In the English case of Clinton, where the accused killed his wife after she had taunted him about his suicidal tendencies as well as her infidelity, the trial judge withdrew the defence of ‘loss of self-control’ from the jury on the basis that the wife’s remarks relating to her sexual infidelity had to be disregarded in accordance with the law, and therefore there was insufficient evidence to raise provocation. However, the appeal court held that events cannot be isolated from their context, so, notwithstanding the express exclusionary provisions, sexual infidelity was taken into account and Clinton was able to raise the defence. This case highlights a major flaw within the exclusionary provision, since cases involving provocation are rarely simple and often involve a complex combination of factors, an excluded factor may be combined with other non-excluded
In the English case of Clinton, where the accused killed his wife after she had taunted him about his suicidal tendencies as well as her infidelity, the trial judge withdrew the defence of ‘loss of self-control’ from the jury on the basis that the wife’s remarks relating to her sexual infidelity had to be disregarded in accordance with the law, and therefore there was insufficient evidence to raise provocation. However, the appeal court held that events cannot be isolated from their context, so, notwithstanding the express exclusionary provisions, sexual infidelity was taken into account and Clinton was able to raise the defence. This case highlights a major flaw within the exclusionary provision, since cases involving provocation are rarely simple and often involve a complex combination of factors, an excluded factor may be combined with other non-excluded