Class Notes (839,312)
Canada (511,260)
Criminology (722)
CRM 200 (78)
Lecture

CRM200 Lecture Note Nov.21, 2013.docx

3 Pages
106 Views

Department
Criminology
Course Code
CRM 200
Professor
Alexandra Orlova

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 3 pages of the document.
Description
1 CRM200 Week #10 Week #10: Nov. 21, 2013 1.) ELEMENTS OF NECESSITY DEFENCE ● 3 elements established ● Latimer (2001) case ○ was not proportionate ○ she was always in that condition, he was just tired and depressed ○ there was no imminent peril or danger, there was no proportionality ● Factual situation #1 (Sam) ○ look at the three elements ○ reasonable legal alternatives - was there a church nearby? a mall? was he tired? etc. ○ he already went to two homeless shelter and was turned away ○ strong case for him, but do have to look at the circumstances 2.) DURESS IN SECTION 17 ● same rationale of necessity of defence with morally involuntary ● generally arises in cases of external threat ● accused is generally claiming that his or her willpower was overpowered by someone else - the danger comes from another person ● s.17 a person who commits an offence under compulsion by threats of immediate death or bodily harm from a person who is present when the offence is committed is excused for committing the offence if the person believes that the threats will be carried out and if he person... ● could only be raised where the threat is an immediate death or bodily harm, and the person who is making the threat is physically there when the threat is being made ● this section only applies to principals ● the immediacy and present requirements can have a very harsh effect when it comes to this section ● people said this section could potentially violate s7 of the charter because it could convict someone with no moral choice but did the prohibited act ● Ruzic (2001) ○ she admitted she committed those offences, but didn’t have any choice ○ she was approached by a military group who ordered her to take the drugs to Toronto and assaulted her, and no point of her going to the police in Yugoslavia because they were corrupt; military groups were ruling ○ upon arriving to Canada, she did not attempt to go to police or officials because they threatened they would kill her mother in Bulgaria ○ because she actually committed the offence, she was a principal and subject to s.17, however because of the way it was written up, s.17 was applicable ○ but she was not threatened immediately, and it was her mother that was being threatened, and the man was not present during the time of the crime 2 CRM200 Week #10 ○ SCC said the immediacy and present requirement was a violation of s.7 of the charter; she had no moral choice but to break the law, she was involuntary and if they imprisoned her, it would be unfair ○ so said immediacy and present requirement was unconstitutional ○ she was acquitted, and used the common law de
More Less
Unlock Document

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit