R. v Clinton (Jon-Jacques); R. v Parker (Stephen); R. v Evans (Dewri)

Here, Rees and Ashworth say that decisions on R v. Clinton (Jon-Jacques), R v. Parker (Stephen), and R v. Evans (Dewri), are the first significant appellate judgments on the interpretation of the partial defense of loss of control introduced by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. This is not the occa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Criminal law review 2012-07 (7), p.539
Main Authors: Rees, Tom, Ashworth, Andrew
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Court decisions
Criminal law
Juries
Murders & murder attempts
Sexual behavior
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Here, Rees and Ashworth say that decisions on R v. Clinton (Jon-Jacques), R v. Parker (Stephen), and R v. Evans (Dewri), are the first significant appellate judgments on the interpretation of the partial defense of loss of control introduced by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. This is not the occasion for re-telling the history of the reforms that were enacted by ss54-56 of the Act, but it may not be a coincidence that two issues on which the Ministry of Justice decided on a different approach from that recommended by the Law Commission have so quickly called for authoritative interpretation. There could be two reasons for the difficulties--one, that the policies on these two issues were misconceived; the other, that the drafting of the relevant provisions was, as one learned commentator has put it, "disappointing". The two reasons may, of course, be linked.
ISSN:0011-135X