Reputation and behavior of battered women who kill their partners: Do these variables negate self-defense?

Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory or gender conflict?

“…This is in spite of evidence that reports women were less likely to provoke the violence (Follingstad, Brondino, & Kleinfelter, 1996;Langan & Dawson, 1995;O'Keefe, 1997) and were most often acting in self-defense (e.g., Wilson & Daly, 1992). In comparison, men who killed their wives were not attempting to protect themselves from attack (Goetting, 1991).…”

Decisions to Prosecute Battered Women’s Homicide Cases: An Exploratory Study

“…However, in the vignette comparisons, the woman's reputation in the community (whether she was faithful or rumored to be having an affair; whether she was well liked or not) was highly influential for a decision to prosecute, as were the dead man's family's preference for her to be prosecuted, and whether an advocacy group was involved, highlighting a potential discrepancy between intentions and actual impact. Supporting the likelihood of extraneous variables influencing decisions to prosecute is the match between those factors that did influence decision makers' likelihood to prosecute with anecdotal literature warning that particular stereotypes or case discrepancies with self-defense criteria may influence outcomes (e.g., Gillespie 1989) or with factors previously identified through quasi-experimental research manipulating personal variables of battered women defendants as problematic variables for these cases (e.g., Follingstad et al 1996). The fact that this study identified personal aspects of the battered woman (i.e., her size, her drinking, her reputation), or the preference of the deceased man's family, or the woman's demeanor after the killing as producing significantly different orientations toward prosecution strongly suggests the need for greater understanding of these discretionary decisions.…”

“…High emotionality is frequently exhibited on both sides, and long-standing stereotypes and myths regarding BW are easily resurrected and applied to these women defendants. Specifically, attitudes may be triggered toward the following aspects of battered women's cases: 1) claims of SD (Follingstad 1996;Follingstad 2003;Follingstad et al 1996;Follingstad et al 1989;Follingstad et al 1997;Kahan and Braman 2008); 2) BW who kill (Blackman 1990;Jenkins and Davidson 1990;Russell and Melillo 2006;Schneider and Jordan 1978;Schuller et al 1994); 3) BW as a group (Follingstad et al 1988;Follingstad et al 2001;Follingstad et al 1990;Gillespie 1989); 4) women's roles (Gillespie 1989;Schneider and Jordan 1978); and 5) crime/criminals (Kalven 1969;Narby et al 1993).…”

Men's Violence Toward Women Is the Serious Social Problem

“…Research shows, for example, that judges and juries will not take women's victimization seriously if women have any history of violence (Ferraro, 2003). This reflects attitudes of the public in general who lose sympathy for battered women when they believe these women are even verbally assertive (Follingstad, Brondino, & Kleinfelter, 1996;Harris & Cook, 1994).…”