Provocation. The provocative act must cause the defendant to suddenly and temporarily lose their self control as shown in R v Duffy. Evidence to show that Eleanor lost her temper is the fact that in a state of agitation, she bought a container of flammabl

Authors Avatar

Provocation:  Exam Question 2002

Provocation is a special defence. This means it is only available to a defendant if they have been charged with Murder, it cannot be used for any other offence, and if it is successful the defendant will be convicted of manslaughter rather than murder.

The provocative act can be anything said (R v Newell) or done, and the acts can be directed at or not at the defendant (R v Davies). The relevant case here is R v Davies where the provocative act was not directed at the defendant because the defendant saw his wife (victim) with her “friend” outside the library, merely seeing this was enough provocation for the defendant to shoot his wife. Similarly, Eleanor was convinced that Fiona and Gordon were making a lot of noise in order to disturb her, even though Fiona and Gordon were unaware that Eleanor was angry with them. This was therefore an indirect act but provocative enough for Eleanor to carry out the unlawful act.

Join now!

The provocative act must cause the defendant to suddenly and temporarily lose their self control as shown in R v Duffy. Evidence to show that Eleanor lost her temper is the fact that in a state of agitation, she bought a container of flammable liquid.  

If an apparently small incident causes the defendant to kill then the jury may doubt whether there had been a loss of control because the provocative act was so trivial such behaviour may imply pre-mediation. However, the defendant can use evidence of cumulative provocation as shown Thornton No.2. There is evidence to show ...

This is a preview of the whole essay