Sudden Anger and Founding a Partial Defense to Murder

Sudden Anger and Founding a Partial Defense to Murder

Provocation acts as a partial defence to murder, but only to reduce

the conviction to manslaughter. The defence of provocation only

becomes relevant when the prosecution can show evidence that proves

that the defendant killed the victim with the necessary mens rea for

murder, that is ‘an intention to kill or an intention to cause

grievously bodily harm’.1 If the jury accepts that the defendant may

have been provoked to lose his self control and that a reasonable

person may have been provoked to lose his self control and do so as

the defendant, they must acquit of murder and convict of manslaughter.

This is known as the subjective and objective test. Subjective the

defendant must be shown to have actually lost his self-control. Loss

of self control is also a central aspect in the defence of

provocation, which links back to the early development of the Homicide

Law in the 14th Century when the difference was drawn between

premeditated killings and hot- blooded killings2 In the case R v

Betambeau (2001) the defendant stabbed and strangled his wife Stella

to death when he lost control after she ‘nagged’ him over the way he

cut a joint of beef. The judge at the Crown Court held

"I accept that your wife was a difficult woman to live with and

offered you a fair degree of provocation".3 The defendant aged 62, has

spent 20 months in prison since the incident, the judge ruled that he

was of no threat to the public and sentenced him to two years

probation.

A good example of ‘loss of self control’ and the use of ‘battered

women syndrome’ is the recent New Zealand case of Reg. v. Rongon...

... middle of paper ...

...ect

---------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Cunningham [1982] AC 566; Woollin [1998] 3 WLR 382

2 The jury and the English Law of Homicide, 1200- 1600

3 R v Betambeau, (2001)

4 Reg. v. Rongonui (Court of Appeal, 13 April 2000, unreported)

5 The Homicide Act 1957(3)

6 Lord Taylor CJ, R v Ahluwalia, (1993) CA

7 Lord Diplock :DPP v Camplin [1978] HL

8 J. Smith and B.Hogan, Criminal Law, 8TH Ed.

9 DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 ALL ER 168 at 174,[1978] AC 705 at 717 HL

10 Lord Diplock: the Homicide Act 1957 s 3

11 Week 4 Lecture notes, Esther Mc Guinness

12 Mc Gregor [1962] NZLR 1069

13 Lord Simon of Glaisdale, Criminal Law Journal

14 R v Miah, [2003] CA

15 R v (Morgan James) Smith (2000) HL

16 R v Ahluwalia, (1993) CA

17 [1995] 3 AER 659