A confession of infidelity accompanied by sexual taunts, even assessed by reference to the accused's cultural background, ethnicity, and personal characteristics, is insufficient to meet the objective test for provocation where no reasonable jury could conclude that such words could cause an ordinary person to form an intention to kill or do grievous bodily harm. A jury's verdict of murder based on conscious and voluntary action does not necessarily mean the jury rejected the accused's account of the conversation that preceded the killing, and a sentencing judge cannot treat the accused's evidence of that conversation as false merely because the jury convicted. Expert opinions on automatism that are substantially based on the accused's claimed amnesia may be rejected by the jury if the jury rejects the claim of amnesia.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.