R v Filippou [2011] NSWSC 1379

R v Filippou [2011] NSWSC 1379

The defence of provocation failed because the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was no reasonable possibility that the accused shot the Willis brothers as a result of a loss of self-control induced by their conduct. The accused's actions during and after the shooting, including placing the revolver in Sam Willis's hand, leaving the scene, and repeatedly justifying the killings afterwards, were inconsistent with a temporary loss of self-control. In any event, even assuming the deceased produced the firearm, an ordinary person in the accused's position could not have so far lost self-control as to form an intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm by shooting both brothers...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial for Murder / Judge Alone Trial Verdict After Accused Pleaded Not Guilty of Murder But Guilty of Manslaughter, With the Crown Not Accepting the Plea
Outcome
Guilty of murder in relation to both charges.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'manslaughter' 'provocation' 'loss of Self Control' 'ordinary Person Test' 'firearm' 'judge Alone Trial']
['criminal Law'] ['murder' 'manslaughter' 'provocation' 'loss of Self Control' 'ordinary Person Test' 'firearm' 'judge Alone Trial']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial for Murder / Judge Alone Trial Verdict After Accused Pleaded Not Guilty of Murder But Guilty of Manslaughter, With the Crown Not Accepting the Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the killings of Samuel Willis and Luke Willis were acts done under provocation within s 23 of the Crimes Act (NSW) 1900.' 'Whether the accused lost self-control as a result of conduct of the deceased.' 'Whether one of the deceased or the accused first produced the firearm.' 'Whether the conduct of the deceased could have induced an ordinary person in the position of the accused to lose self-control so as to form an intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defence of provocation failed because the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was no reasonable possibility that the accused shot the Willis brothers as a result of a loss of self-control induced by their conduct. The accused's actions during and after the shooting, including placing the revolver in Sam Willis's hand, leaving the scene, and repeatedly justifying the killings afterwards, were inconsistent with a temporary loss of self-control. In any event, even assuming the deceased produced the firearm, an ordinary person in the accused's position could not have so far lost self-control as to form an intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm by shooting both brothers...

Court Disposition

Guilty of murder in relation to both charges.

Orders

  • ['The accused is found guilty of murder in relation to the charge concerning Samuel Willis.' 'The accused is found guilty of murder in relation to the charge concerning Luke Willis.']