|
|
此文章由 MR.Q 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 MR.Q 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整
本帖最后由 MR.Q 于 2016-11-9 21:19 编辑
找到了nsw关于正当防卫的一些资料
http://www.armstronglegal.com.au ... fences/self-defense
(1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the person carries out the conduct constituting the offence in self-defence.
(2) A person carries out conduct in self-defence if and only if the person believes the conduct is necessary:
to defend himself or herself or another person, or
to prevent or terminate the unlawful deprivation of his or her liberty or the liberty of another person, or
to protect property from unlawful taking, destruction, damage or interference, or
to prevent criminal trespass to any land or premises or to remove a person committing any such criminal trespass,
and the conduct is a reasonable response in the circumstances as he or she perceives them.
There are two questions to be answered by the Court when self defence is raised.
Is there is a reasonable possibility that the accused believed that his or her conduct was necessary in order to defend himself or herself; and,
If there is, is there also a reasonable possibility that what the accused did was a reasonable response to the circumstances as he or she perceived them.
The first question is determined by a completely subjective point of view considering the personal characteristics of the accused at the time they carried out the conduct.
The second question is determined by an entirely objective assessment of the proportionality of the accused’s response to the situation the accused subjectively believed they faced.
The accused need not have reasonable grounds for their belief that it was necessary to act in the way they did in order to defend themselves as the common law required. It is sufficient if the accused genuinely holds that belief.
The jury is not assessing the response of the reasonable person but the response of the accused. In making that assessment it is obvious than some of the personal attributes of the accused will be relevant just as will be some of the surrounding physical circumstances in which the accused acted. So matters such as the age of the accused, his or her gender, or the state of his or her health may be regarded by the jury.
Intoxication is only relevant to an assessment of the belief held by the accused as to what conduct was necessary in his self defence and as to the circumstances perceived by the accused (The first question)
One matter that must be irrelevant to an assessment of the reasonableness of the accused's response (second question) is his or her state of sobriety.
正当防卫免责，此行为是为了保护权利，保护财产的情况下做出的防卫行为， 并且
1.你认为当时的防卫是必要的
2.陪审团认为是必要的
第一条都没问题，第二条看你怎么描述故事了。
先帮到这了 |
评分
-
查看全部评分
|
参加征文：我在fashion业捣糨糊 (2009-10-2) kitcat 
楼主:BOC
发表于 2016-11-7 22:47
