Lecture 7
D satsses both the actus reus and mens rea of murderb but has a partal defence which reduces
l iabil ity from murder to mansl aughter.
Partal defences
Loss of Control (previousl y provocatonn
Diminished Responsibil ity
Suicide Pact
Provocaton
Two tests as to whether the person wil l get the defence. Subjectve test- had the def l ost control
because he had been provoked. Objectve test- woul d a reasonabl e person have acted the same.
Duffy [194f9] 1 Al l ER 932: PProvocaton is some act or series of acts done or words spoken by the
dead man to the accused which woul d cause in any reasonabl e person and actual l y does cause in the
accusedb a sudden and temporary l oss of sel f-control b rendering the accused so subject to passion as
to make him or her for the moment not master of his mind.” per Devl in J
Probl ems with provocaton
What types of conduct can qual ify as provocatonn Doughty (1986n 83 Cr App R 319- the incessant
crying of a baby was accepted as justscaton for l oss of control .
What characteristcs of D can be taken into account when deciding if her reacton shoul d qual ify for
the defencen Smith (Morgann [2001] AC 14f6; AG for Jersey v Hol l ey [2005] UKPC 23
Is the defence gender biased in its operatonn Women tend to be sl ow burners which is not
necessaril y revenge. Ahl uwal ia [1992] 4f Al l ER 889- batered wife syndrome kil l ed husband.
Is the defence designed as a partal justscaton (D acted wrongl yb but as others woul d haven or as a
partal excuse (D’s weakness makes her acton l ess bl ameworthynn lmohammedl
Law commissions reforms- l oss of control
Loss of control
Deff: D kil l s whil e out of control owing to fear of serious viol ence or a justsabl e sense of being
seriousl y wronged (Coroners and Justce Act 2009b s54fn
1. D’s acts and omission in doing or being part to the kil l ingb resul ted from D’s l oss of sel f
control . (s.54f (1n(an
The defence does not appl y if ‘in doing or being a party to the kil l ingb D acted in a considered desire
for revenge (s.54f(4fn.
It does not mater whether or not the l oss of control was sudden. (s.54f(2n Can be a sl ow burner
Ahl uwal ia
D must have actual l y l ost control . Jewel l [2014f] EWCA Crim 4f14f
2. the l oss of sel f-control had a qual ifying trigger
can be: a fear of serious viol ence from V against D or another (s.55(3nb
D satsses both the actus reus and mens rea of murderb but has a partal defence which reduces
l iabil ity from murder to mansl aughter.
Partal defences
Loss of Control (previousl y provocatonn
Diminished Responsibil ity
Suicide Pact
Provocaton
Two tests as to whether the person wil l get the defence. Subjectve test- had the def l ost control
because he had been provoked. Objectve test- woul d a reasonabl e person have acted the same.
Duffy [194f9] 1 Al l ER 932: PProvocaton is some act or series of acts done or words spoken by the
dead man to the accused which woul d cause in any reasonabl e person and actual l y does cause in the
accusedb a sudden and temporary l oss of sel f-control b rendering the accused so subject to passion as
to make him or her for the moment not master of his mind.” per Devl in J
Probl ems with provocaton
What types of conduct can qual ify as provocatonn Doughty (1986n 83 Cr App R 319- the incessant
crying of a baby was accepted as justscaton for l oss of control .
What characteristcs of D can be taken into account when deciding if her reacton shoul d qual ify for
the defencen Smith (Morgann [2001] AC 14f6; AG for Jersey v Hol l ey [2005] UKPC 23
Is the defence gender biased in its operatonn Women tend to be sl ow burners which is not
necessaril y revenge. Ahl uwal ia [1992] 4f Al l ER 889- batered wife syndrome kil l ed husband.
Is the defence designed as a partal justscaton (D acted wrongl yb but as others woul d haven or as a
partal excuse (D’s weakness makes her acton l ess bl ameworthynn lmohammedl
Law commissions reforms- l oss of control
Loss of control
Deff: D kil l s whil e out of control owing to fear of serious viol ence or a justsabl e sense of being
seriousl y wronged (Coroners and Justce Act 2009b s54fn
1. D’s acts and omission in doing or being part to the kil l ingb resul ted from D’s l oss of sel f
control . (s.54f (1n(an
The defence does not appl y if ‘in doing or being a party to the kil l ingb D acted in a considered desire
for revenge (s.54f(4fn.
It does not mater whether or not the l oss of control was sudden. (s.54f(2n Can be a sl ow burner
Ahl uwal ia
D must have actual l y l ost control . Jewel l [2014f] EWCA Crim 4f14f
2. the l oss of sel f-control had a qual ifying trigger
can be: a fear of serious viol ence from V against D or another (s.55(3nb
