What is the test for whether an accused had no safe avenue of escape?

Before going further, a legal refinement must be added, for it exposes the futility of making an inquiry (as I am about to embark on) as to whether an accused had no safe avenue of escape divorced from finding a threat existed, its nature and whether the accused reasonably believed it would be carried out: … The requirement of a close temporal connection between the threat and the harm threatened is linked with the requirement that the accused have no safe avenue of escape … … By reading in the requirements of safe avenue of escape and close temporal connection, the purely subjective standard becomes an evaluation based on a modified objective standard. These two elements, in conjunction with the belief that the threat will be carried out, must be analyzed as a whole: the accused cannot reasonably believe that the threat would be carried out if there was a safe avenue of escape and no close temporal connection between the threat and the harm threatened. (R v. Ryan, supra at para. 51)