all based
on a reduced capacity to reason. For example, a Virginia jury
found Lorena Bobbit temporarily insane when she cut off her
husband’s penis. She was released after three months of
psychiatric evaluation.
A few states have abolished the insanity plea as a legal defense.
There is significant discussion about whether criminals are
avoiding punishment by claiming they are not guilty by reason
of insanity. Increasingly, courts are convicting defendants who
are found insane and sentencing them to psychiatric facilities.
Involuntary Intoxication and Self-Defense
The involuntary intoxication and self-defense defenses are
based on the idea that the accused was manipulated into
committing a crime. Involuntary intoxication involves chemical
manipulation, and self-defense maintains that the threat of
physical violence gave the accused no choice but to commit a
crime. Learn more about each defense here.
Select each item to learn more.
Involuntary Intoxication
When intoxication makes it impossible for an individual to
form mens rea, and that individual’s intoxication was
involuntary, the defense may be involuntary intoxication. For
example, if a drug was slipped into your drink at a party and
you were unaware that it happened, you could claim that your
intoxication was involuntary. In this case, you would not be
liable for any crimes you committed while under the influence.
Note that voluntary intoxication is not a defense for committing

5. a crime. Becoming intoxicated voluntarily is a conscious
choice.
Recently, the involuntary intoxication defense has been used for
acts of violence committed while the offender was using a
prescription medication, such as Zoloft. Because in these cases
a physician prescribed the use of an FDA–approved drug,
involuntary intoxication applies. There is controversy, however,
about whether the use of certain prescription drugs causes
uncontrollable violent behavior.
Self-Defense
When an individual uses force to protect himself or herself from
death or serious bodily harm, he or she is entitled to plead self-
defense. Essential to this defense is the concept of proportionate
force, meaning that an individual can use force for self-
protection but cannot use force that is greater than necessary to
avoid the threat. Deadly force cannot be used against less
serious threats, such as threats against property.
For example, if a man defends himself from a home intruder by
hitting the intruder over the head with a baseball bat, self-
defense would likely apply. However, if the homeowner beats
the intruder to death, this defense may not apply.
Prevention of a Felony and Coercion/Duress
The prevention of a felony and coercion/duress defenses are
based on the idea that a crime was committed to protect others
or to prevent harm.
Select each item to learn more.
Prevention of a Felony
This is an acceptable defense when an individual protects others
from harm or prevents a violent felony. Also known as
the defense of others, using force is permissible if the defendant
believes that force is necessary to protect others. If the
perpetrator is injured as a result of the protective action, the
individual who defended the victim is protected. This defense is
only valid if the individual who takes the defensive action is
certain that others are in danger.
Coercion/Duress

6. An individual can claim coercion or duress if he or she acts in
response to a rational fear of immediate death or serious bodily
injury. An example of duress is if a kidnapper demands ransom
from a child’s parents and says the child will be killed if the
parents do not pay money that they have embezzled. In this
circumstance, the parents would not be prosecuted for
embezzlement if they felt their child’s life was in danger. The
coercion/duress defense cannot be used to justify murder,
however, because under the law one life is not considered more
valuable than another.
Necessity
The necessity defense is based on the idea that a crime was
committed to prevent a greater tragedy or crime. For example,
John and his pregnant wife were on the way to the hospital for
delivery and were in an accident with another car. The wife was
going to have the baby soon, so John left the scene of the
accident to get his wife to the hospital. The necessity defense
might be used to prevent John from being convicted of leaving
the scene of an accident. John committed a crime to prevent
possible danger to the health of his wife and new baby. Four
elements must be present for this defense to be effective:
The crime must be committed to prevent a significant and
imminent evil (in this case, potential problems with delivery).
The defendant must not have a reasonable legal alternative
available (in this case, there was no time to wait).
The criminal act must not be disproportionate to the evil it
sought to prevent (in this case, the health of John’s wife and
baby were more important than leaving the scene of an
accident).

7. The defendant must have acted with good faith, believing the
act was necessary to prevent the evil (in this case, John did not
think there was sufficient time to stay at the scene or wait for
an ambulance for his wife).
Entrapment
Entrapment occurs when a government agent takes action that
creates an opportunity for a crime to occur. For example, if a
police officer plants drugs on an individual who would not have
otherwise come into possession of these drugs, that individual
can claim entrapment.
Entrapment can be difficult to prove because law enforcement
agents rarely intentionally put law-abiding individuals in
criminal situations. Sting operations intended to catch those
already involved in crime do not fall under the definition of
entrapment.
Syndromes and Mistake of Fact
The syndromes and mistake of fact defenses are based on the
idea that a mental state—whether a psychological problem or a
misunderstanding—was responsible for the crime. Learn more
about each defense here.
Syndromes
The syndromes defense is when specifically identified
psychological syndromes are used to justify a crime. Syndromes
that have recently been used as a defense include battered
woman’s syndrome, battered child syndrome, post-partum
depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. When the
defendant has been significantly affected by a psychological
syndrome, his or her ability to form mens rea may be
compromised.
For example, in 2001, Andrea Yates was convicted of drowning
her five young children. She claimed that she was not guilty
because of the effects of post-partum depression. Although this
defense did not hold up in court and she was convicted of
murder and sentenced to two life sentences in prison, it
increased awareness of post-partum depression.

