Thedistinction between justification and excuses is important to thecriminal judicial system because it answers different questions thatrelate to culpability, responsibility, and liability. The two claimscan be distinguished in three ways. First, justification is auniversal claim because it can extend to any person who is aware ofdifferent circumstances that can be used to justify the ostensibleviolation of law (Net Industries, 2014). Excuses, on the other hand,are limited to an individual who has been fixed in the maelstrom ofproper and wrong.
Secondly,justification claims rest on a balancing of judgment and interestthat the conduct being justified supports the greater good or reducesthe evil. Excuses, on the other hand, do not necessarily call for thebalancing of interests. However, claims of excuse require theconsideration of whether the harm avoided and the harm done isinvoluntarily sufficient to be excused. It is assumed that theevaluation of the actor’s tendency to surrender to some externalpressure increases with the widening of the gap between the conflictsof interests (Net Industries, 2014).
Third,the two claims (justification and excuses) are based on differentnorms of criminal law. Justification is based on norms that aredirected to the general public and create exceptions to the exclusionof the criminal law. Claims of excuses, on the other hand, aredirected to the legal officials, juries, and judges, who are giventhe responsibility of assessing people who violate the law.
Examplesof justifications that can serve as defenses
Thedecision by the defendant to use force to prevent someone fromexploding a detonator can be justified because that force is intendedto prevent a dangerous action (Botterell, 2009). An offense can alsobe justified if it was intended to prevent imminent private or publicinjury. For example, the Appellate Division of Bronx County SupremeCourt overturned the conviction made by the Supreme Court on FreddyRodriguez for a vehicular manslaughter. The justification given bythe defendant to the appellate division was that Freddy jumped intothe car to prevent its rolling, but he was not successful. Thevehicle rolled downhill, killed one kid and injured two people(Galluzzo, 2010). Freddy’s action was justifiable because heintended to prevent more harm, although he was not successful.
Botterell,A. (2009). A primer on the distinction between justification andexcuse. PhilosophyCompass,4 (1), 172-196. 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2008.00200.x
Galluzzo,J. (2010). Justificationdefense cause appellate court to overturn manslaughter conviction.New York: Galluzzo & Johnson.
NetIndustries (2014). Justification and excuse: Similarities anddifferences. NetIndustries.Retrieved June 6, 2014, fromhttp://law.jrank.org/pages/1114/Excuse-Theory-Justification-excuse-similarities-differences.html