748:
is irrelevant although, in the criminal law, this may reduce the sentence. The basis of the defense argues that the threats made by the other person make the defendant's entire behavior involuntary and therefore the liability should be reduced or removed. The extent to which this defense should be allowed, if at all, is a simple matter of public policy. A state may say that no threat should force a person deliberately to break the law, particularly if this breach will cause loss or damage to a third person. Alternatively, a state may take the view that even though people may have ordinary levels of courage, they may nevertheless be coerced into agreeing to break the law and this human weakness should have some recognition in the law. For example, suppose that a group of terrorists kidnap A's family and instruct A to carry a large bomb into a crowded area as the price for the release of their family. If A carries out these instructions, making no effort to contact the police or to warn those in the danger area, the issue of liability for death and injury resulting depends on the state's values. This is a legal as well as a political decision. In the civil law, duress is similarly only an exculpation, rendering contracts and other transactions voidable, and offering only minor mitigation in the calculation of the amount of any
778:, i.e. the state cannot allow ignorance of the law to be a defense. This would unduly encourage the lazy and the deceitful to trade on their ignorance (real or otherwise). Thus, usually only mistakes relating to the factual basis of what is being attempted can form this defense and, in the majority of situations, it will only offer limited benefit to a defendant of ordinary capacity since the state owes no general duty to save citizens from the effects of their own ignorance or stupidity. Nevertheless, there may be limited circumstances in which people may honestly believe things that either prevent them from forming the requisite
803:
But the state has a positive interest in maintaining good order and therefore, no matter what is done or said, people are not supposed to react violently or to cause loss or damage. Even though certain forms of physical contact or particular words might cause even reasonable people to become seriously annoyed, the state cannot sanction or justify retaliation. Thus, in most aspects of the law, any loss of control is taken to be an aggravating factor that, in the criminal law or the law of intentional torts, might well lead to an increase in sentencing, or the award of punitive or exemplary damages.
44:
627:
transactions may be voidable, i.e. the courts will judge, whether in the particular circumstances, it would be right to favor the interests of the child or the interests of the other party or parties involved in the transaction. Hence, it would not be appropriate to allow a child knowingly to deceive innocent retailers or service providers into supplying value, and then allow him or her to avoid liability to pay a reasonable sum of money for those goods or services. This is a balancing of political and commercial interests.
309:
535:
opposed to having to wait until a police officer arrives before help can be rendered. Whilst the jurisprudential importance of the distinction between justification and excuse defenses is clear, legally they have the same effect, acquittal, and there is an ongoing debate about whether the distinction makes any practical difference.
725:
typical example of disproportionate force; however, such decisions are dependent on the situation and the applicable law, and thus the example situation can in some circumstances be defensible, generally because of a codified presumption intended to prevent the unjust negation of this defense by the trier of fact.
534:
fall outside the formal controls that would seek to ensure reasonable use of force in state-appointed police officers, such people may accidentally find themselves interrupting the commission of a crime and their actions in defence of their own or another's interests is justified out of expediency as
747:
In this situation, the defendant has actually done everything to break the law and intended to do it to avoid some threatened or actual harm. Thus, some degree of liability already attaches to the defendant for what was done. In law, the usual rule is that the defendant's motive for breaking the law
411:
approves of the purpose or motives underpinning some actions or the consequences flowing from them (see
Robinson), and distinguishes those where the behavior cannot be approved but some excuse may be found in the characteristics of the defendant, e.g. that the accused was a serving police officer or
592:
and the available evidence of the age at which antisocial behavior begins to manifest itself. Some societies will have qualities of indulgence toward the young and inexperienced and will not wish them to be exposed to the criminal law system before all other avenues of response have been exhausted.
802:
This is an example of a purely mitigatory defense in that, in the few situations when it is allowed to operate, it only reduces the level of criminal liability. In most legal systems, it cannot extinguish liability. It is a natural part of human nature that people get angry when they are provoked.
