Facts

The case concerns a man, [F.], who killed his wife after a dispute. The couple had marital problems for several years, and [F.] had already exercised violence against his wife. On the day of the murder, [F.] attempted to impose sexual relations on his wife, who refused them due to their separation and the deterioration of their marital bond. The cantonal authority rejected the qualification of passionate murder, considering that F.'s state of deep distress was not excusable.

The key facts are as follows

  • The couple married in 1986 and had two children.
  • Marital problems began two years after the marriage.
  • [F.] exercised violence against his wife on several occasions.
  • On the day of the murder, [F.] attempted to impose sexual relations on his wife, who refused.
  • The cantonal authority rejected the qualification of passionate murder.

Considerations

The SCC examined the question of whether F.'s state of deep distress could be considered excusable. The court considered that the state of deep distress must be made excusable by the circumstances, as is the case for violent emotion.

The court also examined the criteria for determining whether the perpetrator's state was excusable. It considered that the criteria will not necessarily be the same depending on whether one is…