The Criminal and Justice Act 2009 abolished provocation and replace it with a new partial defence of Loss of Control. It is a partial defence to murder only. If successful it reduces the conviction from murder to voluntary manslaughter, thereby avoiding the mandatory life sentence.
Section 54 1 where defendant skills or is party to the killing of another, defendant is not to be convicted of murder,
Defendants act or omission in doing or being party to the killing resulted from the defendants loss of self control.
The loss of control had a qualifying trigger.
A person of d's sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint and in the circumstances of the defendant, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to the defendant.
R v Hatter
defendant have a relationship with victim for a year. Defendant older and well sia. Victim moved back home and went out with Dave defence. Defendant visits with knife and climbs through window. Defendant and victim argue. Defendant argues with dave. Victim is that and nobody hears the saying he's stopped me. The defendant stabbed himself to give impression of suicide pact. The defendant pleaded loss of control.
Trial judge refuse to leave Loss of Control to jury and Court of Appeal agreed. No evidence that the defendant lost his self control. The killing was not by a man out of control.
What does Section 54 (2) say?
- Loss of control does not need to be sudden.
- It was included because in older law of provocation, Duffy said it had to be sudden and temporary. This led to many abused or battered life/women being denied defence of Loss…