724:
Self-defense is, in general, some reasonable action taken in protection of self. An act taken in self-defense often is not a crime at all; no punishment will be imposed. To qualify, any defensive force must be proportionate to the threat. Use of a firearm in response to a non-lethal threat is a
496:
from liability means that although the defendant may have been a participant in the sequence of events leading to the prohibited outcome, no liability will attach to the particular defendant because they belong to a class of person exempted from liability. In some cases, this will be a policy of
626:
and other legal situations during which liabilities would otherwise attach to the infant. Where there is only minimal understanding, transactions entered into will be void, i.e. the infant is excused. When understanding grows in line with age, the law switches from excuse to exculpation, and
714:
attack will not be liable for any loss or damage caused. To that extent, it borrows from the policy excuse favoring those who are suffering from a mental illness, but allows the full trial as to liability to proceed. For a detailed comparative law discussion, see
705:
This criminal defense straddles the divide between excuse and exculpation. It works by showing that the defendant's mind was not in control of the body's movements at the relevant time and that this loss of control was not foreseeable. For example, a
513:
or for an ambulance driver exceeding the speed limit in an emergency. Others are excused by virtue of their status and capacity. Others may escape liability because the quality of their actions satisfied a general public
488:
may be excused from liability as belonging to a class of person that ought to be excused, their behaviour may be considered justified, or an exculpation may be allowed on the merits of the particular case.
667:, the state accepts the person as being in need of care, and offers or requires medical treatment instead of subjecting such people to the stress of having to undergo a trial as to liability.
558:, or other wrong and have a liability to compensate the victim, they should be exculpated because of special circumstances that operated in favor of the defendant at the time they broke the
505:
or other civil organizations may be granted a degree of immunity for causing prohibited outcomes while acting in the course of their official duties, e.g. for an
436:. An excuse may also be something that a person or persons use to explain any criticism or comments based on the outcome of any specific event.
73:
599:
and exclude liability for all acts and omissions that would otherwise have been criminal up to a specified age. Thereafter, there may be a
339:
468:
result. When considering the consequences which are to be imposed on those involved in the activities forming the subject matter of the
833:
647:
If individuals are a danger to society and/or to themselves but not responsible through a lack of understanding, there is no point in
691:, even though voluntary intoxication can not, if the "settled insanity" negates one of the required elements of the crime such as
955:
636:
891:
655:
if the person understands that what was done was wrong and accepts the judgment of society as part of the process of
95:
66:
332:
185:
373:
774:
28:
950:
325:
660:
603:
against the use of criminal sanctions except in more serious cases. Other states leave discretion to
515:
145:
56:
377:
190:
60:
52:
607:
to argue or the judges to rule on whether the child understood that what was being done was wrong.
883:
32:
17:
843:
765:
757:
615:
600:
445:
389:
175:
170:
77:
945:
901:
739:
716:
519:
200:
820:
Criminal Law Cases and
Materials, 7th ed. 2012; John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder
680:
416:. Thus, a justification describes the quality of the act, whereas an excuse relates to the
400:
150:
8:
912:
795:
579:
523:
640:
571:
233:
155:
887:
396:
195:
111:
927:
The
Criminal Defense of Duress: A Justification, Not an Excuse - And Why It Matters
698:
688:
672:
632:
205:
160:
140:
130:
676:
543:
461:
361:
456:
enact policy into laws which are then administered through the judicial system.
761:
584:
453:
433:
425:
421:
413:
289:
135:
840:
Unjustified: The
Practical Irrelevance of the Justification/Excuse Distinction
651:(whether in the criminal or non-criminal sense). Punishment is only justified
939:
876:
711:
684:
399:
for a group of persons sharing a common characteristic. Justification, as in
380:). Exculpation is a related concept which reduces or extinguishes a person's
353:
595:
498:
417:
284:
269:
259:
254:
229:
854:
Adequate (Non)Provocation and Heat of
Passion as Excuse Not Justification
611:
473:
449:
381:
369:
27:
This article is about excuses in legal trials. For "making excuses", see
648:
604:
477:
469:
424:(or lack of it) in the accused. These factors can affect the resulting
313:
274:
243:
210:
119:
588:. In the criminal law, each state will consider the nature of its own
675:
is defined as a permanent or "settled" condition caused by long-term
656:
547:
531:
485:
429:
279:
857:
847:
308:
930:
780:
707:
692:
652:
619:
264:
550:
argues that despite the fact they committed and are guilty of the
786:
749:
589:
527:
506:
465:
408:
404:
384:, such as their liability to pay compensation to the victim of a
735:
687:
jurisdictions "settled insanity" can be used as a basis for an
510:
502:
180:
880:
772:
The general policy usually allocated in cases of mistakes is
551:
457:
365:
165:
623:
555:
460:
also have a residual discretion to excuse individuals from
385:
376:
and excuse are different defenses in a criminal case (See
559:
856:, (2009) University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
929:, (2003) Vol. 6 Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 833.
