文档介绍：(A) Sangero Prelims 4/7/06 13:39 Page i
SELF-DEFENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW
This bines a careful philosophical discussion of the rationale justifying
self-defence together with detailed discussions of the range of statutory self-
defence requirements, as well as discussions of numerous other relevant issues (ie,
putative self-defence, excessive self-defence, earlier guilt, battered women). The
book argues that before formulating definitions for each aspect of self-defence
(necessity, proportionality, retreat, immediacy, mental element, etc.) it is impera-
tive to determine the proper rationale for self-defence and, only then, to derive the
appropriate solutions. The first part of the book therefore contains an in-depth
discussion of the rationale for self-defence: why society does not just excuse the
actor from criminal liability, but rather justifies his act. The author critically analy-
ses theories that have been proposed up to the present (including the culpability
of the aggressor; the autonomy of the attacked person; protection of the social-
legal order; balancing interests and choice of the lesser evil; etc.), points out the
weaknesses of each theory and then proposes a new theory that explains the ratio-
nale behind the justification of self-defence. The new rationale proposed is that for
the full justification of self-defence, a balance of interests must be struck that takes
into account the expected physical injury to the attacked person (in the absence of
defensive action) vis-a-vis the expected physical injury to the aggressor (as a result
of defensive action), as well as all of the relevant abstract factors, which are three-
fold: the autonomy of the attacked person, the culpability of the aggressor and the
social-legal order. The author demonstrates how ignoring one or more of these
factors leads to erroneous results. In the chapters following the book shows that
the proposed rationale can be applied to develop conv