Murder Defences – Loss of control
However, as a partial defence to the murder charge (Defendants name) may be able to raise the defence of loss of control. Loss of control is a special defence to murder and aims to reduce liability to voluntary manslaughter. The law is set out in S54 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. There are three requirements to loss of control. The first requirement is for the defendant to prove that ‘the killing must have resulted from a loss of self-control’. The loss need not be sudden, but control must have been lost. In Ahluwalia provocation was not available as a defence as the defendant waited for her husband to fall asleep before killing him. In Thornton the defendant killed her husband after a delay following an abusive incident; ‘Last straw’ could trigger final loss of self-control. In this instance, (Defendants name) had lost control when….. Secondly, there must be a qualifying trigger. These can include a).fear of serious violence from V against D or another identified person or B).thing or things said/done that constituted circumstances of an extremely grave character and they caused to have a justifiable sense of being wronged. In Ibrams and Gregory the CoA upheld the convictions as there was no evidence of provocation after the 7th and interval time and their planned action negated the loss of control. In Richens the provoked defendant may know what he is doing but unable to restrain himself. In the scenario things said or done by (Victims name) caused (Defendant’s name) to lose control and this does constitute circumstances of an extremely grave character. It is likely that the jury would decide that D’s sense of being wronged was justifiable. The final requirement of the defence is the objective test. Would a person of D’s sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self -restraint and in the circumstances of D might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D? Camplin held that the D’s age and sex had to be...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document