509:or trespass to the person caused during a lawful
937:
65:but its sources remain unclear because it lacks
869:Gorr, Michael & Harwood, Sterling, (eds.),
862:Gorr, Michael & Harwood, Sterling, (eds.),
873:. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 1995.
871:Crime and Punishment: Philosophic Explorations
432:, or in the case of a conviction may mitigate
333:
920:Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law
909:Criminal Law Defenses: A Systematic Analysis
830:Justification and Excuse, Law and Morality
340:
326:
96:Learn how and when to remove this message
679:and differs from the temporary state of
530:at large. Albeit that the actions of a
14:
938:
931:Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
858:Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
848:Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
866:. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992.
593:Hence, some states have a policy of
37:
368:charges that is a distinct from an
24:
518:. For example, the willingness to
497:expediency. Hence, members of the
25:
967:
814:
614:may also excuse liability in the
307:
42:
729:
956:Criminal law legal terminology
439:
13:
1:
864:Controversies in Criminal Law
807:
775:ignorantia juris non excusat
29:Rationalization (psychology)
7:
565:
10:
972:
480:and judges have a choice:
403:, vindicates or shows the
141:Mental disorder (Insanity)
26:
925:Westen & Mangiafico,
578:This is an aspect of the
146:Diminished responsibility
832:, (2003) Vol. 53, No. 1
637:mental disorder defences
526:from injury may benefit
378:Justification and excuse
51:This article includes a
884:Oxford University Press
766:mistake in contract law
764:in criminal law and in
738:in criminal law and in
522:oneself and others, or
80:more precise citations.
33:Excuse (disambiguation)
846:Journal of Law Reform
844:University of Michigan
601:rebuttable presumption
484:the criminal or civil
395:The excuse provides a
31:. For other uses, see
922:, (1989) Crim. LR 93.
902:California Law Review
828:Berman, Mitchell N.,
717:automatism (case law)
784:or from reaching an
401:justifiable homicide
913:Columbia Law Review
852:Fontaine, Reid G.,
464:if it represents a
452:branches of modern
838:Chin, Gabriel J.,
572:Defense of infancy
53:list of references
951:Criminal defenses
900:, (1987) Vol. 75
663:. Hence, as with
412:suffering from a
397:mitigating factor
350:
349:
112:Criminal defenses
106:
105:
98:
16:(Redirected from
963:
907:Robinson, P. H.
834:Duke Law Journal
821:
818:
689:insanity defense
673:Settled insanity
633:Insanity defense
428:which may be an
342:
335:
328:
312:
311:
226:
206:False confession
131:Actual innocence
108:
107:
101:
94:
90:
87:
81:
76:this article by
67:inline citations
46:
45:
38:
21:
971:
970:
966:
965:
964:
962:
961:
960:
936:
935:
825:
824:
819:
815:
810:
758:Mistake of fact
732:
677:substance abuse
641:M'Naghten Rules
568:
442:
346:
306:
294:
222:
215:
102:
91:
85:
82:
71:
57:related reading
47:
43:
36:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
969:
959:
958:
953:
948:
934:
933:
923:
916:
905:
898:Excusing Crime
894:
874:
867:
860:
850:
836:
823:
822:
812:
811:
809:
806:
805:
804:
799:
798:
792:
791:
769:
768:
762:mistake of law
754:
753:
744:
743:
731:
728:
727:
726:
721:
720:
702:
701:
696:
669:
668:
665:parens patriae
661:rehabilitation
644:
643:
629:
628:
610:The status of
608:
585:parens patriae
575:
574:
567:
564:
490:
489:
441:
438:
414:mental illness
348:
347:
345:
344:
337:
330:
322:
319:
318:
317:
316:
314:Law portal
301:
300:
296:
295:
293:
292:
287:
282:
277:
272:
267:
262:
257:
251:
248:
247:
239:
238:
237:
236:
227:
217:
216:
214:
213:
208:
203:
198:
193:
188:
183:
178:
173:
168:
163:
158:
153:
148:
143:
138:
133:
127:
124:
123:
115:
114:
104:
