coercion

Question 1

coercion basic definition

Answer 1

where the accused commits the offence because of coercion by threats

Question 2

requirements for coercion

Answer 2

Thomson v HM Adv 1983 JC 69
- imminent danger of death or serious injury to accused or third party
- accused’s will must have been overcome by the threats
- objective test ‘such threats as would overcome the resolution of an ordinarily constituted person of the same age and sex of the accused’
- no defence if voluntarily exposed oneself to risk of coercion

Question 3

imminent danger

Answer 3

Van Phan v HM Adv 2018 JC 195
Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Act 2015. This legislation does not provide victims of trafficking with a bespoke specific defence, which other jurisdictions have introduced. In this case, the court had to consider whether this lack of a specific defence was compatible with a couple of treaties, such as article 26 of the Warsaw convention. Ie parties must not impose penalties on victims of trafficking where they have committed a crime, where they have been induced to do so.
Significance: Prosecutorial discretion in relation to human trafficking and exploitation.

Question 4

objective test

Answer 4

Cochrane v HM Adv 2001 SCCR 655
Facts: Accused had an unusually low iq, and was unusually easy to manipulate, unusually compliant.
Held: This fact was irrelevant to the plea of coercion. He would still be held to the objective test’s standard of the ordinarily constituted person of the same age and sex of the accused.

Question 5

voluntary exposure to the risk of coercion

Answer 5

R v Hasan [2005] 2 AC 467 ENGLISH CASE, NO SCOTTISH AUTHORITY YET
Significance: If there is a risk of coercion generally that is reasonably foreseeable. Not necessary for the accused to foresee being coerced into specific offences. General is enough.