Battered Women's Syndrome: A valid defence in law?

Should the effects of prolonged abuse be considered a defense for killing another human being?

Total Votes:

[ 0 ]

This poll closed on December 20, 2004.
No longer accepting new votes.

[kitsune_rei05]

I haven't seen this topic around before, so I, being curious, felt I should start one and see what others think. Please vote and post reasons why.

Essentially, should prolonged abuse be considered a defence in law for murder? A case of 'battered woman's syndrome' as many call it would be when a woman, who has been abused by her partner for several years, fears for her life and kills her abusive partner.

On one side:

-In the past, the legal system has failed women in violent domestic situations. The vast majorty of women do not report the abuse, but even when abuse is reported, police forces are often reluctant to act. Abusers are often warned not to do it again and let off with no further repercussions. And even when charges are laid, they are often dropped by the woman due to fear or 'learned helplessness'

-In a severely abusive situation, with repet ed violence and extensive use of weapons, it is only time before the victim fears for his or her life and feels that killing their partner is self-defence.

On the other:

- Abuse does not give the victim an excuse for murder.

-If abuse is serious enough to use as a defence, it should be treated seriously when it comes up. To this end, those against battered women's syndrome as a valid defence propose educating people on the issue, having trained personnel to deal with this problem, and increasing the powers of the police.

In Canada, the Supreme Court first recognized battered women's syndrome as a defense in 1990 in the case of Angelique Lyn Lavallee.

Reference and Bibliography: my law textbook.

Nelson: All About Law:Exploring the Canadian Legal System, Fourth Edition

(has no idea how to properly cite a source)

What is your opinion on this issue?

[stalebsicuit]

maybe


if it could be reasoned that it was self-defense and they feared for their lives


but if a womans husband sgets drunk and hits her a few timeas, then naw thats not justififed

that s**t is subjective

[kitsune_rei05]

*cough cough*

*points*

kitsune_rei05

Essentially, should prolonged abuse be considered a defence. . .

[Vash jr.]

it is a mental illness like post tramatic war syndrome. it can cause temporary insanity and that can drive to the murder.
by including it as a valid reason it just cuts out having to say what i just said

[stalebsicuit]

kitsune_rei05

*cough cough*

*points*

kitsune_rei05

Essentially, should prolonged abuse be considered a defence. . .

cough uhh no s**t, unless the person had reasont o fear for their lives, why couldnt she just leave cough?


like i said it depends on the case


cough

[kiironobara]

It's post-traumatic shock syndrome, and should be considered.

[kitsune_rei05]

Women who leave an abusive situation are often in more danger than before- has anyone every tried to visit an abused women's centre? If you are male, you need approximate six pieces of ID just to enter (unless you work there), and they are behind bolted doors, locks, and bars, just to protect them from their abusive partners.

An example of this can be found in the case R v Sansregret in Canada- Sansregret and his girlfriend had been living together for a year, and their relationship was violent and abusive. The girlfriend eventually kicked him out, and he came back in the night and threatened her. To keep him from hurting her, the girlfriend held out hope of reconciliation and they had sex. She later filed a report with police, but it was not acted upon. Later, Sansregret again broke into her house and threatened her with a butcher knife for over an hour, making move to hit her and narrowly missing her twice. After an hour, the girl again held out hope of reconciliation, and they again had sex, and she again filed a report. Sansregret was charged with sexual assault. Although he was acquitted at the Supreme Court of the province, and at the Court of Appeal for the province, the Supreme Court of Canada convicted him of sexual assault on the basis of wilful blindness.

(Refer- Supreme Court Reports, or same textbook as before)

So when a woman leaves an abusive stuation, she is in more danger than before.

Also, for the case of temporary insanity- In Canadian law, temporary insanity is NOT a defence.

. . . I sound like a law student.

Wait, I am a law student. --''

[AbbeyGale]

A lot of things would have to be defined. Like what is prolonged abuse? Twice a week for three years? Three times a month for one year?

Would it only be available to women? And would it only be available to those who have been physically abused? After all, an emotionally and verbally abusive spouse could do just as much psychological damage as a physically abusive husband.

[speez]

Well, since legal insanity (in the US at least) means that you cannot discern between right and wrong, I don't think that insanity would work as a defence... I do think that Battered woman Syndrone could and should be used by a good laywer as part of a self-defence defense... which in the US would work on a state-by-state basis. In Florida, I'd be surprized if this didn't work (especially in the case cited: if R had killed her boyfriend when he broken in, but before sex, then there would have been a good argument for self-defence), but in New York I think this would be something to get the charge lowered and time in jail lessened.

[Spider Jerusalem PHD]

I think it should be contingent on the findings of a court approved psychologist. If said psychologist determines that the defendant was acting with diminished capacity as a result of prolonged abuse so be it. So generally speaking I would say that prolonged abuse is not a defence, but diminished mental capacity is and prolonged abuse could be a major contributing factor to said diminished capacity. "He beat me so I killed him" should not be a legal defence. Imagine what a legal precedent like that would do. I'm not so naive as to claim that it would start a rash of murders like the end of Chicago, but it would certainly create a very nasty situation in which battered women could conceivably murder their significant other knowing that they stand an excellent chance of aquittal before the crime is comitted.

[Prettz3003]

That's garbage.

"Ohh I was abused by my husband so that gives me the right to kill him." What the hell? Suck it up, and get over it. Just like the stupid EMO kids, get over your supposed "pain" and get on with life. If it's to be considered for women, I want it for men who are abused from their wives. Because if a man was abused by his wife, he damn well couldn't plead this.

