R v Martin (Tony) [2002] 1 Cr App R 27
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:02:51 UTC
Victims broke onto Defendant’s home to rob it and, without warning, Defendant shot Victims, killing one of them.
Self defence, CA said, did not apply since, even though Defendant was eccentric, he did not believe the threat to himself to be so severe that killing could be considered reasonable force.
However, Defendant was suffering depression at the time and Lord Woolf said it would be appropriate to substitute in a manslaughter conviction on a diminished responsibility basis. Thus he was convicted for manslaughter.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
R v Owino
Defendant committed actual bodily harm against his wife, Victim, and he was convicted after the judge gave the standard direction on self-defence (albeit late). Defendant appealed on the basis that D...
Beckford v R
The defendant, a police officer, took the life of a man, believing he posed a serious threat as a dangerous gunman firing at the police. The defence asserted self-defence, and the jury focused on eva...
R v O’Grady
Defendant killed Victim while intoxicated, genuinely, though mistakenly, believing that Victim was trying to kill him. He was convicted of manslaughter (murder is a specific intent crime and therefor...
Clunis v Camden & Islington HA
Plaintiff was mental and stabbed someone while being mental, after Defendant, the health authority, failed to realise how dangerous he was and failed to treat him. He had been convicted of manslaught...
R v Keane
In legal contexts, self-defense refers to the right of an individual to use reasonable force to protect themselves from imminent harm or danger. A fundamental principle allows individuals to respond...
Related free notes samples
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.