Abstract
Gender biases hamper battered women in their self-defense claims. While black letter self-defense law accommodates the factual circumstance many battered women's homicide cases present, self-defense is less likely to be argued and, as evidenced in State v. Strieby, less likely to be seen as reasonable. Yet, instead of focusing on gender bias in the application of longstanding self-defense principles, many battered women's advocates agitate for reform in the law itself. There may be instances in which reform is necessary. However, a disservice is done women if their pleas for equal treatment under the law are perceived as pleas for a major overhaul in the law to suit their specific needs. Moreover, pardoning and leniency does women a disservice. Often focusing on the passive and victimized aspects of women's experience, it compounds perceptions that women are not in fact justified in their actions, but rather that the law extends them favorable treatment. Instead, where a woman's actions to defend herself against an abusive spouse are objectively reasonable, in light of all the circumstances, the law must not excuse, but exonerate her.
Recommended Citation
Bigelow, Paige
(1992)
"Guilty of Survival: State v. Strieby
and Battered Women
Who Kill in Utah,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1992:
No.
3, Article 11.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1992/iss3/11