quote:

ORIGINAL: Svale

In 1995 in an important case the Appeal court turned a murder conviction into manslaughter due to provocation.

Woman who stabbed violent partner freed
The Emma Humphreys case: 'Landmark judgment' strengthens defence of provocation for victims of domestic violence driven to kill


..the appeal court ruling which quashed her murder conviction and substituted a verdict of manslaughter on the grounds of provocation.

Lawyers said the judgment strengthened and clarified the defence of provocation on behalf of victims of domestic violence driven to kill. It spelt out for the first time that not only must trial judges detail any history of abuse, they must also analyse and explain its significance to the jury.

Further, it underscored an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that personality traits - such as "battered wives' syndrome" - and any effects on behaviour, should be taken into account when considering provocation.


Woman who stabbed violent partner freed - News - The Independent

Yesterday, another case hit the news:

A woman who had killed a man to protect her friend from attack has been aquittet of murder on the second trial:

She was convicted of murder, but a new legal team obtained fresh evidence from adolescent psychiatrists that was presented to the court of appeal, and this conviction was quashed in November 2014. She had by then served five years of a life sentence with a nine-year tariff.

The second article is mostly concerned why this woman should stand a second trial, but my question is:

Is it ok that a proven history of violence means a murder charge gets reduced to manslaughter?

Should the woman (if a woman) not have left instead?

Would it be more fair if the accused were totally acquitted on grounds of self defense?

In the first case the woman had slit her wrists to try to avoid a gang bang by her man and her friends, and she plunged the knife in his heart instead when she did not succeed. Is this murder - manslaughter - self defense??

In the second case the man was killed during a fight: "When the police arrived Hyde was very distressed, sobbing and saying, “He tried to kill me … I had to help Holly … he was going to kill her … I thought he would kill me …” Hyde was found to have injuries, some of which were consistent with previous self-harm, and some of which were consistent with a forceful struggle with Francis."


In both cases the women were initially convicted or murder, later on appeal turned to manslaughter.

What would be right??

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

In neither of these cases, does the full picture emerge with the amount of information provided. For example, we don't know if the abuse was prolonged, had there been previous convictions for abuse, had the police attended "domestic incidents" at the homes or whether there were any children involved, all of which would have significant bearing on the case.

Could you please supply some links that will give us access to more detailed accounts of these cases? Thanks

quote:


Not enough information on the first one.
On the second one if he was trying to murder someone else why was there even a trial.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Svale

quote:


Not enough information on the first one.
On the second one if he was trying to murder someone else why was there even a trial.

Sorry, see the links to the articles.

On the second one there was an attack on the spouse, but it was the friend who killed him. Maybe that does not count as self defense? Other defense??