LAW

UNDERSTANDING THE LAW

Most Popular Defenses Against Criminal Charges

(Written by Njagi Gacigi on December 6th 2011)

Defenses in criminal charges

There is no doubt- law is a complicated affair for most people. Not so many people bother to know what the law requires, until that moment of need. But, it is imperative that you know some basic law, regardless of whether you have a personal lawyer or not, for the sake of secure, peaceful co-existence. In criminal law, defenses are the reasonable justifications on an alleged criminal act that could result in acquittal of the accused, or acknowledgement of diminished responsibility. Whereas the final judgment lies upon the judge or the jury, there are a dozen of defenses that can be used in courts when a need arises.

Self Defense

 

self defense

Even those who swear that they are absolutely clueless on legal issues, must have heard about this. It is by far the most popular form of defense in criminal charges. It is mainly applicable in criminal charges of homicide or assault. The accused alleges to have assaulted or killed, the victim because the latter attacked the defendant. In assault cases, both allegations are brought forth and the truth ascertained. In instances where the accused has killed the attacker, it is upon the law court to establish that the attacker could have otherwise killed the defendant, and the defendant had no other options to escape death. In any case, the attack by the accused could not have been excess of what was necessary to fend off the original aggressor’s attack.

Infancy Defense

In many jurisdictions, there are what is known as the Age of Criminal Responsibility. This age varies, and there is no defined age for this kind of defense. If a person commits a criminal offense while shy of that age, they can escape legal responsibility of their actions on those grounds. The accused must therefore prove that they had not attained that age at the time of committing the alleged crime, and consequently cannot be held legally liable.

Restraint Defense

This defense is used when the accused was restrained by external factor that rendered them incapable of having control of their own actions. For example, in an accident a driver could prove that a hurricane rendered him incapable of stopping. Similarly, a drugged person could use this type of defense to prove innocence.

The Double Jeopardy Defense

The law states that a person can only be tried for an offense just once. This is regardless of whether the accused was acquitted or convicted at trial. Not unless, the second trial is an appeal of the original hearing, the accused can claim double jeopardy. This defense covers even prosecuting the same action under description of a different charge. In the same way, someone cannot be charged with a new offense if their action was not an illegality at the time it was committed. (However, this defense fails to hold in case new substantial evidence is gathered, which was not available before.) This was put in place to prevent harassment of the accused by bringing them to trial over and over again over weak cases- the prosecution ought to give the best shot at investigation and formulation, and present absolutely the best for conviction.

Legitimate Purpose Defense

There are some laws that are action specific as indicated by certain phrases as “For Sexual purpose” or something like “With intent to (something specified).” Under such scenarios, the accused can claim they did not commit the act for the purpose, and consequently have not breached any law. This kind of defense only applies where there is a purpose stated by law, and the court is convinced that the accused did not do the act for the ILLEGITIMATE purpose stated.

Entrapment Defense

This is where deception can be used as defense in law. If the accused committed the offense out of deception by an authority, or ordinary person purporting to be an official or authority, they can use the entrapment defense. This implies that the authority or the official cajoled/deceived the accused into thinking that their actions were not an illegality, was necessary for justice, science or any other legitimate purpose and field. For instance, a police officer could have convinced the accused to import cocaine into the country under the pretence that it would be used for scientific research to establish its curative properties.

Defense of Necessity

The accused arise the defense of necessity when it is alleged that their actions were done due to exceptional circumstances. Under such, the accused was desperate and there was no other way out, but to breach the law. Courts, however, must use the following criteria to establish whether the defense can be met (is applicable) or not.

• The unlawful act was done solely to avert a greater danger
• There could not have been any reasonable, legal alternative course of action
• The unlawful act could not have been in excess of what was necessary to avert the greater evil
• The unlawful act must have been effective, or at least had a high probability of effectiveness towards averting the greater evil

However, the accused need be very careful when arising this defense as many courts may not be willing to accept this due to fear of setting precedent and public image. The accused could still be convicted, even after meeting all the above requirements.

Defense of Duress

The accused committed the unlawful act under compulsion by another person to do it, where the compulsor was threatening death or other bodily harm to the accused, or related third party for non-compliance. In many jurisdictions, this line of defense holds if the threats were of a greater magnitude than that of the offense committed, and that the threats were immediate and otherwise unavoidable, which would result in death or severe bodily harm. Nevertheless, there are some crimes that are exempt from this defense

Defense of Automatism

The accused alleges that s/he had no control over their actions, and consequently cannot be held responsible. The accused may have been deluded, incapacitated, provoked, mentally disabled or during sleepwalk. This is to say, they were in a state of mind in which they did not have control over their actions, had no knowledge what they were doing or could not understand what they were doing was an illegality. There are two types of automatism- insane automatism and non-insane automatism. In case of the insane automatism, the court normally refers the accused to psychiatric care or other related care center. For non-insane automatism, the accused can be acquitted or given a more lenient sentence.

Defense of Mistake

The accused may arise this defense if he was unaware of a fact that could have rendered the alleged action illegal. Whereas ignorance in law is no defense in most jurisdictions, ignorance of a certain legal fact could actually be defense.

For instance, a bartender serving an underage client could have this defense in case a fake ID document was presented, and the court feels that it was reasonable for the defendant to believe that the client was of age. However, a person from the general public would not use this defense in mitigation if they gave a minor alcohol on the assumption that the legal drinking age was lower that it really was.