8. Mistake of Fact
When an individual commits an act that could be a crime but is
based on an honest misunderstanding of the situation, the
mistake of fact defense may be used. For example, if a traveler
at an airport inadvertently picks up the wrong bag at baggage
claim because the bag is similar to his or her own, it is unlikely
the traveler would be accused of theft. However, the traveler
would be expected to report the incident and take reasonable
action to correct it.
Ignorance of a law is not considered mistake of fact except in
certain complex situations, such as interpreting the tax code.
Review
A de-fense of in-fancy may be used in a case when a child
un-in-ten-tion-ally holds his sib-ling under water while
play­ing, lead­ing to the sib­ling’s drown­ing and death. The
child may not know right from wrong or re-al-ize the ef-fect of
his ac-tions. How-ever, a case where the ac-cused is able to use
one of the legal de-fenses does not al-ways mean the ac-cused
lacks a guilty state of mind. For in-stance, in-tox-i-cated
per-sons can still form mens rea, and some mat-ters of self-
de-fense do not re-quire a level of force that would end in
mur-der. Legal de-fenses are only meant to argue that an
in-di-vid-ual lacks a guilty state of mind, which must be proven
in the court sys-tem.
After his arrest for the robbery of a local jewelry store, Alex is
now part of a lengthy process under the law that gives him the
opportunity to prove or disprove his innocence in the crime. If
Alex is able to prove his innocence during his initial
appearance—a preliminary hearing—before the judge, then the
case will be dismissed. Otherwise the case will move forward in
a number of possible steps, including a set trial date. Knowing
these steps will help you better navigate through the initial
stages of the American court system.

9. Court Hearing
An arrest has been made. Now what happens?
Preliminary Hearing
Step 1: After an individual is arrested, a preliminary hearing
(also called a probable cause hearing) is held before a judge.
This hearing determines if there is enough evidence to hold a
trial. In some states, a grand jury is used to decide if a criminal
indictment will be issued. The term grand jury refers to the
number of people who serve on the jury. In a grand jury, there
are 16 to 23 members, as opposed to a trial jury, which has six
to twelve members.
Step 2: If there is enough evidence, a trial date is set. The case
is dismissed if the judge finds inadequate evidence.
Arraignment
Step 3: The charges against the accused are read in court.
Step 4: The accused enters a plea of guilty, not guilty, or nolo
contendere (no contest). If the defendant chooses to not enter a
plea, that defendant neither admits guilt nor disputes a charge,
and the court enters a plea of not guilty. No contest pleas cannot
be used against a defendant in civil court.
Step 5: The judge questions the defendant to ensure that he or
she understands the charges and reads the defendant his or her
rights.
Step 6: The judge sets bail.
Let’s follow Alex’s case as it moves through the criminal courts
system. Knowing what to expect during this preliminary trial
and arraignment period will help Alex’s attorney’s better
prepare for the stages of the court system. After his arrest, Alex
will first have to attend a preliminary hearing for his case. At
the hearing, a judge will read the charges against Alex and set a
trial date. Alex will have the opportunity to enter a plea, and the
judge will make sure that Alex fully understands the charges
against him. The judge will read Alex his rights and set bail.

10. Imagine being the judge in Robert’s case. Robert is accused of
kidnapping his son. In the court proceedings, the evidence is
laid before you from both sides. Robert’s attorney presents a
man who is an upstanding citizen with no previous criminal
history—a man who believed his son was in danger while his
son lived with his mother, Robert’s ex-wife. Based on the
structure of the criminal courts system in the United States, the
judge and jury will hear Robert’s side as the defendant and also
the opposing side of the prosecution.
Defining Adversarial Systems
The legal system in the United States is an adversarial system.
An adversarial system is a legal system in which two advocates
(lawyers) each represent their party (defendant or plaintiff)
before an objective group of people (a jury and/or judge). Under
this system, justice is served when the most effective adversary
convinces the judge and/or jury that his or her perspective on
the case is correct.
Consider the adversarial system as a form of battle like an NFL
football game. In the football game, one of the teams will win,
but this cannot be predicted beforehand. This is the same as the
court system
Basis of the Adversarial System
The adversarial system is based on the following premises:
Justice is served best when opposing points are presented and
argued in court.
The exchange between the defense and prosecution is a checks-
and-balances system that enables examination of both sides of
the case.
An accused individual is innocent until proven guilty.
The adversarial system reflects the ethos and beliefs of the free
market system, and the competition between the two sides
encourages the truth and best solution to emerge.

