The Impact of Elements of Self-Defense and Objective Versus Subjective Instructions on Jurors' Verdicts for Battered Women Defendants

Abstract

Battered woman defendants' claims of self-defense have often been viewed as not fitting the classic definition of self-defense. Vignettes of a legal case varied the explicitness of the threat made to the woman by her partner before she killed him, whether she had the opportunity to retreat, and objective versus subjective instructions by the judge. College students (N = 399) chose a verdict, identified variables that influenced their verdicts, and completed attitudinal measures. The opportunity for retreat increased the probability of a guilty verdict by 5 times. Objective juror instructions increased the odds of a guilty verdict by almost 2 times. Explicitness versus implicitness of the threat did not affect verdict choice nor did attitudes of mock jurors. Verdict choice was more influenced by details about the abuse than personal traits of the husband or wife or reports from authorities.

Factors impacting juror perceptions of battered women who kill their abusers: Delay and sleeping status.

“…Finally, although some prior research showed no effect of participant gender (Cheyne & Dennison, 2005) the present study supports the findings of Follingstad et al (1997) and Schuller et al (1994) that women generally have lower guilt ratings and are more prodefendant than are men in cases in which a battered woman kills her abuser. In addition to the aforementioned interaction of gender and delay on verdict, sleeping status seemed to have a differential effect on men and women's judgments related to the defendant.…”

“…First with regard to sleep status, it is expected that conviction rates, guilt ratings, and provictim sentiments (e.g., victim's emotional distress and sympathy toward victim) will be higher while prodefendant sentiments (e.g., anger toward victim and sympathy toward defendant) will be lower when the victim is described as sleeping than when the victim is described as awake. This prediction is based on attribution theories that suggest participants will consider blame and responsibility of the victim and defendant in making decisions about the case (Alicke, 2000), and on the findings of previous research (e.g., Follingstad et al, 1989Follingstad et al, , 1997Terrance et al, 2000).…”

“…Finally, a main effect of participant gender is expected on trial outcome variables. It is expected that women will be more prodefense (and less provictim) and will render fewer guilty verdicts (and have lower guilt ratings) than will men (e.g., Follingstad et al, 1997;Russell & Melillo, 2006;Schuller et al, 1994). It should be noted that although no interactions were predicted, the two-way interaction involving abuse history and participant gender will be analyzed in an exploratory fashion.…”

“…In addition to case factors, researchers have also focused on how participant demographics impact decision making in cases in which battered women kill their abusers (e.g., Follingstad et al, 1997;Kasian et al, 1993;Russell & Melillo, 2006). One of the most robust effects in the mock juror literature in cases involving abuse is a participant gender effect.…”

“…For example, in cases of child sexual assault women are typically more provictim than are men, rendering more guilty verdicts and rating the alleged child victim as more believable than do men (e.g., Bottoms & Goodman, 1994;Haegerich & Bottoms, 2000;Hodell et al, 2009). Although Cheyne and Dennison (2005) found no impact of mock juror gender in an investigation of battered women who kill, other research has found reverse effects of mock juror gender-women tend to be more prodefense in these cases (Follingstad et al, 1997;Kasian et al, 1993;Russell & Melillo, 2006;Schuller, Smith, & Olson, 1994;Terrance et al, 2000). In cases in which battered women kill their abusers, the line between perpetrator and victim becomes less clear, as the woman may be considered a victim of domestic violence with the abuser as the perpetrator, but in the case at hand, the woman is the defendant and the abuser is the victim of homicide.…”