R v Colless (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 933

R v Colless (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 933

There was no direct or inferential evidence of loss of self-control by the accused, and therefore, provocation was not to be left to the jury in summing-up.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Jack Vincent Colless
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Jury Trial – Ruling on Whether to Leave Provocation to Jury
Outcome
Provocation not left to the jury in summing-up.
Legal Topics
Murder, Manslaughter, Provocation, Self Defence
Criminal Law Murder Manslaughter Provocation Self Defence

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Jack Vincent Colless

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Jury Trial – Ruling on Whether to Leave Provocation to Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence to leave the partial defence of provocation (as under s 23 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) prior to its repeal) to the jury in relation to the charge of murder.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no direct or inferential evidence of loss of self-control by the accused, and therefore, provocation was not to be left to the jury in summing-up.

Court Disposition

Provocation not left to the jury in summing-up.