A Brief Note On Provocation And Its Effects On The Reform Of The Laws

1803 Words8 Pages
Provocation is an arising contemporary issue, the effectiveness of both legal and non-legal responses have significantly impacted on the reform of the laws relating to it. Provocation is a partial defence act that can be used by someone who has killed another person if they claimed to be induced with anger or provoked to do it. It can be used to lessen the severity of a charge as the person can say they were provoked into killing someone, pleading guilty of a charge of voluntary manslaughter rather than one of murder which has a longer sentence. Current issues that have risen from this defence are the misuse or rather unfair exploitation of it that has allowed some to get away with murder. Due to this, reform of the law is needed as…show more content…
To avoid execution the law was made to be more flexible introducing manslaughter which could be used as a lesser charge to murder. Legal responses 1. (s 23(a) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) A legal response concerning provocation can be shown through in the ‘Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 23(a)’ legislation. This legislation states that provocation can be used under the circumstance that the deceased induced their own death, this includes words or gestures. The person that killed the other had to have lost control and killed suddenly without intent. This was what the legislation stated prior to the amendment, it states the following: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 23 (a) (1) The accused had to be provoked into committing the crime; the jury will have to charge them with manslaughter rather than murder. (2) The act causing death under provocation where: (a) The act caused loss of self-control, including gestures or words from the deceased. (b) The acts of the deceased would have to provoke an ordinary person making them lose control so to the point of the intention to kill or cause harm. (3) There is no laws in which provocation is accepted if: (a) There is not a reasonable reason (b) The act was planned and not sudden (c) They had the intent to kill (4) The prosecution will have to prove that it was not provocation, beyond reasonable doubt. The provocation defence can be seen through the ‘r v Hill (1981)’ case. In this case Georgina
Open Document