Domestic violence is no laughing matter, many women, children, and even men are affected by its emotionally and physically damaging results, and these results can span a victim’s lifetime. Without downgrading the very real problem of domestic violence towards children and adult males, for the purpose of this paper we will be focusing on intimate violence towards women. More specifically we will discuss spousal homicide involving women who kill their male abuser in non-violent situations. Many legal professionals contend that such an act does not qualify for a plea of self-defense because the woman was not facing “immediate” danger at the time of the murder. However, battered women who engage in non-confrontational killings of their abusers should be able to successfully assert the claim of self-defense using battered women’s syndrome to support this claim because their history of abuse and knowledge of future abuse meets the qualifications of a self-defense claim.
The claim of self-defense is a complicated one and requires specific criteria to assert an effective plea. According to Henry Campbell Black, “Essential elements of self-defense are that the defendant does not provoke difficulty and that there must be impending peril without convenient or reasonable mode of escape. The law of ‘self-defense’ justifies an act done in the reasonable belief of immediate danger…” (1220). There are many interpretations as to what the rightful claim of self-defense is, and because of the ambiguity of the definition and necessary elements, the debate concerning the battered women’s rights to a self-defense claim rages on.
Another key element in a self-defense claim involving an abused woman is battered women’s syndrome. Battered women’s syndrome, also known as, battered women’s experience, can be described, as “a pattern of psychological symptoms that develop after someone has lived in a battering relationship. This is the gradual process of conditioning in which the victim feels both helpless and hopeless…” (Wallace, 196) and can lead to an eventual mental break down. Battered Women’s Syndrome is extremely damaging and has been compared to the internationally recognized psychological condition called Stockholm syndrome because the feelings of seclusion and loss of power are typically very similar between the two (Wallace, 196). These syndromes are important when asserting a claim of self-defense in non-confrontational killings because they aid in asserting a successful defense by showing the feelings an abuse victim was dealing with prior to killing their abuser.
In addition, the clause of “reasonable belief of immediate danger” is imperative to a battered woman’s self defense claim, and where most women’s advocates, dealing with self-defense pleas for battered women who claim battered women’s syndrome, place their focus. Critics of a the self-defense claim from these battered women suggest that a woman has the choice to leave or call the police during non-confrontational times in the abusive relationship, rather than killing the abuser. However, as stated earlier, women suffering from battered women’s syndrome often feel trapped and powerless to end the abuse. Likewise, Kit Kinports asserts that “a woman sometimes can only realistically protect herself when the batterer is sleeping and further, that leaving an abusive partner may subject her to even greater harm” (qtd. in Reutter). Kinports continues by noting that a significant portion of the women who do choose to leave abusive relationships are harassed, stalked, assaulted further, or even killed by their abuser (qtd. in Reutter).
The danger that battered women face both during and in between violent confrontations with their abusers is where the self-defense clause above is applied. “Reasonable belief of immediate danger” if generally experienced by a woman plagued with battered women’s syndrome. Often, when a woman kills her abuser while being non-violent, they later report that they felt scared that he would attack again and feared that the next time he might kill her (Wallace, 206-208). These feelings, though difficult to prove, have been successfully used in court. Similarly, Kinports notes, “that evidence of a history of beatings or chokings by a partner can provide an objective standard for evaluating a defendant’s state of mind and her claim that she believed she was under a dire threat” (qtd. in Reutter). Common misconceptions about battered women and battered women syndrome hinder a successful self-defense claim in the courtroom. Questions such as “if she doesn’t like it why doesn’t she just leave?” only serve to further injure and isolate an already suffering victim. Time and time again it has been shown that when dealing with women who live with abuse, leaving rarely ends the problem. The sad fact is, that the issue of domestic violence is still very much taboo to many people. It is important to understand that battered women’s syndrome is a very real and very harmful thing. In situations where an abused woman is suffering from this syndrome, the claim of self-defense is for killing an abuser during non-violent situations is justified under the law. An examination of the legal rules and standards compared to an abuse victim’s case, including past abuse and the anticipation of future abuse, will show that the claim is both reasonable and acceptable.
Works Cited
Black, Henry C. Black’s Law Dictionary. St. Paul Minn.: West Publishing Co., 1979.
Reutter, Mark. “Battered Women Who Kill in Non-Beating Situations Have Self-Defense Right.” News Bureau: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 15 Aug. 2005. 28 April 2008 < http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/05/0815women.html>.
Wallace, Harvey. Family Violence: Legal, Medical, and Social Perspectives. New York: Pearson, 2005.
