The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that provocation should have been found. The issue was whether or not, in the course of his summing-up, the trial judge should have left, and if so whether he had left, to the jury the appellant’s ‘unduly possessive and jealous nature’ as a relevant characteristic for their consideration in relation to the objective element of the appellant’s defence of provocation.
Held: ‘there are two elements to the ‘defence’ of provocation. For present purposes they may be identified as follows: (a) whether the defendant lost his self-control; (b) whether he should reasonably have controlled himself. They are sometimes called the ‘subjective element’ and the ‘objective element’. The first element sets up the defence. The second sets a limit.’ On the basis of its analysis of the judgments in Smith (Morgan), the characteristics identified should have been left to the jury.
Lord Justice Mantell, Mr Justice Jack, Mr Justice Hedley
[2003] EWCA Crim 815, [2003] Crim LR 724
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Jenkins and Another CACD 14-Feb-2002
The decision in Smith (Morgan) does not prevent use of the expression ‘the reasonable man’ in the judge’s summing-up, in Weller, when considering how a jury should be directed on provocation, the court plainly regarded the relevant question as being . .
Cited – Regina v Smith (Morgan James) HL 27-Jul-2000
The defendant had sought to rely upon the defence of provocation. He had suffered serious clinical depression.
Held: When directing a jury on the law of provocation, it was no longer appropriate to direct the jury to disregard any particular . .
Cited – Regina v Stingel 1990
(High Court of Australia) An infatuated man had stabbed his former girlfriend’s lover.
Held: The judge had been right to withdraw the issue of provocation from the jury. Jealousy and possessiveness should not found a defence of provocation. . .
Cited – Regina v Humphreys CACD 1995
Defence of provocation to murder. Abnormal immaturity and attention seeking by wrist slashing were mental characteristics which should have been left for the jury to decide upon. . .
Cited – Regina v Dryden 1995
The court considered the defence of provocation to a charge of murder.
Held: ‘eccentric and obsessional personality traits’ were mental characteristics which should have been left for the jury. . .
Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camplin HL 1978
The court considered the direction to be given as to the existence of provocation so as to reduce a charge of murder to one of manslaughter. The reasonable man in the definition should be one with the defendant’s mental condition. ‘The judge should . .
Practice recommendation – Regina v Lowe 21-Feb-2003
The jury had come back into court with a question showing that they were having difficulty in understanding the direction on provocation. A court preparing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation woiuld be wise to submit the form of . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Rowland CACD 12-Dec-2003
The appellant had been convicted of murder. He sought to have substituted a conviction for manslaughter following Smith, and in the light of evidence as to his mental characteristics.
Held: ‘in the context of the law of provocation, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.180075