Case law Defences

Question 1

R V Forrest and Forrest (Age)

Answer 1

The best evidence possible in the circumstances must be adduced by the prosecutions in proof of the victims age

Question 2

R V Cottle (Burden of Proof)

Answer 2

As to degree of proof, is is sufficient if the plea is establish to the satisfaction of the jury on preponderance of probabilities without necessarily excluding all reasonable doubt.

Question 3

R V Clark (Insanity)

Answer 3

The decision as to an accused’s insanity is always for the jury and a verdict inconsistent with medical evidence is not necessarily unreasonable. But where unchallenged medical evidence is supported by the surrounding facts a jury’s verdict must be founded on tat evidence which in this case shows that the accused did not and had been unable to know that his act was morally wrong.

Question 4

R V Codere (Insanity nature and quality)

Answer 4

The nature and quality of the act means the physical character of the act. The phrase does not involve any consideration of the accused’s moral perception nor his knowledge of the moral quality of the act. Thus a person who is so deluded that he cuts a woman’s throat believing that he is cutting a loaf of bread would not know the nature and quality of the act.

Question 5

R V Joyce (Court of Appeal)

Answer 5

The Court of Appeal decided that the compulsion must be made by a person who is present when the offence is committed.

Question 6

Police V Lavelle (Entrapment)

Answer 6

It is permissible for undercover officers to merely provide the opportunity for someone who is ready and willing to offend, as long as the officers did not initiate the persons’s interest or willingness to so offend.

Question 7

R V Cottle (Automatism)

Answer 7

Doing something without knowledge of it and without memory afterwards of having done it - a temporary eclipse of consciousness that nevertheless leaves the person so affected able to exercise bodily movements.

Question 8

R V Tarei

Answer 8

The Court held that the withdraw of any form of life support system is not “treatment” under s166 CA 61. To withdraw life support does not cause death but removes the possibility of extending the person life through artificial means.