# What laws are there relating to crimes committed under duress? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 8, 2011, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693 "2011-06-08T01:21:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2011, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/1 "2011-06-08T01:21:47Z")
I caught part of a _Criminal Minds_ rerun in which a vengeful small town resident kidnaps the three daughters of three men he hates, holds them hostage, and tells them that unless any two of them murder the third, he will kill all three. They do. This reminded me that I (think I’ve) read about real life cases in which people were still prosecuted for crimes (they claim were) committed under duress. In many, I’m sure that the state simply did not believe the duress claims, but that got me wondering: what laws are there, in general, about duress crimes? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2011, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/2 "2011-06-08T01:31:05Z")
[Duress](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress) is a defense, like self-defense. Generally, to establish duress a defendant must show that he acted under an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury, that he had a well-grounded fear that the threat would be carried out, and that he had no reasonable opportunity to escape or inform the police. But the elements, taken from the common law, vary a bit from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I believe it is not a defense to homicide in most places. Example statute from NY: § 40.00 Duress. 1. In any prosecution for an offense, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant engaged in the proscribed conduct because he was coerced to do so by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical force upon him or a third person, which force or threatened force a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist. ``` 2. The defense of duress as defined in subdivision one of this section ``` is not available when a person intentionally or recklessly places himself in a situation in which it is probable that he will be subjected to duress. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/3 "2011-06-08T18:16:52Z")
Hollywood aside, it is _very_ rarely an issue in real life. I was a prosecutor from 1995-2001, and have been a magistrate since then. I’ve never had it raised in any case with which I’ve been involved, nor have I heard of it ever being raised as a defense by any lawyer I know. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/4 "2011-06-08T19:01:37Z")
As a non-lawyer, the key problem I see with claiming duress as a defense is that it is based on what a reasonable person would do in the situation. It’s not enough to show just any duress - you have to show sufficient duress that the courts agree that you couldn’t have done much else. I haven’t seen the show given in the OP, but my guess is that the prosecution would start asking things like “Why not call the police? Why not fake the death of one person instead of really doing it?” The prosecution might even argue that the threat to kill the daughters was just a bluff and should have been treated that way. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2011, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/5 "2011-06-08T19:06:15Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Hollywood aside, it is _very_ rarely an issue in real life. I was a prosecutor from 1995-2001, and have been a magistrate since then. I’ve never had it raised in any case with which I’ve been involved, nor have I heard of it ever being raised as a defense by any lawyer I know. I have used duress’ cousin _necessity_ before, but agree that duress as a defense is in real life very rare. ---
**Author:** ![cat039](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@cat039](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cat039)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/6 "2012-12-27T15:30:15Z")
> [@dracoi](#): > > As a non-lawyer, the key problem I see with claiming duress as a defense is that it is based on what a reasonable person would do in the situation. It’s not enough to show just any duress - you have to show sufficient duress that the courts agree that you couldn’t have done much else. > > I haven’t seen the show given in the OP, but my guess is that the prosecution would start asking things like “Why not call the police? Why not fake the death of one person instead of really doing it?” The prosecution might even argue that the threat to kill the daughters was just a bluff and should have been treated that way. In the episode, the man kidnaps the three girls, (obviously takes away their cell phones, etc) and locks them in a metal room from which they cannot escape. Inside the room, there is only the three of them. If they choose one of the three to die, he will let the other two out. Otherwise, he will kill them all. When they finally choose one, he throws in a hammer, forcing them to kill her themselves (whereas the girls had obviously expected that he would do the killing.) And, when one of them finally commits the act, he lets them go, just like he said. Just letting you know the full premise. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/7 "2012-12-27T15:39:32Z")
Reminds me of a story from a few years ago where some thugs forced a son to rape his mother at gunpoint. I don’t think that he was prosecuted, and if he were, duress probably would have been the defense put forward. The reason that duress is probably rarely actually used in court is that prosecuting attorneys probably aren’t going to prosecute if they feel that an otherwise-would-be-crime was committed under duress. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/8 "2012-12-27T15:52:56Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > The reason that duress is probably rarely actually used in court is that prosecuting attorneys probably aren’t going to prosecute if they feel that an otherwise-would-be-crime was committed under duress. The reason it’s rarely used in a criminal context is that it’s an affirmative defense; in order to avail yourself of it, you have to admit that you committed the underlying act. In the criminal context, defendants very rarely stipulate to anything, particularly of the “yes I did it” variety, unless they’re pleading guilty anyway. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/9 "2012-12-27T16:04:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have used duress’ cousin _necessity_ before, but agree that duress as a defense is in real life very rare. So, necessity and duress are cousins, and necessity is the mother of invention. What relationship exists between duress and invention? ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/10 "2012-12-27T16:31:06Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > So, necessity and duress are cousins, and necessity is the mother of invention. What relationship exists between duress and invention? Dunno, but its probably only legal in Kentucky ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/11 "2012-12-27T19:24:51Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > So, necessity and duress are cousins, and necessity is the mother of invention. What relationship exists between duress and invention? First cousins once removed, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/12 "2012-12-27T19:33:36Z")
The show’s use of the defense in relation to murder seems likely flawed (but possible, 50 states and all that). > [@](#): > > § 13.01 General Principle > > Generally speaking, a person may be acquitted of any offense except murder if the criminal act was committed under the following circumstances: > > 1.) Another person issued a specific threat to kill or grievously injure the defendant or a third party, particularly a near relative, unless he committed the offense; > 2.) The defendant reasonably believed that the threat was genuine; > 3.) The threat was “present, imminent, and impending” at the time of the criminal act; > 4.) There was no reasonable escape from the threat except through compliance with the demands of the coercer; and > 5.) The defendant was not at fault in exposing himself to the threat. > > § 13.02 Duress as a Defense to Homicide > > The common law rule, expressly adopted by statute in some states, is that duress is not a defense to an intentional killing. A very few states recognize an “imperfect” duress defense, which reduces the offense to manslaughter. Courts are split on the availability of the duress defense in felony-murder prosecutions. > > § 13.03 Model Penal Code > > Duress is an affirmative defense to unlawful conduct by the defendant if: (1) he was compelled to commit the offense by the use, or threatened use, of unlawful force by the coercer upon his or another person; and (2) a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist the coercion. [MPC § 2.09(1)] The defense is unavailable if the defendant recklessly placed himself in a situation in which it was probable that he would be subjected to coercion. If he negligently placed himself in such a situation, however, the defense is available to him for all offenses except those for which negligence suffices to establish culpability. [MPC § 2.09(2)]. > > The Code’s duress defense is broader than the common law in various respects. First, it abandons the common law requirement that the defendant’s unlawful act be a response to an imminent deadly threat. Second, the defense is one of general applicability, so the defense may be raised in murder prosecutions. > > The Code defense is similar to the common law in two significant ways. First, the defense is limited to threats or use of “unlawful” force; therefore, it does not apply to coercion emanating from natural sources. Second, in conformity with the common law, the Code does not recognize the defense when any interest other than bodily integrity is threatened. [http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim13.htm](http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim13.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-laws-are-there-relating-to-crimes-committed-under-duress/584693/13 "2012-12-27T19:42:58Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > The show’s use of the defense in relation to murder seems likely flawed (but possible, 50 states and all that). Not possible. It’s a [fairly well established](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens) principle at common law that duress and necessity do not excuse intentional homicides.