Citation

Bradfield R. Psychiatry Psychol. Law. 2002; 9(2): 177-199.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1375/pplt.2002.9.2.177

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article aims to challenge the traditional way in which evidence of the accused's personal history is presented and constructed in cases where battered women kill and rely on self-defense. Although an accused (and other witnesses) may provide an account of the history of violence and her lack of alternatives other than the use of force, the potential message of reasonable necessity that this evidence might convey is usually not realized. It is contended that the current evidentiary framework of “battered woman syndrome” (BWS) relied on for the presentation of “expert evidence” to educate judges and juries in cases where women kill their violent partners works against the efforts of defense counsel to make apparent the reality of the accused's situation. In this article, a fundamental shift from BWS evidence (with or without accompanying social framework evidence) to the reception of social framework evidence in its own right is proposed. This conceptual change aims to open the way for the legal system to think more creatively about the relevance of specific evidence relating to the personal experiences of the accused that is presented in cases where women kill their violent partners.