In Masciantonio v R [1995] HCA 67, McHugh J (dissenting) said:
The ordinary person standard would not become meaningless, however, if it incorporated the general characteristics of an ordinary person of the same age, race, culture and background as the accused on the self-control issue. Without incorporating those characteristics, the law of provocation is likely to result in discrimination and injustice. In a multicultural society such as Australia, the notion of an ordinary person is pure fiction. Worse still, its invocation in cases heard by juries of predominantly Anglo-Saxon-Celtic origin almost certainly results in the accused being judged by the standard of self-control attributed to a middle class Australian of Anglo-Saxon-Celtic heritage, that being the stereotype of the ordinary person with which the jurors are most familiar.
Provide an analysis of McHugh’s dissenting judgment in Masciantonio from the perspective of liberalism.
Sample Solution