NCJ Number
169131
Journal
Journal of Interpersonal Violence Volume: 12 Issue: 5 Dated: (October 1997) Pages: 729-747
Date Published
1997
Length
19 pages
Annotation
Because battered woman defendant claims of self-defense are not always viewed as 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.
Abstract
A sample of 400 college students, 249 females, 149 males and 2 unspecified at a large southeastern university chose a verdict, identified variables influencing their verdicts, and completed attitudinal measures. Most students were between 18 and 22 years of age; 62 percent were white and 29 percent were black. A two-factorial design was used with eight conditions. The threat manipulation addressed the explicitness versus the implicitness of the threat to the woman, while the retreat manipulation addressed the woman's ability versus inability to retreat from the situation in which the killing occurred. Instructions by the judge regarding self-defense represented either objective or subjective instructions. Participants read one of eight possible vignettes about a battered woman who killed her husband. Results showed the opportunity for retreat increased the probability of a guilty verdict by five times. Objective juror instructions increased the odds of a guilty of a guilty verdict by almost two times. Explicitness versus implicitness of the threat and attitudes of mock jurors did not affect verdict choice. Rather, details about the abuse as opposed to personal traits of the husband or wife or reports from authority influenced verdict choice. 36 references and 4 tables