Provocation?

A while back I wrote about the sexist nature of our legal definition of provocation. You can be convicted of manslaughter rather than murder if you were provoked, but it was based on an assumption that you'd killed someone the same size as you or smaller, because if you had a weapon that was premedication. There was a high-profile case about ten years ago when a woman was found guilty of murder for killing her abusive husband.

Anyway Christine King who put 50 sleeping pills in her partners food was convicted of manslaughter, and sentanced to 4 and a half years. This is what the judge said

"I accept he abused you physically, sexually and verbally," Justice Young said.

"That he took the mileage of the family car to see how far you travelled illustrates the point and I accept it occurred regularly."

Justice Young described the degree of provocation experienced by King over eight years as "at the top end of the medium range" and on the night of Roycroft's death it was "at the low end".

I'd hate to see what the top end provocation was if being abused physically, sexually, and verbally is the medium range. Although it is just possible that the judge is a sexist asshole who doesn't get it.