---

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I wish I had not allowed my hon. Friend to intervene. That is what I was saying. The point is exactly as he makes it. The first test is whether the defendant believed he was under attack. The answer is yes or no. The second test as to the gravity of the attack, and therefore the response, must be tested objectively in terms of reasonableness. That is still the situation under new clause 8, but under the Government's proposals in new clause 6, let us consider subsections (5) and (8). Subsection (8) is crucial. It states:"““For the purposes of references in this section to what D believed, it is immaterial whether—""(a) any belief if D's was mistaken, or""(b) (if it was mistaken) the mistake was reasonable.””" In other words, where a person meets an intruder in his house in the middle of the night and may be entirely mistaken about what the intruder is about to do to him, provided that he reacts in an appropriate way, even if it is not reasonable in the cold light of day, he is protected by the law. Under the Conservative amendment, he would not be protected by the law. That is the distinction that I am trying to make.