A prisoner testified that he escaped from prison, not because he wanted freedom, but rather to escape physical abuse. If true, should this situation justify the escape? What ramifications of such a defense can you identify?

Answer 1

Presumably the accused acted involuntarily, that is, to avoid personal harm. Duress is the forced participation in a crime, and is a defense to the crime of escape, as in People v. Jones, 149 Cal App. 3d Supp. 41, 197 Cal. Rptr. 273 (Ca. 1983). Because prison officials are obliged to
maintain reasonably safe facilities, continued physical abuse by guards or other prisoners is a defense to escape accomplished under duress, as in U.S. v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394, 100 S.Ct. 624 (1980).
As a practical matter, the student may observe that any time any a prisoner attempts or completes an escape, this defense may be raised. A defense lawyer may subpoena guards, prison officials, other inmates, and so on to prove the existence of the abuse, causing more court congestion and public expense.