Defences Alibi Best defence possible Best defence possible Proof that the accused could not have possibly committed the offence Proof that the accused could not have possibly committed the offence Ex. Accused may be able to prove he or she was in another location at the time of the offence Ex. Accused may be able to prove he or she was in another location at the time of the offence

Legal Duty A person can commit certain actions which would constitute offences if he or she were acting under a legal duty A person can commit certain actions which would constitute offences if he or she were acting under a legal duty Ex. A police officer can drive above the speed limit when chasing a suspected criminal… the officer may use as much force as is necessary to make the arrest Ex. A police officer can drive above the speed limit when chasing a suspected criminal… the officer may use as much force as is necessary to make the arrest However, he or she is criminally responsible for any excessive force However, he or she is criminally responsible for any excessive force

Drunkenness A successful defence of drunkenness may serve to change a conviction from an offence requiring specific intent to one not requiring it A successful defence of drunkenness may serve to change a conviction from an offence requiring specific intent to one not requiring it Ex. Def’n of murder in Code states that it must be committed with “intent” Ex. Def’n of murder in Code states that it must be committed with “intent” If it can be shown that the accused committed the murder while in a drunken state, and so could not form specific intent to commit the murder, the conviction would be manslaughter instead of murder If it can be shown that the accused committed the murder while in a drunken state, and so could not form specific intent to commit the murder, the conviction would be manslaughter instead of murder

Drunkenness (Cont’d) If drunkenness does not make it impossible for the accused to form the necessary intent to commit the offence, then the defence will not succeed If drunkenness does not make it impossible for the accused to form the necessary intent to commit the offence, then the defence will not succeed The defence of drunkenness will usually fail if it can be shown that a person intentionally got drunk to gain courage to commit the action, or to provide a possible defence The defence of drunkenness will usually fail if it can be shown that a person intentionally got drunk to gain courage to commit the action, or to provide a possible defence

Consent Consent is a valid defence for the accused if the injured party consented to the action administered to him or her, such as assault Consent is a valid defence for the accused if the injured party consented to the action administered to him or her, such as assault Ex. Hockey and football players, have been often charged with the assault of opponents during a game Ex. Hockey and football players, have been often charged with the assault of opponents during a game The defence has been that, since the injured parties participated in the game, they consented to be subject to the physical contact implicit in the game The defence has been that, since the injured parties participated in the game, they consented to be subject to the physical contact implicit in the game Defence of consent cannot be used in the case of murder, or for offences committed against a person under 14 years of age Defence of consent cannot be used in the case of murder, or for offences committed against a person under 14 years of age

Mistake of Fact Ignorance of the law is generally not accepted as a defence Ignorance of the law is generally not accepted as a defence Ignorance of the facts can, however, be accepted as a defence under two conditions: Ignorance of the facts can, however, be accepted as a defence under two conditions: (1) If there was a genuine mistake which did not result from the negligence of the accused in not finding out the facts (1) If there was a genuine mistake which did not result from the negligence of the accused in not finding out the facts (2) If there is no provision in the law that ignorance of the law is not a defence (2) If there is no provision in the law that ignorance of the law is not a defence

Mistake of Fact (Cont’d) Ex. If someone receives change while shopping in a store, and one of the bills is counterfeit, mistake of fact would likely be a successful defence if he or she is arrested for passing the money to someone else Ex. If someone receives change while shopping in a store, and one of the bills is counterfeit, mistake of fact would likely be a successful defence if he or she is arrested for passing the money to someone else They can’t be considered negligent for not finding out the money was counterfeit, since people don’t check every bill they receive They can’t be considered negligent for not finding out the money was counterfeit, since people don’t check every bill they receive

Mistake of Fact (Cont’d) Another example… It is an offence to be “knowingly” in possession of stolen goods Another example… It is an offence to be “knowingly” in possession of stolen goods If a person did not know that the goods he bought were stolen (assuming wilful blindness isn’t an issue) then defence of mistake of fact could succeed If a person did not know that the goods he bought were stolen (assuming wilful blindness isn’t an issue) then defence of mistake of fact could succeed

