What is the section that confirms that the judge decides if there is sufficient evidence of loss of control to put the issue to the jury?
s.54(6)
1 of 20
What does the cases of Barnsdale Quean/Jewell/Workman confirm?
They confirm that the trial judge decides if the defence has put sufficient evidence forward, to put it the jury.
2 of 20
What does s.54(6) confirm?
It confirms that the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to disprove the defence beyond reasonable doubt.
3 of 20
What is the section that defines that d must have killed due to a subjective loss of control?
s.54(1)(a)
4 of 20
What section amended the previous act of provocation, stating that this loss of control no longer needs to be sudden?
s.54(2)
5 of 20
What are the names of the 3 cases that confirm that the loss of control no longer needs to be sudden?
Duffy/Thornton/Ahluwalia
6 of 20
However, what does s.54(4) confirm?
It confirms that this loss of control must be due to a considered desire for revenge
7 of 20
What did the principle in Ibrams&Gregory uphold?
It upheld that loss of control cannot be due to a considered desire for revenge
8 of 20
What section are the qualifying triggers defined under?
s.54(1)(b)
9 of 20
What are the 2 cases that demonstrate the 'fear trigger' where d lost control due to fear of serious fear of violence from d?
Ward/Lodge
10 of 20
What section defines this?
s.55(3)
11 of 20
S.55(4) defines what?
It defines the 'anger trigger' where d lost control due to things said or done or both.
12 of 20
What case does this overrule?
Doughty
13 of 20
A self-induced trigger will not be accepted as a trigger, what section defines this?
s.55(6a-b)
14 of 20
What does the case of Dawes confirm?
It confirms that sexual infidelity alone will not be accepted as a trigger
15 of 20
What section defines this?
s.55(6)(c)
16 of 20
However, what does the case of Clinton confirm?
It confirms that sexual infidelity may form the 'anger trigger' if coupled with other things said or done.
17 of 20
What does s.54(1)(c) define?
It defines the objective test where a person of d's age & gender with a normaql degree of tolerance & self restraint, d's relevant circumstances, may have acted in a similar way
18 of 20
What case confirms this?
Camplin
19 of 20
What does the case of Ashmelash confirm?
It confirms that intoxication or conditions making d more likely to lose control will not be classed as relevant circumstances & will be disregarded for the objective test
20 of 20
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
What does the cases of Barnsdale Quean/Jewell/Workman confirm?
Back
They confirm that the trial judge decides if the defence has put sufficient evidence forward, to put it the jury.
Card 3
Front
What does s.54(6) confirm?
Back
Card 4
Front
What is the section that defines that d must have killed due to a subjective loss of control?
Back
Card 5
Front
What section amended the previous act of provocation, stating that this loss of control no longer needs to be sudden?
Comments
No comments have yet been made