Image from Google Jackets

Is the partial defence an endangered defence? : recent proposals to abolish provocation Tolmie, Julia

By: Material type: ArticleArticlePublication details: Auckland Legal Research Foundation 2005Description: 28 p. ; 24 cmISSN:
  • 1173-5864
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • TRVF 000095
 In: New Zealand Law Review (1) 2005 : 25-52Summary: This article investigates the ramifications of the abolition of partial defence under the Sentencing Act 2002. The author contends that the partial defence argument is imperative for victims of domestic violence who kill their abusive partners. Without this defence argument, 'battered defendants' who kill their abusers will be facing murder as opposed to manslaughter charges. The article discusses the complex nature of domestic violence, and how the courts must consider the social, economic and cultural context of murder in this instance. The defence of provocation may be used by defendants to reduce culpability in some homicide cases, and the author argues that this applies in the case of battered women who kill their partners in self defence. However, the defence of provocation has differing interpretations and is often used to normalise male violence towards their female partners. The author suggests the definition of defence of provocation must be clarified in legislation to expunge any misdirection of legal argument.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Status Barcode
Journal article Journal article Vine library TRVF 000095 Available A00760609B

Offprint from New Zealand Law Review copied and supplied to HCR by the author.

This article investigates the ramifications of the abolition of partial defence under the Sentencing Act 2002. The author contends that the partial defence argument is imperative for victims of domestic violence who kill their abusive partners. Without this defence argument, 'battered defendants' who kill their abusers will be facing murder as opposed to manslaughter charges. The article discusses the complex nature of domestic violence, and how the courts must consider the social, economic and cultural context of murder in this instance. The defence of provocation may be used by defendants to reduce culpability in some homicide cases, and the author argues that this applies in the case of battered women who kill their partners in self defence. However, the defence of provocation has differing interpretations and is often used to normalise male violence towards their female partners. The author suggests the definition of defence of provocation must be clarified in legislation to expunge any misdirection of legal argument.

New Zealand Law Review (1) 2005 : 25-52