The Pros And Cons Of The Battered Woman Syndrome

“(A) The general assembly hereby declares that it recognizes both of the following, in relation to the 'battered woman syndrome:' (1) That the syndrome currently is a matter of commonly accepted scientific knowledge; (2) That the subject matter and details of the syndrome are not within the general understanding or experience of a person who is a member of the general populace and are not within the field of common knowledge. (B) If a person is charged with an offense involving the use of force against another and the person ... raises the affirmative defence of self-defence, the person may introduce expert testimony of the 'battered woman syndrome' and expert testimony that the person suffered from the syndrome as evidence to establish the
On the other hand states like California, allows a wide range of expert testimony by not using the term BWS. Similarly, even Massachusetts allows an abused woman to raise the reasonableness of her belief that death or serious bodily injury was impending, that she had exhausted all available means to avoid the use of deadly force, and that the amount of force was apposite in cases of self-defence or defence of another. She can introduce propensity evidence of physical, sexual, or psychological harm or abuse. An expert can testify to common patterns in abusive relationships. Even Kentucky's statute is also broad in allowing the use of deadly physical force when the defendant believes, reasonably or unreasonably, such force is necessary and evidence of prior acts of domestic violence or abuse is admissible. These States are mainly of the view that BWS produces a stereotyped image of women, as was observed in the Report. The remaining states have adopted their evidence policies based on the Federal Rule of Evidence which restrict the admission of prior acts of domestic violence only to the extent that they show motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or
It would be pertinent to discuss the cases of Francine Moran Hughes , who, after facing 13 years of domestic abuse, set fire to the bed of her ex-husband. It was one of the very first cases involving battered woman syndrome in US where, at trial, Hughes was found not guilty by reason of temporary insanity. During the trial, she had not only testified to countless humiliations, beatings and psychological torture but also established, through evidence and her own testimony, that it was only a matter of time before she would be killed. Hughes also showed that, given her inability to support her family in a new location, the fact that neither police nor the legal system was effective in protecting her or her children, retreat was not a viable option. Apart from that Hughes also established that her ex-husband being a perpetual aggressor, she honestly feared for her life and bodily integrity and her fear, was thus reasonable. However, instead of claiming self-defence on trial for murder, Hughes argued that the years of violence, abuse and terror had rendered her temporarily insane. Her temporary insanity plea, therefore, proved to be advantageous as compared to the self-defence plea. The Model Penal Code’s partial defence of “extreme mental or emotional disturbance” has also been accepted by few states while framing their own laws and the other states have adopted the Code