Opinion ID: 3048821
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: 2d 1199, 1202 (7th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439

Text: U.S. 821, 99 S.Ct. 87, 58 L.Ed.2d 113; United States v. Semak, 536 F.2d 1142, 1145 (6th Cir. 1976); United States v. Onori, 535 F.2d 938, 943 (5th Cir. 1976). As the court said in the English case of Regina v. Gill, (1963) 1 W.L.R. 841, 846 (Crim. App.): The accused, either by the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses or by evidence called on his behalf, or by a combination of the two, must place before the court such material as makes duress a live issue fit and proper to be left to the jury. But, once he has succeeded in doing this, it is then for the Crown to destroy that defence in such a manner as to leave in the jury’s minds no reasonable doubt that the accused cannot be absolved on the grounds of the alleged compulsion. Quoted in United States v. Hearst, 563 F.2d 1331, 1336 n.2