does the defendant need to wait before using force?

• the law appears to be clear when a defendant can act to prevent force.
• It would be ridiculous if people had to wait til they'd been attacked before being allowed to defend themselves.
• According to the Attorney general's second reference of 1983, it was held that someone who fears an attack may make preparations to defend themselves--- even if the preparations involve breahces of the law.
• Limits must be set on what force can be used in the defence of self defence otherwise people will begin to take the law into their own hands
• If the limtis are exceeded, the nthe defence of self defence cannot be ised and the person who uses force will be at fault. However, the level of fault ca neb taken into account by the judge when they pass a sentence
• The fact that the level of fault of the defendant is taken into consideration when sentencing by the judge can be particularly unfair for a person who kills another while claiming to act in self defence. If they ar convicted, they are to be given a life sentence however the level fo their fault can be reflected in the tariff period.
• Although the level of the defendant's fault can be reflected when sentenced, critics still say that the defence is an all or nothing defence:

  • The defendant cant succeed with the defense, and is found not guilty
  • the defendant fails and is found guilty
• It can be argued that there should be a partial defence where the use of force in self defence was justified however the defendant used excessive force in the circumstances