R v Howe
Duress is not a defence to murder, whether as principal or secondary party.
Facts
Mr Howe and Mr Bannister were involved, with others, in the torture and killing of two young men. They took part under threats from the leader of the group, Murray, a violent man who they feared would kill them if they did not obey. In one killing they took part as secondary parties, and in the other they strangled the victim themselves. They were convicted of murder, after the judge ruled that duress was not available as a defence to murder as a principal.
Legal principle
The House of Lords upheld the convictions, and held that duress is not a defence to murder, whether the defendant is the principal or a secondary party. Lord Hailsham said that the law should not allow a person to choose to take an innocent life to save his own, because the law expects people to sacrifice themselves rather than kill an innocent person. The House overruled its earlier decision in DPP for Northern Ireland v Lynch [1975] AC 653, which had allowed duress as a defence for a secondary party to murder. It also approved the test for duress in R v Graham.
Related cases on defences: self defence, duress and necessity
- Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) [2001] Fam 147
- Beckford v The Queen [1988] AC 130
- R (Collins) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWHC 33 (Admin), [2016] QB 862
- R v Bowen [1997] 1 WLR 372
- R v Clegg [1995] 1 AC 482
- R v Conway [1989] QB 290
- R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273
- R v Gotts [1992] 2 AC 412
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
