Abstract
The partial defence of provocation has been used by the common law courts for some 400 years. Recently, it has been attacked for promoting male heterosexual violence and for its presupposition that ordinary people fly into homicidal rages. The author examines the provocation doctrine and argues that while some changes can be made to the drafting and deployment of the defence, provocation serves a legitimate purpose in accounting for the complexity of being human. The author supports this position by reviewing the application of the doctrine, addressing common criticisms of the defence, and suggesting improvements to the application of provocation that will prevent it from being used to devalue and degrade murder victims.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
