Terms in this set (123)

How does a pattern and history of abuse affect the Imminence Requirement in SD analysis
Limited Situations
SD is limited to those situations where the D faces imminent, or immediate, threat of physical harm
In which the D is allowed to defend themselves until the threat no longer exists.
And if the threat is to life or GBH, then the D is justified in committing a homicide to guard himself.
Original Interpretation
Objective standard was strictly applied, requiring that the threat be present at the very moment that the defendant defends themselves
Required CERTAINTY: Which didn't make sense b/c you can be wrong and still be reasonable under modern SD law
Now, the test is whether a reasonable person would have believed the threat from the victim was imminent
A preemptive strike is illegal force used to soon while a retaliation against a successful aggressor is illegal force used too late
Imminence defined
"immediate danger, such must be instantly met, such that cannot be guarded by calling for the assistance of others for protection."
MPC: 3.04: "immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force. . . on the present occasion."
No Alternatives
There must be no alternative to using force against the other person
if the threat is not imminent, then the D is required to use alternative, usually lawful, measures to avoid the conflict
Non-Confrontational B/W Cases
Ct says, "where torture appears interminable and escape impossible, the belief that only death of the batterer can provide relief may be reasonable in the mind of the person of ordinary firmness"