DPP v Kehoe

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Court of Criminal Appeal
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1992
• Date: 01 January 1992

People (D.P.P.)

and

Kehoe

(C.C.A.)

- Defence - Provocation - Effect on accused - Question of fact - Evidence of psychiatrist - Whether trespassing on function of jury - Judge's charge to jury.

The accused's defence to a charge of murdering P.H. was one of provocation. The facts leading up to the killing were as follows: the accused had been friendly with S.M. with whom he had a child. S.M. then had a relationship with P.H. who up to then had been the best friend of the accused. On the evening of 1 March the accused and S.M. met and had drinks together after which they went back to S.M.'s apartment. When there the accused decided to look in on his son. On entering his son's bedroom he saw P.H. The accused gave evidence that he was shocked and upset by seeing him. The accused went to the kitchen where he got a knife and ran back and stabbed P.H. In support of the defence of provocation a psychiatrist gave evidence relating to the accused's emotional state at the time of the killing. His evidence was to the effect that he had a great deal of experience with people who had been through emotional upset and therefore he was in a position to give a clinical pronouncement on the reality of the accused's defence. Held by the Court of Criminal Appeal (O'Flaherty, Murphy, Blayney JJ.) in refusing the accused leave to appeal his conviction for murder, that, 1, whereas it is accepted law that when a defence of provocation is put forward the onus is on the prosecution to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was not provoked to such an extent that having regard to his temperament, character and circumstances he lost control of himself at the time of the wrongful act, it is clear that a psychiatrist...