Manslaughter claim in case of Belfast woman whose conviction for murdering abusive partner was quashed
A west Belfast woman whose conviction for murdering her abusive partner was quashed should instead be found to have committed manslaughter, the Court of Appeal heard today.
Counsel for Julie Ann McIlwaine, 35, urged senior judges to impose the substitute verdict over the fatal stabbing of James Joseph Crossley.
Prosecutors argued, however, that a retrial is required on the original charge of carrying out the murder while the victim slept.
With judgment reserved, McIlwaine remains in prison until a final determination is reached.
Mr Crossley, 38, was knifed to death at her former home in the Dunmurry area in March 2022.
McIlwaine admitted killing her partner but denied murder, claiming to have suffered a temporary loss of control as a victim of domestic abuse.
The pair had been in a relationship marred by emotional manipulation and coercive control.
At the time of his death Mr Crossley was on bail for an alleged assault against McIlwaine and subject to a restraining order prohibiting any contact with her.
Despite a period of separation, they had re-established their relationship by the night of the killing.
Previous courts heard Mr Crossley took medication and went to sleep following arguments where he issued an ultimatum for McIlwaine to choose between him and her family.
During police interviews she stated it all got on top of her and how she considered taking her own life.
The mother-of-four described taking a knife from the kitchen, returning to the bedroom and moving their young child out of the way before repeatedly stabbing her sleeping partner.
The prosecution argued she made rational choices which demonstrated being in control of her actions.
In October 2024 a jury rejected McIlwaine’s case and returned a unanimous guilty verdict.
Last month, however, she won a legal bid to overturn her conviction for murder.
Defence lawyers successfully argued that jurors were misdirected and reached a verdict which went against the weight of expert evidence.
Central to the appeal was how the trial judge advised them on the legal test for the loss of control defence.
Instead of being asked to decide if someone of similar characteristics to McIlwaine “might” have reacted similarly, the question posed was “would” that person have acted in the same way.
The wording used was found to have wrongly imposed a higher threshold for establishing probability.
Further issues related to opinions from two consultant forensic psychiatrists on the psychological impact of prolonged abuse and the responses of victims in coercively controlling relationships.
Based on the identified misdirection, appeal judges ruled that the murder conviction is to be quashed.
McIlwaine, who had been serving a minimum 12-year jail term, appeared remotely at the Court of Appeal today for a further hearing on what should happen next.
Her barrister, Eilis McDermott KC, argued for an alternative outcome.
“The court has the power to substitute a verdict of manslaughter,” she submitted.
Citing the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence, counsel claimed that outcome would have been inevitable if the proper question had been asked about the loss of control issue.
Ms McDermott also described her client as a model prisoner throughout the two years now spent behind bars.
Based on the potential threat of double jeopardy, she added: “A retrial would expose her to being condemned by a different jury in the same facts.”
Philip Henry KC, prosecuting, confirmed that the loss of control defence was not being accepted.
He stressed that the defence was seeking an exceptional outcome.
“The interests of justice are better met by a retrial,” Mr Henry said.
Reserving judgment, Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan pledged to give a decision as soon as possible.
She acknowledged: “These are important matters in a significant case.” ends