R v Cocker [1989]

R v Cocker [1989]

1. Facts:

• Scenario: D's wife suffered from an incurable medical condition and repeatedly begged D to kill her.

• Action: D asphyxiated his wife with a pillow.

2. Outcome:

• Verdict: D was convicted of murder.

• Reasoning: The court held that the loss of self-control (LOSC) defence was not applicable because LOSC is about an angry reaction, and D acted in a calm and deliberate manner.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Legal Principle:

◦ Loss of Self-Control (LOSC): This case highlights that the LOSC defence is intended for situations involving an impulsive and angry reaction, not calm and deliberate actions.

◦ Calm Deliberation: The court emphasised that LOSC requires evidence of an emotional and uncontrolled reaction to a provocative situation, which was not present in this case.