By Stanley Yeo
Is a person who is threatened with serious harm by a violent criminal unless he or she commits a crime, duty bound to seek police protection? What if such protection were ineffective? Should police efficacy in affording protection be a relevant issue, who is to assess this matter – the court (be it judge or jury) or the accused? If it is the accused, can his or her assessment be honest alone or must it be based on reasonable grounds? Should reasonable grounds be required, how is this matter to be dealt with from an evidential point of view? These were some of the questions which were raised in the High Court of Australia case of Taiapa v The Queen.
The full article can be accessed here: “Taiapa v The Queen (2009) 240 CLR 95” (2010) 34 Crim LJ 198.