Self-defence

Intro

D may claim the defence of self-defence contained in s.76(1) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, which if successful will lead to an acquittal.

1. Use of force must be necessary

Use of force must have been necessary. The d is judged in the circumstances as he/she honestly believed them to be and the jury will consider all the surrounding circumstances.
[If D apprehends an attack, they can take pre-emptive strikes (Beckford)]
[There is no duty to retreat when faced with an attack and you can strike the first blow (Bird)]
[If all danger from the original attack is over the defence is not available (Clegg)]
[If D apprehends an attack, he may prepare to defend himself (AG’s reference No 2 of 1983)]
[If D makes a mistake and thinks that self-defence is necessary, he will be judged on the facts as he honestly believed them to be and the defence could still be available, even if the mistake was unreasonable (s.76(4) (R v Williams (Gladstone))]
[If the defendant was intoxicated when making the mistake as to the need for self-defence, the defence will not be available (s.76(5) (R v O’Grady))

2. Force used must be reasonable

Whether the force used was reasonable in the circumstances as he believed them to be is a matter for the jury to decide.
In Owino, the test is whether a person used such force as was objectively reasonable in the circumstances as he believed them to be (s.76(3) and s.76(7)).
S.76(7) also recognised that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action (R v Palmer)
Excessive force is not reasonable (Clegg).

.

.