Kirk Gordon v The Queen

Kirk Gordon v The Queen

The judge misdirected the jury by introducing an objective element into the partial defence under section 119(b), which is a subjective test. The appellant’s statement and interview should have been put before the jury. These errors rendered the murder conviction unsafe, and a verdict of manslaughter should be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] UKPC 18
Parties
Appellant: Kirk Gordon; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal of Belize to Privy Council
Outcome
appeal allowed; murder conviction quashed; manslaughter conviction substituted; sentence remitted to Court of Appeal; costs to appellant unless submissions to the contrary within 28 days
Legal Topics
Murder, Manslaughter, Self Defence, Loss of Self Control, Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Manslaughter Self Defence Loss of Self Control Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kirk Gordon

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal of Belize to Privy Council

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge withdrew the issue of intention to kill from the jury
  2. 2 Whether the judge misdirected the jury as to the partial defence of loss of self-control under section 119(b) of the Belize Criminal Code
  3. 3 Whether the judge misdirected the jury by stating that a verdict of manslaughter was not available on a finding of intention to kill

Ratio Decidendi

The judge misdirected the jury by introducing an objective element into the partial defence under section 119(b), which is a subjective test. The appellant’s statement and interview should have been put before the jury. These errors rendered the murder conviction unsafe, and a verdict of manslaughter should be substituted.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; murder conviction quashed; manslaughter conviction substituted; sentence remitted to Court of Appeal; costs to appellant unless submissions to the contrary within 28 days

Orders

  • Verdict of murder quashed
  • Verdict of manslaughter substituted