self-defence +eval

• self defence cases in order

  hussain

  beckford

  cousins

  ag's ref number 2

  bird

  martin

  clegg

  gladstone williams

  o'grady
• self defence is covered by the criminal justice and immigration act 2008 - it is a full defence
• the d must satisfy 2 elements

  1. was the force necessary
  2. was the force reasonable
• the pros must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the d wasnt acting in self defence or the force was excessive
• hussain - force wont be necessary if the attack is over
• beckford - pre emptive strikes are included
• cousins - d can use threats of force or death to stop an attack
• ag's ref 2 - the d can make preparations in self defence
• bird - d is under no duty to retreat
• whether the force is reasonable is covered by section 76 CJIA 2008
• martin - the d is not expected to weigh up the exact amount of force used but to do what they thoughts was reasonable in the circumstances
• clegg - if the force is excessive then the defence fails
• gladstone williams - the d is judged on the facts as they believed them to be
• o'grady - a D can not rely on any mistaken belief if the mistake is due to the d being voluntarily intoxicated
• pros - good that the d is not expected to weigh up the amount of force used
• pros - fair that householders have more protection over their homes
• pros - fair that pre-emptive strikes are allowed - would be harsh if the d had to wait to be harmed
• pros - protects people from harm or allows them to assist in arrest
• cons - all or nothing defence - can leave people defenceless if unsuccessful
• cons - should it take into account the characteristics of the d and why they acted that way
• cons - what does reasonable force mean - lead to subjective and inconsistent outcomes - AG's ref no 2 - able to make petrol bombs and thats okay ?
• cons - the juries decisions can lead to inconsistencies - unfair on the defendants