103:
61:external links
50:
48:
41:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
968:
957:
954:
952:
949:
947:
944:
943:
941:
932:
928:
924:
921:
917:
914:
910:
906:
903:
899:
895:
893:
892:0-19-825181-5
889:
885:
881:
878:
875:
872:
868:
865:
861:
859:
855:
851:
849:
845:
841:
837:
835:
831:
827:
826:
817:
813:
801:
800:
797:
794:
793:
789:
788:
783:
782:
777:
776:
771:
770:
767:
763:
759:
756:
755:
751:
746:
745:
741:
737:
734:
733:
723:
722:
718:
713:
712:hypoglycaemic
709:
704:
703:
700:
697:
694:
690:
686:
685:United States
682:
678:
674:
671:
670:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
645:
642:
638:
634:
631:
630:
625:
621:
617:
613:
609:
606:
602:
598:
597:
591:
587:
586:
581:
580:public policy
577:
576:
573:
570:
569:
563:
561:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
536:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
512:
508:
504:
500:
495:
487:
483:
482:
481:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
447:
437:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
410:
406:
402:
398:
393:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
374:Justification
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
354:jurisprudence
343:
338:
336:
331:
329:
324:
323:
321:
320:
315:
310:
305:
304:
303:
302:
298:
297:
291:
288:
286:
283:
281:
278:
276:
273:
271:
268:
266:
263:
261:
258:
256:
253:
252:
250:
249:
245:
241:
240:
235:
231:
228:
225:
221:
220:
219:
218:
212:
209:
207:
204:
202:
199:
197:
194:
192:
189:
187:
184:
182:
179:
177:
174:
172:
169:
167:
164:
162:
159:
157:
154:
152:
149:
147:
144:
142:
139:
137:
134:
132:
129:
128:
126:
125:
121:
117:
116:
113:
110:
109:
100:
97:
89:
79:
75:
69:
68:
62:
58:
54:
49:
40:
39:
34:
30:
19:
946:Contract law
926:
919:
918:Smith, J.C.
911:, (1982) 82
908:
897:
879:
870:
863:
853:
839:
829:
816:
785:
779:
773:
730:Exculpations
710:suffering a
681:intoxication
664:
596:doli incapax
594:
583:
539:
537:
499:armed forces
493:
491:
443:
394:
357:
352:In American
351:
230:Criminal law
223:
201:Self-defense
151:Intoxication
118:Part of the
92:
86:October 2023
83:
72:Please help
64:
877:Hart, H.L.A
796:Provocation
605:prosecutors
546:in which a
540:exculpation
478:governments
474:legislation
450:legislative
440:Explanation
382:culpability
370:exculpation
196:Provocation
78:introducing
940:Categories
882:. Oxford:
808:References
790:agreement.
699:Automatism
683:. In some
649:punishment
470:common law
434:sentencing
244:common law
211:Entrapment
161:Automatism
120:common law
842:, (2009)
657:expiation
616:civil law
548:defendant
532:vigilante
486:defendant
462:liability
446:executive
430:acquittal
390:civil law
234:procedure
191:Necessity
896:Kadish,
886:, 1968.
781:mens rea
752:payable.
740:contract
708:diabetic
693:mens rea
639:and the
620:contract
566:Defenses
524:property
426:judgment
422:capacity
407:. Thus,
366:criminal
290:Evidence
270:Property
260:Contract
255:Criminal
224:See also
136:Immunity
787:ad idem
750:damages
653:morally
590:society
544:defense
528:society
507:assault
494:excused
409:society
405:justice
388:in the
362:defense
299:Portals
285:Estates
176:Mistake
171:Consent
156:Infancy
74:improve
18:Excuses
904:, 257.
890:
736:Duress
520:defend
511:arrest
503:police
501:, the
492:To be
458:Judges
454:states
418:status
358:excuse
280:Trusts
242:Other
181:Duress
122:series
612:minor
552:crime
542:is a
360:is a
356:, an
275:wills
246:areas
166:Alibi
59:, or
915:199.
888:ISBN
760:and
659:and
624:tort
618:for
556:tort
516:good
466:just
448:and
444:The
386:tort
265:Tort
232:and
742:law
582:of
560:law
538:An
472:or
420:or
364:to
186:Age
942::
635:,
622:,
562:.
554:,
476:,
392:.
372:.
63:,
55:,
719:.
695:.
341:e
334:t
327:v
99:)
93:(
88:)
84:(
70:.
35:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.