Homicide Part 2: Loss of Control

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

The Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s54 abolished the defence of loss of control and replaced it with the defence of provocation.

False

The loss of self-control in the context of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s54 is an objective test.

False

The qualifying trigger for the loss of control defence includes a fear of serious violence from the defendant against the victim.

False

According to the R v Jewell case, the defendant's planning and preparation before the killing supported a claim of loss of self-control.

False Signup and view all the answers

The loss of control defence is a complete defence to murder, resulting in an acquittal.

False Signup and view all the answers

The three-part test for the loss of control defence includes a requirement that the defendant acted in a premeditated manner.

False Signup and view all the answers

The defence of provocation was only available following a sudden and temporary loss of control.

True Signup and view all the answers

In R v Duffy, the court held that the defendant was not entitled to the defence of provocation.

False Signup and view all the answers

The new partial defence of 'loss of control' excludes considered revenge.

True Signup and view all the answers

The fear of serious violence, as stated in s54(2), is assessed objectively.

False Signup and view all the answers

Consciously inciting violence will undermine a loss of self-control defence.

True Signup and view all the answers

Things said or done must constitute extremely grave circumstances and cause the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.

True Signup and view all the answers

Sexual infidelity is always a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control.

False Signup and view all the answers

The objective test for the defence of loss of control asks whether another person with normal tolerance and self-restraint would have killed.

True Signup and view all the answers

A defendant's age and sex are irrelevant to the objective test for the defence of loss of control.

False Signup and view all the answers

The case of R v Rejmanski & Gassman established that insulting comments about a person's military service can be a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control.

True Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary purpose of the 'loss of control' defence?

To provide a partial defence to murder Signup and view all the answers

What is the main difference between the 'loss of control' defence and the former 'provocation' defence?

The 'loss of control' defence is a new partial defence Signup and view all the answers

What is the significance of the defendant's age and sex in the 'loss of control' defence?

They are irrelevant to the objective test Signup and view all the answers

What is the impact of planning and preparation on a 'loss of self-control' defence?

It undermines a claim of loss of self-control Signup and view all the answers

What is the relationship between the 'loss of control' defence and the concept of murder?

The 'loss of control' defence is a partial defence to murder Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary focus of the subjective part of the 'loss of control' defence?

The defendant's loss of self-control Signup and view all the answers

In the case of R v Donachie, why did the court hold that the defence of provocation succeeded?

Because of adultery, which was considered a provoking act at the time. Signup and view all the answers

What is the purpose of the new partial defence of 'loss of control'?

To solve the issues of delay and considered revenge in the old defence of provocation. Signup and view all the answers

In R v Ahluwalia, what was the outcome of the case?

The court held that the defendant's act was a slow burn reaction rather than a sudden loss of control. Signup and view all the answers

What is required for a fear of serious violence to be considered a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control?

The fear must be of violence from the victim. Signup and view all the answers

What is the effect of consciously inciting violence on the defence of loss of control?

It undermines the defence. Signup and view all the answers

What is the purpose of the requirement that things said or done must constitute extremely grave circumstances and cause the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged?

To exclude trivial or unjustifiable killings. Signup and view all the answers

In R v Dawes and others, what did the court hold?

The defendant was guilty of murder. Signup and view all the answers

What is the significance of the case of Clinton?

It allowed sexual infidelity to be considered as part of a wider context. Signup and view all the answers

What is the purpose of the objective test in the defence of loss of control?

To understand and partially excuse the defendant's conduct. Signup and view all the answers

What is the significance of the phrase 'all circumstances' in s54(3) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?

It excludes characteristics that bear on the defendant's general capacity for tolerance and self-restraint. Signup and view all the answers

Homicide Part 2: Loss of Control

Choose a study mode

Podcast

Questions and Answers

The Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s54 abolished the defence of loss of control and replaced it with the defence of provocation.

The loss of self-control in the context of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s54 is an objective test.

The qualifying trigger for the loss of control defence includes a fear of serious violence from the defendant against the victim.

According to the R v Jewell case, the defendant's planning and preparation before the killing supported a claim of loss of self-control.

The loss of control defence is a complete defence to murder, resulting in an acquittal.

The three-part test for the loss of control defence includes a requirement that the defendant acted in a premeditated manner.

The defence of provocation was only available following a sudden and temporary loss of control.

In R v Duffy, the court held that the defendant was not entitled to the defence of provocation.

The new partial defence of 'loss of control' excludes considered revenge.

The fear of serious violence, as stated in s54(2), is assessed objectively.

Consciously inciting violence will undermine a loss of self-control defence.

Things said or done must constitute extremely grave circumstances and cause the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.

Sexual infidelity is always a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control.

The objective test for the defence of loss of control asks whether another person with normal tolerance and self-restraint would have killed.

A defendant's age and sex are irrelevant to the objective test for the defence of loss of control.

The case of R v Rejmanski & Gassman established that insulting comments about a person's military service can be a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control.

What is the primary purpose of the 'loss of control' defence?

What is the main difference between the 'loss of control' defence and the former 'provocation' defence?

What is the significance of the defendant's age and sex in the 'loss of control' defence?

What is the impact of planning and preparation on a 'loss of self-control' defence?

What is the relationship between the 'loss of control' defence and the concept of murder?

What is the primary focus of the subjective part of the 'loss of control' defence?

In the case of R v Donachie, why did the court hold that the defence of provocation succeeded?

What is the purpose of the new partial defence of 'loss of control'?

In R v Ahluwalia, what was the outcome of the case?

What is required for a fear of serious violence to be considered a qualifying trigger for the defence of loss of control?

What is the effect of consciously inciting violence on the defence of loss of control?

What is the purpose of the requirement that things said or done must constitute extremely grave circumstances and cause the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged?

In R v Dawes and others, what did the court hold?

What is the significance of the case of Clinton?

What is the purpose of the objective test in the defence of loss of control?

What is the significance of the phrase 'all circumstances' in s54(3) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?

More Like This

Politics and Criminal Law Reform

Criminal Law: Homicide Overview

Criminal Homicide Flashcards

Homicide Law Quiz