Facts
The case concerns the manslaughter of a son-in-law by his father-in-law, caused by a violent emotional outburst. The father-in-law, [M.], had visited his son-in-law, [R.], to discuss the mistreatment of his grandchild and the problems in his daughter's marriage. During the conversation, an altercation ensued, in which [R.] insulted and provoked [M.], leading to a violent emotional outburst that ultimately resulted in the manslaughter.
The lower court had established that [M.] did not carry the pistol with the intention of killing his son-in-law, but as a result of a genuine fit of rage, he lost control and, without weighing the pros and cons, fired the two fatal shots in a violent emotional outburst.
Considerations
The Federal Court had to examine whether the violent emotional outburst that led to the killing was justifiable. Justifiability is to be assessed according to general ethical considerations and requires that the violent emotional outburst is not only psychologically explicable but also justified by objective evaluation of the circumstances that triggered it.
The court found that the violent emotional outburst that triggered the killing was justifiable according to general ethical considerations. The background to the act is the serious conflict situation caused by R.'s life-threatening mistreatment of the child and physical violence against his wife.
…