KembaraXtra-Case Law-R v Gotts (1992)-Duress and Attempted Murder

KembaraXtra-Case Law-R v Gotts (1992)-Duress and Attempted Murder
Facts:

Defendant (D): Aged 16.
Alleged Offence: Charged with attempted murder.
Circumstances: D was instructed by his father to kill his mother (who was separated from the father).
Alleged Threat: D claimed his father threatened to shoot him if he did not comply.
Action Taken: D stabbed his mother.
Outcome: A passer-by intervened, preventing further injury. The mother survived, though seriously injured.

Legal Issue:

Held (Decision of the Court):

Reasoning of the Court:

Logical Inconsistency: The court found no justification in law, morality, or logic for distinguishing between a person who completes a murder under duress and one who attempts it under duress.
Intent: The mental element (intent) required for attempted murder is considered greater than that for murder. The court highlighted that it was a matter of chance that the defendant was charged with attempted murder rather than actual murder.
No Defence for Attempt: To allow the defence of duress for attempted murder would, in essence, permit a defence where the intent to cause serious harm (or death) was present, even if the act did not reach its ultimate conclusion.

Key Takeaways for Study:

Core Principle: Duress is generally available as a defence to most criminal offences, except in specific circumstances where the law deems it inappropriate.
Attempted Murder Exception: R v Gotts firmly establishes that duress is not a defence to attempted murder.
Underlying Rationale: The decision is rooted in the idea that one who intends to kill (even under duress) should not escape criminal liability for that intent, particularly when the intent for attempt is arguably higher than for murder itself.
The "Chance" Factor: The court's emphasis on the "pure chance" of the charge highlights the principle that the law should not be circumvented by the fortuitous intervention of a third party. The defendant's intent and actions remain central to the criminal liability.

Self-Study Questions:

What were the key factual circumstances that led to the charge against D in R v Gotts?
What was the central legal question before the court in this case?
What was the final decision of the court regarding the availability of duress for attempted murder?
Explain the court's reasoning for denying the defence of duress to an attempted murderer. Focus on the arguments of legal, moral, and logical justification.
How does the court's discussion of the "intent required for attempted murder" influence its decision?
Why is the fact that the mother survived considered a matter of "pure chance" in the context of the defence of duress?
Can you identify any potential arguments against the court's decision in R v Gotts? (Consider this critically).
How does this case inform your understanding of the limitations of the defence of duress in English criminal law?

LAW