[2011] EWCA Crim 3292

The Law Commission had been right to observe that the readiness of the courts to accept the possibility of a "slow burn" reaction to provocation gave rise to a difficult question in that it left no clear way of differentiating between a provoked killing and a revenge killing. The judge in the instant case had been right not to leave the defence of provocation to the jury, as the evidence indicated that the defendant had been in full self-control after the provoking conduct relied on.

CA (Crim Div) (Toulson LJ, Davis J, Judge Bevan QC)

29/07/2011