Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kamper
"Force majeure" is not a legal principle. It means the something is done because the person doing it has the strength to accomplish their objective by violent means. Claiming a defense by "force majeur" in court will probably be the same effect as confessing premeditation.
There are reasonable actions you can take to protect your family. When someone is in the water use the diver flag or anchor a brightly colorred cheap inflatable dingy out there. Put out a swim line. These things are well within your rights. Pre-emptive violence is not, and talking that way makes you sound silly.
Good luck!
|
I found this on the internet. Sounds like it's a recognized principle.
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/cat/netherlands1994.html
"34. The exclusion of articles 42 and 43 of the Criminal Code does not, however, exclude the possibility of raising the defence of force majeure. Force majeure may be defined in abstract terms as every force, coercion or compulsion which a person cannot reasonably be expected to resist. Force majeure exists where a person is forced to commit an offence by means of severe (mental) pressure and he could not be expected to have acted differently at the time of such action. "