Automatism Automatism has been described as “unconscious, involuntary behaviour, the state of a person who, though capable of action, is not conscious of what he or she is doing” Automatism has been described as “unconscious, involuntary behaviour, the state of a person who, though capable of action, is not conscious of what he or she is doing” Ex. Sleepwalking, convulsions, psychological stress, or behaviour while concussed due to a blow on the head Ex. Sleepwalking, convulsions, psychological stress, or behaviour while concussed due to a blow on the head

Automatism (Cont’d) Burden is on the accused to prove that the offence was committed because of automatism Burden is on the accused to prove that the offence was committed because of automatism If the accused can prove this, he did in reality not voluntarily act, so that actus reus is not prevent If the accused can prove this, he did in reality not voluntarily act, so that actus reus is not prevent A person found not guilty due to automatism is released A person found not guilty due to automatism is released

Entrapment Entrapment is the police action of encouraging or aiding a person to commit an offence Entrapment is the police action of encouraging or aiding a person to commit an offence It is not recognized as a substantive defence It is not recognized as a substantive defence Rather, it is an abuse of process, so a judge who finds entrapment has occurred should stay the process Rather, it is an abuse of process, so a judge who finds entrapment has occurred should stay the process R. v. Mack SCC outlined principles relating to entrapment R. v. Mack SCC outlined principles relating to entrapment

Self-Defence* Code states that a person may use force to defend against an unprovoked assault where there is not intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm to the attacker Code states that a person may use force to defend against an unprovoked assault where there is not intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm to the attacker “Reasonable force”: may only use the amount of force necessary to defend against the attack “Reasonable force”: may only use the amount of force necessary to defend against the attack What constitutes reasonable force depends on the circumstances of each situation What constitutes reasonable force depends on the circumstances of each situation Generally, the accused must believe they are in danger and could see no other alternative to preserving themselves from death or grievous bodily harm Generally, the accused must believe they are in danger and could see no other alternative to preserving themselves from death or grievous bodily harm

Battered Woman Syndrome* The effect of prolonged spousal abuse is used to advance the justification of self- defence The effect of prolonged spousal abuse is used to advance the justification of self- defence A woman unable to escape a violent relationship who truly believes that the continued pattern of violence puts her life in danger A woman unable to escape a violent relationship who truly believes that the continued pattern of violence puts her life in danger

Battered Woman Syndrome (Cont’d)* In deliberating this defence a jury must consider three elements: In deliberating this defence a jury must consider three elements: Why an abused woman might remain in an abusive relationship Why an abused woman might remain in an abusive relationship The nature and extent of the violence that may exist in a battering relationship The nature and extent of the violence that may exist in a battering relationship The defendant’s ability to perceive danger from her abuser The defendant’s ability to perceive danger from her abuser SCC has said that establishing a woman suffers from BWS doesn’t necessarily justify using it as a defence in the case SCC has said that establishing a woman suffers from BWS doesn’t necessarily justify using it as a defence in the case

Necessity* Means that the accused has no reasonable alternative to committing an illegal act Means that the accused has no reasonable alternative to committing an illegal act Following conditions must be met: Following conditions must be met: Act was done to avoid a greater harm Act was done to avoid a greater harm No reasonable opportunity for an alternative course of action that doesn’t break the law No reasonable opportunity for an alternative course of action that doesn’t break the law The harm inflicted must be less than the harm avoided The harm inflicted must be less than the harm avoided

Compulsion or Duress* A person will be excused from having committed the offence if the accused did so under the threat of bodily harm A person will be excused from having committed the offence if the accused did so under the threat of bodily harm Not a defence for violent crimes such as murder, sexual assault, robbery, or assault with a weapon Not a defence for violent crimes such as murder, sexual assault, robbery, or assault with a weapon

Provocation* Is any act or insult that causes a reasonable person to lose self-control Is any act or insult that causes a reasonable person to lose self-control This defence applies only to the crime of murder This defence applies only to the crime of murder May be considered as a partial defence to reduce the conviction from murder to manslaughter May be considered as a partial defence to reduce the conviction from murder to manslaughter

Provocation (Cont’d)* All four of the following elements must be present: All four of the following elements must be present: Wrongful act or insult occurred Wrongful act or insult occurred This act or insult was sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self-control This act or insult was sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self-control The person responded suddenly The person responded suddenly The person responded before there was time for passion to cool The person responded before there was time for passion to cool