Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill — 23 Apr 2008 at 16:33

moved Amendments Nos. 88A to 88D:

Clause 75, page 54, line 1, leave out "(4) and (5)" insert "(3A) to (6)"
Clause 75, page 54, line 2, at end insert-
"(3A) If D claims to have held a particular belief as regards the existence of any circumstances-

(a) the reasonableness or otherwise of that belief is relevant to the question whether D genuinely held it; but(b) if it is determined that D did genuinely hold it, D is entitled to rely on it for the purposes of subsection (3), whether or not-(i) it was mistaken, or(ii) (if it was mistaken) the mistake was a reasonable one to have made.

(3B) But subsection (3A)(b) does not enable D to rely on any mistaken belief attributable to intoxication that was voluntarily induced."
Clause 75, page 54, line 4, leave out first "those circumstances" and insert "the circumstances as D believed them to be"
Clause 75, page 54, line 5, after "question" insert "mentioned in subsection (3)"

On Question, amendments agreed to.

moved Amendment No. 88E:

Clause 75, page 54, line 18, leave out subsections (8) and (9)

On Question, amendment agreed to.

<[i>Amendments Nos. 89 to 91 not moved.]

moved Amendment No. 91A:

Clause 75, leave out Clause 75 and insert the following new Clause-
"Self-defence etc.
(1) The Criminal Law Act 1967 (c. 58) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 3 (use of force in making arrest, etc.) after subsection (1), insert-
"(1A) Where a person uses force in the prevention of crime, or in the defence of persons or property, on another who is in any building or part of a building having entered as a trespasser or is attemping so to enter, that person shall not be guilty of any offence in respect of the use of that force unless-

(a) the degree of force used was grossly disportionate, and(b) this was, or ought to have been, apparent to the person using such force.

(1B) No prosecution shall be brought against a person subject to subsection (1A) without the leave of the Attorney General.
(1C) In this section "building or part of a building" shall have the same meaning as in section 9 of the Theft Act 1968 (c. 60) (burglary).""

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 91A) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 87; Not-Contents, 217.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Not-Content)Minority (Content)Turnout
Bishop1 03.8%
Con0 74 (+2 tell)37.1%
Crossbench37 723.5%
DUP0 266.7%
Lab120 (+2 tell) 055.0%
LDem54 067.5%
UUP1 0100.0%
Total:213 8341.4%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

Viscount Brookeborough Crossbenchaye
The Earl of ErrollCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Kilclooney Crossbenchaye
Lord Luce Crossbenchaye
Lord Molyneaux of KilleadCrossbenchaye
Lord Rees-Mogg Crossbenchaye
Lord Thomas of SwynnertonCrossbench (front bench)aye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive