Complicity
Murder
Purpose (Dual)
Purpose,
knowledge,
extreme reck.
Manslaughter Recklessly or,
Murder, but
EED
Neg. Hom.
Negligently
Solicits, aids or
agrees or
attempts to aid;
or fails to
prevent + duty
Causes death
Causes death
Causes death
 EED
1. Was Defendant under EED? (Subjective)
2.Was there a reasonable explanation or excuse
for EED? (Objective and subjective)
 Necessity:
 1. Belief that conduct is necessary to avoid a
greater harm (Subjective)
 2. Weighing of evils - Harm or evil avoided is
greater than that sought to be prevented.
 3. Legislature has not precluded defense.
 4. Multi-tiered approach to blame issue. (Could
support finding of negligent homicide)
+ Facts & Inferences
(Pros)
Began to plan on 18th
day, 2 days in advance
(purposeful, planned
act)
Brooks dissented
(necessity?)
Dudley committed the
act of killing
Prayers offered (again
shows purposeful,
planned act)
+ Facts & Inferences
(Defense)
Extreme conditions/for
both EED & Necessity
(Had no supply of
water & no supply of
food in rescue boat,
Subsisted for 3 days on
1 lb of turnips, Caught
a turtle on 4th day, up to
20th day)
Plan made on 18th day,
when had gone 7 days
w/o food & 5 w/o
water.
(Pros)
Stephens & Dudley
went to Parker & told
him that time had come
Parker did not consent;
did not threaten others
Did not draw lots
Dudley kept knife & no
remorse
Death was probable not certain
Lifeboats not
adequately stocked
(negligent/reckless?)
(Defense)
1000 mi. from land
Parker most likely to
die & men would have
died soon w/o eating
No rescue in sight
Fortuity of rescue
(mermaids)
Parker’s family has
forgiven men
Public sympathy
3 lives saved w/ 1 death
Honest belief shown by
conduct
Negotiation Results
 Man.
 Minimum Sentence 5
yrs:
 Man.
 No
Settlement
– Will serve one yr, with 4 yrs
suspended (possibility of
having sentence commuted)
 5 Yrs. Deferred.
Negotiation Results
 Man.
 5 Yrs probation
 Man.
 5 yr. Suspended Sentence
 No
Settlement
Negotiation Results
 Man.
 7 Yr. Suspended Sentence
 Neg.
 6 months in jail with
Hom.
intensive psych.
Counseling, 6 months
probation with monthly
psych evaluations.
Common Law
MPC
Clear & Imminent Danger
(examine alternatives)
Reasonable belief actions will
abate danger
Maj: Judge weighs evils
------------
Legislature has not precluded
defense
Same
Without blame
Maj: Not for homicide
Reck. = Reck. MR
Neg. = Neg. MR
All crimes
Maj: Forces of Nature
---------------
Honest Belief
?
Justification v. Excuse
 Justification: Society deems that the
defendant made the right choice and did the
right thing under the circumstances of the
case.
 Excuse: Society does not condone the
defendant’s conduct, but rather excuses it on
the basis that he or she can not be held
responsible for the conduct.
Toscano (p. 845)
 Use or threat of harm to you or another
 Present, imminent & pending
 Induce a well-grounded apprehension of
death or serious bodily harm (used to be just
death) to a man of ordinary fortitude and
courage
 Not Reckless
Duress Defense
 Whether the standard of reasonableness is
subjective or objective.
 Source of the threat.
 Whether the threat should be imminent.
 Whether the defense should be excluded for
certain types of crimes (e.g. homicide).
 Whether particular types of threats are required.
 Whether the defendant should be free from fault.
Duress Defense
 Whether the standard of
reasonableness is subjective or
objective.
– Common Law: Reasonable fortitude
– MPC: Reasonable firmness
Duress Defense
 Source of the threat.
– Most jurisdictions require that the source
of the threat be another person.
Duress Defense
 Whether the threat should be
imminent.
– Common Law: Present, imminent &
Pending
– MPC: ------------------
Duress Defense
 Whether the defense should be
excluded for certain types of crimes.
– Common Law: Homicide (including
felony murder?)
– MPC: -------------------
Duress Defense
 Whether particular types of threats are
required.
– Common Law: Death or serious bodily
harm.
– MPC: Unlawful force.
Duress Defense
 Whether the defendant should be free
from fault.
– Common Law: Yes
– MPC: Sort of.
• Reckless: Defense is barred.
• Negligence: Negligence Mens Rea
Definitions
 Competency:
– Person, as a result of a mental disease or defect
lacks capacity to understand the proceedings
against him/her or to assist in defense.
 Execution:
– Ford v. Wainwright (1986): bar on execution of
insane.
– Atkins v. Virginia (2002): bar on execution of
the mentally retarded.
M’Naghten (p. 879)
 Defect of reason or defect of mind; and
– Did not know the nature of the act, or
– Knowing the nature of the act, did not know
that it was wrong.
 Problems with test:
– Complete impairment
– Restriction to impairment of cognition
– Artificial restriction on expert testimony