| Popis: |
Self-defense is one of those areas of law in which one can immediately grasp the apparent contradiction between the solutions that follow from standard criminal law systems and those that derive from an examination of normative considerations. The gap between these two solutions is more inexcusable in this context than in any other. The chapter reviews these tensions in the context of the law applicable to putative self-defence (involving, for example, a non-culpable aggressor). It claims that the standard of “a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation” belongs to the concept of wrongdoing, and can be applied to solve problems of putative justification (putative self-defence, putative necessity, putative law enforcement and consent), and that it may be possible to admit a claim of justification if the “rational and well-grounded” nature of the belief is used as an objective criterion with which to judge the defensive reaction that took place. |