11. The basic features of an adversarial system enforce the checks-
and-balances premise on which it is partially based. The
concept of cross-examination is based entirely on the
adversarial structure of common law in the U.S. courts system.
In a criminal adversarial proceeding, it is not necessary for the
prosecutor or judge to question the accused. If the accused
chooses to give up the right to remain silent, however, he or she
is required to testify. He or she is then questioned by his or her
own representative and may also be cross-examined by the
opposing party. The accused risks committing perjury during
this line of questioning.
The rules of evidence are also a result of the adversarial system.
Evidence is a tool judges use to gain limited inquisitorial
powers because the rules allow judges to exclude evidence
based on their beliefs regarding its trustworthiness and
relevance to the legal issue at hand.
In a(n) adversarial system the judge serves as a neutral party
who oversees the legal proceedings . This is the opposite of
what happens in a(n)inquisitorial system .
During Robert’s trial, the prosecution paints a picture of a
woman, Robert’s ex-wife, who is dedicated to family with no
history of violence in the past. None of Robert’s son’s school
teachers, neighbors, or other family members expresses
concerns or complaints about the way Robert’s ex-wife treats
their son. The prosecuting attorney also points out that Robert
could have gone through the proper legal channels to ensure his
son’s safety. The jury will have to consider the facts from each
side before making a decision. The strength of the adversarial
system is that it allows both parties in a case to present each
side of the story, giving a complete picture of the alleged
offense.
Francine is accused of assault with a deadly weapon. Based on
the criminal court system in the United States, Francine’s rights
are protected under due process. After her arrest, the police

12. needed to have probable cause to detain her. During Francine’s
trial, the government was tasked with ensuring fairness by
upholding her constitutional rights. Due process ensures that it
is highly unlikely Francine will be executed for her crime, as
the severity of the punishment should match the severity of the
crime. The notion of due process helps protect individuals
accused of a crime until they are proven guilty.
Concepts of Due Process
“No person… shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property
without due process of law.” (The Fifth Amendment, United
States Bill of Rights)
Due process is a concept rather than a strict definition,
encompassing ideas of fairness, accountability of the
government, protection of individual rights, and public scrutiny
of the legal system to ensure justice. The concept applies to
civil rights in three general areas: life, liberty, and property.
Life
Due process, as applied to the right to life, means the
government cannot execute an individual accused of a capital
crime without having first exhausted all courts’ appeals
processes and a petition for a stay of execution. The goal of due
process in this situation is to ensure that all possible evidence
has been reviewed to minimize the chance that an innocent
person will be put to death.
Liberty
Due process, as applied to the right to liberty, affects all
American citizens. For example, a citizen cannot be detained
without probable cause, and law enforcement officials must
have a legal reason (or a reasonable suspicion, in certain cases)
for searching and arresting an individual. Due process in the
legal system entitles defendants to legal counsel and a trial by
jury. In addition, prison inmates have the right to hearings and
other protections before they can incur disciplinary actions.

13. Property
A citizen is entitled to due process if the government wants to
acquire an individual's personal property. For instance, the
government can exercise its right to eminent domain (a
controversial issue) and acquire personal property—for
example, to build a new public school—only if specific legal
guidelines and procedures are followed, which would ensure the
citizen has time to make the necessary preparations to vacate
the property.
Specific Provisions of Due Process
Specific provisions in the United States Constitution are
intended to protect the due process rights of the accused.
Reasonable Doubt
Reasonable doubt is when, after consideration of all evidence
and comparison of facts, the jury cannot say with certainty that
a conviction is warranted. Reasonable doubt exists when facts
and thoughtful deliberation cannot remove the possibility of
doubt in a given case.
Fourth Amendment
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals against
unreasonable searches and seizures.
Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment protects defendants against self-
incrimination. Under the well-known Miranda warning, for
example, all defendants have the right to remain silent.
Sixth Amendment
The Sixth Amendment provides defendants the right to a speedy
and public trial and the right to counsel.
Fourteenth Amendment
The Fourteenth Amendment extended the provisions of the
Bill of Rights to the state level. Citizens are protected from
infringements on their rights by state governments in addition to

14. the federal government.
If, during the criminal proceedings, the government were to
seize Francine’s house or other personal property, that action
would violate the concept of due process. Police also must have
probable cause before detaining Francine after her arrest.
Although Francine has been charged with a very serious crime,
she is still entitled to have her rights protected under the law.
Members of the criminal courts system must follow specific
guidelines and Constitutional amendments to ensure that
Francine’s individual rights, and all rights of people who are
accused of a crime, are protected
In cases where the defendant claims self-defense, such as
Steven’s, defense attorneys will offer the legal defense of self-
defense for his criminal action to protect a potentially innocent
individual. These types of cases illustrate that while the
defendant’s action was voluntary, this definition can change
depending on circumstantial issues. The adversarial system of
U.S. courts also allows both parties in a case to present each
side of the story to provide the fullest account of what
happened.
The outcome of this case will be determined based on current
beliefs in society and guided by the traditional structure of the
law, which directs the penalties of the case. To ensure due
process, Steven’s life, liberty, and property will be protected
during the proceedings.
OBJECTIVES
Topic 1: Introduction to Legal Defenses
Define terms related to crime
Describe legal defenses
Topic 2: After an Arrest

15. Define terms related to crime
Describe what happens after arrest
Topic 3: The Adversarial System
Discuss the adversarial system
Define terms related to adversarial system
Topic 4: Due Process
Summarize due process