1. Criminal Law INTRO TO DEFENCES – DAY 2

2. Let’s Review yesterday…  A Defence is …  How is the defence of mental disorder different from the defence of automatism?  What does the accused need to prove when using intoxication as a defence?

3. Today…  We will review defences for an accused and their justifications

4. Defences for an Accused – Justifications 1. Self-Defence  You can defend yourself from an unprovoked attack  The force has to be reasonable – can only be enough to fend off the attack **Limitation: has to be no intent to cause harm/death and there does not have to be physical use of force  Note – only in your own home can you use as much force as necessary to prevent entry

5. Defences for an Accused – Justifications 2. Necessity  Accused had no other choice but to commit the criminal act **Accused must show:  Act was done to avoid greater harm  No opportunity for alternative action  Harm inflicted must be less than harm avoided

6. Necessity Case  An Ontario woman accused of abducting her children, who are eight-year-old triplets, was found not guilty Friday "by reason of necessity."  Ms. Vandelnelsen became an international fugitive when she abducted her seven-year-old triplets and fled to Mexico. She put the triplets in the back of her car to cross the US Border  Ms. Vandenelsen testified that she fled with the children because she feared she was about to have her access to them terminated at a hearing scheduled for Oct. 23 as only her husband has custody at that time  She argued that being deprived of their mother would cause the triplets irreparable harm, and thus, she was trying to protect them by spiriting them away  Canada's Criminal Code states parents who abduct their children to protect them from imminent harm can be found not guilty by reason of necessity.

7. Defences for an Accused – Justifications 3. Duress  Accused is forced to do a criminal act by threat of violence **2 conditions must exist:  “Threatener” has to be physically present when the crime is committed  Accused must believe death or bodily harm would be inflicted immediately from “threatener”. Accused felt he/she had no other choice  **Defence excludes murder

8. Duress Case (R. v. Ruzic)  Ruzic was charged with importing heroin  Ruzic argued that she was acting under duress after a person threatened to kill her mother (who lived in a foreign country)  She was not allowed to use the defense of duress because the threat was not immediate

9. Defences for an Accused – Justifications 4. Provocation  Any act or insult that causes someone to lose control in the ‘heat of the moment’  Applies only to murder charges  If the defence is accepted, the charge will be reduced to manslaughter

10. Provocation - Case R v. Tran  Caught his wife cheating on him  Stabbed lover and slashed wife  Claimed provocation Denied ◦Went to kitchen to get knives ◦Not “an insult” the Criminal Code outlines

11. Defences for an Accused – Justifications Read in your textbook and fill in the rest of the criminal defences chart  Alibi  Mistake of Fact  NCR (Mental Disorder)  Entrapment  Double Jeopardy  Battered Woman Syndrome