Abstract
I agree with Professor Fontaine that provocation/passion is best interpreted as a partial excuse, but the ground for my conclusion is normative and not analytic. Indeed, I fear that he has not made the analytic case in large part because he begs a question about failed justifications that has only a normative and not an analytic answer. This Essay first briefly provides my own understanding of provocation/ passion. In the course of doing so, I address Professor Fontaine's argument that provocation/passion should also be applied to people with provocation interpretational bias. I then turn to why Fontaine's case for partial excuse is not analytically airtight.
Recommended Citation
Stephen J. Morse,
The Irreducibly Normative Nature of Provocation/Passion,
43
U. Mich. J. L. Reform
193
(2009).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol43/iss1/9