(Sarcasm)Get over the pain and get on with life so you can IRON MY SHIRT, b***h. (/Sarcasm)

[Frustrated]

Once a wife beater always a wife beater. Statistics show that if she doesn't get out of the abusive relationship he'll eventually kill her. Spouse abuse is also the largest indicator of child abuse. Wife beaters should be put to death either by the law or by the victim. We as a society don't protect women at all. OJ walked free and so did Koby even after he admitted he "Could see how she might see it that way."

Wife beater and those that abuse women are no good to no one and should die.

Die!

[Prettz3003]

Frustrated

Once a wife beater always a wife beater. Statistics show that if she doesn't get out of the abusive relationship he'll eventually kill her. Spouse abuse is also the largest indicator of child abuse. Wife beaters should be put to death either by the law or by the victim. We as a society don't protect women at all. OJ walked free and so did Koby even after he admitted he "Could see how she might see it that way."

Wife beater and those that abuse women are no good to no one and should die.

Die!

You feminazi. WHAT statistics show that he will kill her if she doesn't get out? And why doesn't she get out if he's beating the crap out of her? Some people LIKE that kind of stuff, masochists and stuff. I would tend to say that bruises on the child is the largest indicator of child abuse.

And what about the women who beat their husbands? Huh? What happenes to them?

Feminazi's and women who beat their husbands should be raped, multiple times, for as long as they live.

Oh, and OJ didn't do it. Neither did Kobe. Or R.Kelly.

[kitsune_rei05]

Quote:

A lot of things would have to be defined. Like what is prolonged abuse? Twice a week for three years? Three times a month for one year?

Would it only be available to women? And would it only be available to those who have been physically abused? After all, an emotionally and verbally abusive spouse could do just as much psychological damage as a physically abusive husband.

Why don't we define prolonged abuse as "Twice a week for three years?"

Would it be only available to physically abused women? I would like to say no, but in the public mind, you cannot discriminate against the majority. As much as I would like to say no, the jury would probably not accept this defense from anyone else. It's sad, isn't it?

Quote:

In Florida, I'd be surprized if this didn't work (especially in the case cited: if R had killed her boyfriend when he broken in, but before sex, then there would have been a good argument for self-defence), but in New York I think this would be something to get the charge lowered and time in jail lessened.

Just a small note- In Canada, criminal charges are laid by the givernment, and the R stands for Rex or Regina, King or Queen.

So you're saying that it should be a partial defence? I probably should have added that to the poll.

Quote:

Imagine what a legal precedent like that would do.

R v Angelique Lyn Lavallee, Quebec, 1990-

The Supreme Court of Canada first recognized BWS as a defense, and Lavallee was acquitted. In 1995, a dozen similar cases were reviewed.

Quote:

"Ohh I was abused by my husband so that gives me the right to kill him." What the hell? Suck it up, and get over it. Just like the stupid EMO kids, get over your supposed "pain" and get on with life. If it's to be considered for women, I want it for men who are abused from their wives. Because if a man was abused by his wife, he damn well couldn't plead this.

The actual mentality is "I love him, but he's going to kill me. . . I have to kill him, I have no choice."

Have you actually been in an abusive situation? I haven't. But I've tried to imagine what it would be like. And it was not pretty. I saw myself on my knees, begging for forgiveness, asking wat I did wrong, asking if it was my fault. I would fully believe it was my fault. And if or when he apologized later, I would believe him, when he said that I deserved it, or when he said he would never do it again. I hope I never find myself in that situation.

However, you are right- A man could not use this defence. Damn that "You cannot discriminate against the majority" menality. :p

Quote:

Once a wife beater always a wife beater. Statistics show that if she doesn't get out of the abusive relationship he'll eventually kill her. Spouse abuse is also the largest indicator of child abuse. Wife beaters should be put to death either by the law or by the victim. We as a society don't protect women at all. OJ walked free and so did Koby even after he admitted he "Could see how she might see it that way."

I don't trust that stat for two reasons:

a) No source
b) Is it true that men abuse women sometimes because they need to feel powerful or to protect themselves from their own insecurities? If so, it then makes little sense for him to kill her, because then he has no scapegoat to throw it all on. However, I could see it turn into murder if he started to believe that she was the reason for his problems.

Quote:

And why doesn't she get out if he's beating the crap out of her? Some people LIKE that kind of stuff, masochists and stuff. I would tend to say that bruises on the child is the largest indicator of child abuse.

I thought I had discussed the why before. She is scared, loves him, and may believe it to be her fault. I admire a woman who can leave a relationship like that, because I would never have the strength to do that. And women who leave are often at more danger than before- Refer to R v Sansregret, 1985.

And we are not discussing a masochistic situation. We're discussing battery and abuse leading to murder. A masochistic situation would be similar to consent to sex, I would think.

[Lady Ezri]

I think it should be a valid defence for women to let women off, and if not let them comepletly off at least a lesser sentence. These woman who go though this are put though so much physocological abuse as well as physical, sexual abuse they snap under the stress. True it is somewhat like temporay insanity (which is not recognized here in Canada) but afterwards often they suddenlt feel regret and still stuff from their partener's abuse long after they are gone.

Another thing is that most often people will sympathize with victims of abuse. When they get sentence there is always the one or two people complaining that they have been under so much stress already that pretty any punishment is too harsh.

What I don't get is why this is only limited to woman. Men can get abused by their wives and probably do snap yet there is no defence for them to fall back on. Society sympathizes with woman, a minority, I suppose. Personally I think that there should be some "Battered Persons" defence for both genders to use. But then that would also bring in the debate about temporay insanity.