A written summary document provided to the jury supplementing oral directions on self-defence need not use the word 'exclude' where the oral directions clearly state the prosecution's burden to exclude the defence beyond reasonable doubt and the document is otherwise consistent with the law. A trial judge is not required to specifically direct the jury to consider the accused's intoxication as a subjective factor bearing on honest belief in the context of mistake of fact, particularly where intoxication is a two-edged sword. The defence of provocation should not be left to the jury where the accused's own account does not suggest loss of self-control.
The full text is available to signed-in members.