Chapter 15 Multiple choice questions

. Which of the following is generally viewed as FALSE?

Self-defence is a justificatory defence.

Self-defence is an excusatory defence.

Self-defence operates to negate the actus reus of the offence.

Self-defence is successful only where the force used by D was reasonable.

. Which two sources of law govern the defences of self-defence?

The common law

The Criminal Law Act 1967 s. 3

Both (a) and (b)

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s. 76

. Which of the following is FALSE?

The defences (both at common law and under the Criminal Law Act 1967) operate the same rules.

In most self-defence situations, D will be able to rely on either defence.

Where D makes a mistake about the need to use force, his only defence is the common law defence.

Where D makes a mistake about the need to use force, his only defence is under the Criminal Law Act 1967 s. 3.

. In determining whether the force used was reasonable, which of the following is FALSE?

D is assessed entirely by whether the reasonable man would have done what the defendant did.

It is to be decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be.

The reasonableness of D's belief is relevant to the question of whether D genuinely held that belief.

If it is determined that D did genuinely hold a particular belief, D is entitled to rely on it, even if it was mistaken.

. In determining whether the force used was proportionate, which of the following is FALSE?

The degree of force used by D is not to be regarded as having been reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be if it was disproportionate in those circumstances.

That a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action.

That evidence of a person's having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.

The only assessment of proportionality is by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be.

. Which of the following is TRUE?

If D uses force which is disproportionate, self-defence succeeds provided the force is nevertheless reasonable.

If D uses disproportionate force, liability is reduced to a lesser crime.

If successful, self-defence negates the actus reus of the offence and D is acquitted.

The Law Commission has recommended the abolition of self-defence.

. Which of the following is a factual example of where D may plead duress by threats?

Two men approach D's car and D drives off dangerously (which is a criminal offence), aware that his passenger has been the subject of previous threats on his life.

D hijacks a plane (which is a criminal offence) in order to escape deportation to a country where he will face execution.

D persuades another to give him their gun to stop the other using it to commit a crime. D is therefore ends up in possession of a firearm, which is a criminal offence.

D imports a quantity of cocaine (a crime) because she was threatened with death, and the death of her boyfriend, if she did not do so.

. Which of the following is FALSE?

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D did not actually feel compelled to commit the crime.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D was not threatened with death or serious injury or the situation would not cause death or serious injury.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D was not threatened with death or serious injury either to himself, a member of his immediate family, or to person for whose safety D would reasonably regard himself as responsible.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove the person of reasonable firmness would have done the same as D.

. When discussing whether necessity exists separately to the defence of duress of circumstances, which of the following should be viewed as IRRELEVANT to the debate?

The House of Lords held in Howe (1987) that duress is not available as a defence to a charge of murder, but in Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) (2001) Brooke LJ held that were the doctors to be charged with murder, necessity would afford them a defence.

The courts have tended to use the terms necessity and duress synonymously which does lead us to think they are one and the same defence, but this has not been clarified by an appeal court.

The decision in Dudley and Stephens (1843) is ambiguous about whether the defence of necessity failed, or did not exist at all.

If a person voluntarily becomes or remains associated with others engaged in criminal activity in a situation where he knows or ought reasonably to know that he may be the subject of compulsion to commit crime by them or their associates, he cannot rely on the defence of duress.

. Which of the following is NOT an element of the defence of necessity as stated by Brooke LJ in Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) (2001)?

The act was required to avoid inevitable and irreparable evil.

No more would be done than was reasonably necessary for the purpose to be achieved.

The evil to be inflicted was not disproportionate to the evil avoided.

The evil to be avoided would have followed immediately if the act taken to avoid it were not taken.

Chapter 15 Multiple choice questions

Quiz Content