The two defendants escaped from Parkhurst Prison. On capture they said that as murderers, they had received notices that though they had behaved without criticism in prison, their tarriffs had been increased. They said they felt unable to face longer sentences, and would have committed suicide if they had stayed.
Held: No such defence existed. Every cases where the defence of duress or necessity had been allowed had a feature: ‘extraneous to the offender himself. In contrast, in these appeals it was solely the suicidal tendencies, the thought processes and the emotions of the offenders themselves which operated as duress. That factor introduces an entirely subjective element not present in the authorities . . if these appeals were to succeed it would involve an extension of the law upon this topic as hitherto reflected in authority and would introduce an entirely subjective element divorced from any extraneous influence. We do not consider that such a development of the law would be justified, nor do we think that such an extension would be in the public interest. If allowed it would amount to a licence to commit crime dependent on the personal characteristics and vulnerability of the offender. As a matter of policy that is undesirable and in our view it is not the law and should not be the law.’
Judges:
Kennedy LJ, Nelseon J, Sir Patrick Russell
Citations:
Times 30-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Crim 1760, [1998] 1 Cr App Rep 143
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Pommell CACD 16-May-1995
The defendant appealed against his conviction for possessing a loaded shotgun. He had wished to advance a defence to the effect that on the previous evening he had taken it ‘off a geezer who was going to do some damage with it’ in order to stop him. . .
Cited – Regina v Conway 1989
The defendant said that he had driven recklessly because he was in fear for his life and that of his passenger.
Held: The court was bound by Willer to rule that a defence of duress was available. It was convenient to refer to this type of . .
Cited – Regina v Willer (Mark Edward) CACD 1986
The defendant appealed against his conviction for reckless driving (absolute discharge and ten penalty points). He drove his car slowly on the pavement in front of a shopping precinct. He said that this had seemed to him to be the only way in which . .
Cited by:
Cited – Quayle and others v Regina, Attorney General’s Reference (No. 2 of 2004) CACD 27-May-2005
Each defendant appealed against convictions associated variously with the cultivation or possession of cannabis resin. They sought to plead medical necessity. There had been medical recommendations to move cannabis to the list of drugs which might . .
Cited – Regina v Brown CACD 2003
The court head a renewed application in person for leave to appeal a conviction for producing cannabis. The defendant sought to rely on a defence of necessity, saying that cannabis was the only way available to him to control the pain of his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.151215