During a re-trial for second-degree murder, the accused brothers sought to have the partial defence of provocation left to the jury.
The principal shooter, John, argued he was provoked by the victim's threats.
The court found an air of reality to John's claim, despite evidence of prior threats and preparation.
However, the court ruled that provocation is not available in law to an aider, Mato, as it only applies to the person who committed the murder.
Furthermore, there was no air of reality to provocation for Mato based on the evidence.