The straightforward claim 'I broke the law but there would have been Essay

The straightforward claim I broke the law but there would fork up been worse consequences had I obeyed the law will not in itself lead to an acquittal(Quayle 2 - Essay Examplece (1) the Court of Appeal held that, a persons consent is irrelevant and cannot prevent criminal liability for an offence if effective bodily harm was intended and/or caused, subject to some exceptions. This strict rule was based on the view that it is not in the public interest that people should try to cause, or should cause, each otherwise actual bodily harm for no good reason. The Court of Appeals views were applied the House of Lords in R v Brown and Others (2).There are some exceptions to this defense like reasonable surgical interference, a properly conducted game or sport, and tattooing and ear-piercing. A person can validly consent to the risk of being unintentionally harmed. In R v Aitkin and Others (3) the victims participation in practical jokes played on RAF companions was evaluate as evidence suggesting that he too could become a victim and consented to this.The definition of the Duress wellhead mentioned in the case Attorney-General v Whelan (4) that the threats of immediate death or serious personal violence so great as to overbear the ordinary powers of human resistance should be accepted as a justification for acts which would otherwise be criminal. The defense must be based on threats to kill or do serious bodily harm. If the threats are less terrible they should be matters of mitigation only. In DPP for N. Ireland v Lynch (5), it was held that the law would not regard threats to a persons property as a capable basis for the defense. Here the immediate threat should be in such a nature that it is to be operated upon the accused at the time that the crime was committed.In R v Hudson and Taylor (6), it was held that it was always open to the opinion poll to shown that the defendants had not availed themselves of some opportunity to neutralize the threats, and that this might negate the immediacy of the threat, regard had to be had to the advance and circumstances of the accused.But it is to be remembered that a defendant who joins a criminal