In the case of R v. Fitzpatrick, what was the key issue regarding the defendant's defense?

In R v. Fitzpatrick, the pivotal issue surrounding the defendant's defense was whether ongoing involvement in criminal activities, even in the presence of threats from gang members, could be used to justify or excuse his actions. The court ultimately determined that simply being under threat did not absolve the defendant of responsibility for his criminal behavior. This indicates that while threats may create a significant burden and psychological pressure, they do not provide a legal defense if the individual chooses to continue engaging in criminal activities.

This case underscores the principle that individuals must make choices, and remaining affiliated with a criminal organization, despite the presence of threats, does not negate accountability for criminal acts committed as a result. The legal system requires individuals to seek ways to extricate themselves from harmful situations rather than continue participation in criminal conduct, regardless of the threats faced.

The other choices revolve around justifications or the perceived legal defenses against membership or actions taken while being involved with a gang. However, the court's ruling highlighted that no legal immunity could be granted merely on the basis of ongoing threats when the choice to continue criminal activities was made.