Trotter v The Queen

The applicant, Trotter, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a conviction for murder entered in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The dispute concerned the applicant's contention that the trial judge had erred in failing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether there was sufficient evidence of provocation to warrant a direction to the jury on that defence. This required an assessment of the evidence presented at trial concerning the events leading up to the deceased's death and whether those events could reasonably be considered to have constituted a provocation sufficient to reduce the charge of murder to manslaughter.

McHugh J, in chambers, considered the evidence and the relevant legal principles governing the defence of provocation. His Honour noted that for a defence of provocation to be available, there must be evidence that the act of the accused was provoked by something done by the deceased, and that the provocation was such as to make an ordinary person in the position of the accused lose self-control. Applying these principles, McHugh J found that the evidence presented at trial did not, as a matter of law, establish a sufficient evidentiary basis for a jury to find provocation. Therefore, the trial judge was not obliged to direct the jury on this defence.

Special leave to appeal was refused.