Which statement correctly defines the Duress Defense?

Which statement correctly defines the Duress Defense?

• A. A claim of intoxication
• B. An alibi
• C. An affirmative defense claiming the defendant was forced to commit the wrongful act by threat of immediate bodily harm or loss of life
• D. An act of insanity

Answer: (C)

Duress is an affirmative defense where the defendant argues they were forced to commit a crime because someone threatened them with immediate bodily harm or loss of life, and they reasonably believed the threat would be carried out if they did not comply. For this defense to work, the threat must be imminent and serious, the belief in the threat must be reasonable, there must be no safe escape or alternative, and the defendant must not have caused the situation. This definition captures why the statement is the best answer: the focus is on coercion by another person under the pressure of an immediate threat to force the wrongful act. Other defenses describe different situations—for example, intoxication concerns mental state from substances, alibi asserts you were elsewhere, and insanity deals with a mental disorder—so they don’t define duress.