Regina v Cole: CACD 21 Feb 1994

Pending clarification, the defence of duress is not to be extended. As to necessity as a defence, the peril relied on in this case to support the plea of necessity lacked imminence and the degree of directness and immediacy required of the link between the suggested peril and the offence charged.

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 21-Feb-1994, [1994] Crim LR 582 (Comment)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86405