Comments on: Partial defences to murder

By: Squander Two

Squander Two — Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:22:04 +0000

I think the women’s movement have had this one backwards for years. Yes, the disparity in treatment of men and women is wrong, and the but-she-nagged me defense should therefore be disallowed for men. The injustice is that men guilty of murder are being wrongly convicted of manslaughter instead. Kiranjit Aluwhalia was guilty of murder; the miscarriage of justice occurred when her conviction was eventually reduced to manslaughter.

By: gareth

gareth — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:36:21 +0000

For the sake of completeness you should ahve mentioned that Kiranjit Aluwhalia succeeded in her appeal eventually and a conviction for manslaughter was substituted.
It’s arguable that the biggest single problem in Kiranjit’s case was that the police failed to recognise that they were dealing with an unusual perpetrator who was as much in need of care, and careful handling, as any victim. That isn’t gender specific; the Darvell brothers and, arguably, Stefan Kiszko, were just some examples of victims of miscarriages of justice that could have been porevented by more awareness of the perpetrators needs in the police station.
Case law has moved on since Kiranjit Aluwhalia’s original conviction, and statute law might eventually follow; but some women, as well as some men, will still be victims of miscarriages of justice unless the behaviour of police officers in the police station is constantly reviewed and improved.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:02:03 +0000

I believe provocation as a defense is being removed completely anyway following the last review (changes due to come in next year?).