A VICTIM of domestic violence from Sittingbourne has had her life sentence for murder overturned after appeal judges agreed the original jury might not have considered all the abuse she suffered.

Kirsty Scamp, now 24, has always maintained she stabbed Jason Bull in self-defence, but was convicted of murder at Maidstone Crown Court in February 2007. She was sentenced to at least 12 years in prison.

However, after an emotional two-hour hearing on Wednesday, July 21, judges at the Court of Appeal in London overturned the murder conviction, reducing Kirsty's sentence to six years for manslaughter and declaring she was free to return home that day.

Joel Bennathan, defending, said the judge at Kirsty's original trial had not made the jury fully aware of what provocation was involved. He claimed this led jurors to return a verdict of murder rather than manslaughter.

Mr Bennathan said Kirsty had been aware of domestic violence since the age of five or six, when first her dad and then a subsequent partner had been abusive towards her mum, Patsy Barker.

As a result, Patsy, Kirsty and her two older brothers, Lee, now 28, and Dan, 26, had spent time in a women's refuge.

Mr Bennathan said Bull attacked Kirsty three times in the weeks before he died – once punching her in the head while she was driving, once smashing her head against a wall and another time trying to strangle her and then punching her so hard he perforated her eardrum.

After the second attack, Bull was sectioned under the Mental Health Act and after the third, the police were called. Bull was still on bail for that attack when he died.

Mr Bennathan said it should have been explained to the jury that all these facts could be seen as provocation – factors that led Kirsty to lose control and stab Bull – rather than just the events in the immediate minutes before the fatal stabbing.

Cairns Nelson, prosecuting, said the trial judge told the jury to consider everything they knew about the background of the case, adding: "It is not the judge's job to outline particular evidence in favour of one line of defence or prosecution."

Bull died on his 28th birthday, March 13, 2006, when the couple argued after returning home from celebratory drinks. At her original trial, the prosecution claimed Kirsty attacked her boyfriend in a jealous rage after catching him on the phone to another woman. But Kirsty maintained she acted in self-defence when he assaulted her.

Mr Bennathan continued: "She was attacked. He grabbed her by the hair, throttled her and threw her once or twice against the kitchen wall, which is where she grabbed the knife."

Kirsty claimed she didn't remember stabbing Bull and didn't mean to do it. When police officers arrived at the flat in Beach Street, Sheerness, they found her kneeling beside Bull's body, pressing a towel on the wound.

The court heard that Bull had a history of mental illness including bipolar disorder, low moods, depression, frustration and violent outbursts. He was addicted to alcohol, often took cocaine, had attempted suicide on several occasions, including taking an overdose and trying to throw himself from a bridge. He had told people he would be better off dead.

Previous girlfriends claimed Bull was violent towards them and one, a wheelchair user who suffers from multiple sclerosis, spoke at Kirsty's original trial where she said she once threatened Bull with a knife when he attacked her.

Summing up, Lord Justice Laws described the couple's relationship as "volatile" and said different accounts of the fatal night's events had been given by Kirsty and by the woman Bull was speaking to on the phone when the argument broke out.

The judge highlighted the fact that, despite Kirsty's difficult childhood, she secured a good job at a home for vulnerable adults with behavioural difficulties in Lynsted.

Lord Justice Laws said he and his peers – Mr Justice Christopher Clarke and Recorder of Manchester Andrew Gilbart – had found the case difficult, adding: "The judge thought it his duty to introduce provocation, but the jury had no guidance from counsel as to how to approach the issue of provocation."

He said it was not possible to know how limited the jury had believed the issue of provocation to be and concluded: "It is for that reason that we consider that this appeal has force and should be allowed."

Kirsty had already served more than half of the new sentence and was told she was to be released under licence and was free to go home. But a paperwork delay meant she had to spend another night in Holloway Prison.