Director of Public Prosecutions v. Camplin
House of Lords (1978) (pg. 269)
Author: P-Mac Daddy

Procedure: Jury found the ? Camplin guilty of murder, on appeal the court of appeal, criminal appeal substituted the murder for a conviction based of what a similar person of 15 years of age would have done.

Facts: A boy 15 years of age killed a middle-aged man with a cooking implement after the man had committed sodomy on him and laughed about it. At that point the boy lost control and killed the man.

Issue: Whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable do as he did by reference to a reasonable adult or by reference to a reasonable boy of 15?

Rule: Jury applies the reasonable man test it is up to the judge to inform them what that is exactly.

Analysis/Holding: It is legitimate to take age into account when formulating this reasonable man standard, since 15 year olds tend not to have completely well reasoned head upon their shoulders. The court should have allowed age in as a factor for the jury to consider what someone else of his age bracket would have done in a similar situation. Appeal is dismissed