ABSTRACT
A jury should be given guidance by the judge on the limitations to the
defence of duress.
an imitation pistol. Pleading duress, they gave evidence that they had
involved themselves in the supply of cannabis and that when they had
failed to pay for one batch, they and their families had been subjected
to violence and threats of violence and that they had been instructed to
carry out the robbery (using the imitation pistol). The judge gave a
proper and accurate direction as to the ingredients of the defence of
duress. He also mentioned two limitations to the defence, namely: (i)
that a defendant must not voluntarily put himself in a position where he
is likely to be put under duress; and (ii) if the defendant can, without
damage to himself (or his immediate family), avoid the effects of the
duress by escaping from the threats, then he must do so. It was the
defendants’ case that the police were not able to provide effective
protection for the defendants and their families against the men who
threatened them. After retiring to consider their verdict, the jury
submitted two written questions to the judge. One of these related the
first limitation and the other to the second limitation on the defence.
