Crucial issue but avoid stereotypes - Page 2

In jurisprudence, duress or coercion refers to a situation whereby a person performs an act as a result of violence, threat or other pressure against the person. Black's Law Dictionary (6th ed.) defines duress as "any unlawful threat or coercion used... to induce another to act [or not act] in a manner [they] otherwise would not [or would]". Duress is pressure exerted upon a person to coerce that person to perform an act that he or she ordinarily would not perform. The notion of duress must be distinguished both from undue influence in the civil law and from necessity.

Duress has two aspects. One is that it negates the person's consent to an act, such as sexual activity or the entering into a contract; or, secondly, as a possible legal defense or justification to an otherwise unlawful act.^[1] A defendant utilizing the duress defense admits to breaking the law, but claims that he/she is not liable because, even though the act broke the law, it was only performed because of extreme unlawful pressure.^[2] In criminal law, a duress defense is similar to a plea of guilty, admitting partial culpability, so that if the defense is not accepted then the criminal act is admitted.

Duress or coercion can also be raised in an allegation of rape or sexual assault to negate a defense of consent on the part of the person making the allegation.

A defendant who raises a defense of duress has actually done everything to constitute the actus reus of the crime and has the mens rea because he or she intended to do it in order to avoid some threatened or actual harm. Thus, some degree of culpability already attaches to the defendant for what was done. In criminal law, the defendant's motive for breaking the law is usually irrelevant although, if the reason for acting was a form of justification, this may reduce the sentence. The basis of the defense is that the duress actually overwhelmed the defendant's will and would also have overwhelmed the will of a person of ordinary courage (a hybrid test requiring both subjective evidence of the accused's state of mind, and an objective confirmation that the failure to resist the threats was reasonable), thus rendering the entire behavior involuntary. Thus, the liability should be reduced or discharged, making the defense one of exculpation.

The extent to which this defense should be allowed, if at all, is a matter of public policy. A state may say that no threat should force a person to deliberately break the law, particularly if this breach will cause significant loss or damage to a third person.^{[citation needed]} Alternatively, a state may take the view that even though people may have ordinary levels of courage, they may nevertheless be coerced into agreeing to break the law and this human weakness should have some recognition in the law.

A variant of duress involves hostage taking, where a person is forced to commit a criminal act under the threat, say, that their family member or close associate will be immediately killed should they refuse. This has been raised in some cases of ransom where a person commits theft or embezzlement under orders from a kidnapper in order to secure their family member's life and freedom. However, duress is not a complete defense to all crimes. For example, the general rule, both at common law and today, is that duress is never a defense to murder; that is, one is never justified in killing another innocent person even if one's own life has been threatened.^[3]

Originally posted by: atominis

I have often said this show is apt for these times when we have so many cases of rape, sexual harassment, molestation with females be it at home, outside or by their own relatives or teachers/bosses. Moreover our leaders make worst comments on women and rape.

As much as I like Durga fighting for justice. I hope this show does not end up stereotyping women and confirming that they are vulnerable everywhere.

Nitya went out to work. She got harassed at that club. Now this girl wanted to support her mother after father's death. Did she have nothing else to do except turn to Ganguly for help and agree to his ludicrous proposal?😲Don't tell me giving sexual favours and then getting promotions, marks are only recourse left for females from poor families to support themselves!

Otherwise stereotypes of girl getting attacked after crossing Laxman rekha of home or making it in life by offering sexual favours will be reinforced.😲

While I appreciate men being equal partners in getting justice for rape victim I do not like to see Durga getting to accomplish her mission only thanks to Dr. Dayal's or Dev's support.

The show is moving on a tightrope. They have to balance it all and make sure they do not end up reinforcing stereotypes in very process of deconstructing them.

So far. Good.

Originally posted by: dey.bh

@ Nash:Exactly! To solve a mess..getting into another mess is never justified.

True. Its neither morally justified nor legally acceptable.

<font size="2">If she washarassedand made to do it forcibly the case would have been different but she just gave in to the offer. She wanted money and she did whatever came by. Why didnt she tell her friend at least? She was so normal all the time , so much that Sagarika could not understand anything. She even tried to justify herself.</font>

<font size="2">Common.. lets get real, if my maid who is also very poor and has a family to look after steals my gold watch on a pretext that she needed money, I wont spare her.</font>

<font size="2">If we let everyone take the shortcut on the pretext ofpoverty or whatsoever the case may be, the state shall go lawless.</font>