EastealPatricia, Less than Equal: Women and the Australian Legal System (2001), 37.
2.
R v Malott [1998] 1 SCR 123, [43] (L'Heureux-Dubé J); Lavelle [1990] 1 SCR 852, 871–872; Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316, 337 (Gaudron and Gummow JJ), 376–377 (Kirby J). If a battered woman honestly holds a belief that it is necessary in self-defence to kill, and the fact finder is asked to take into account all the situational and psychological circumstances that produced that belief, then an honest belief necessarily becomes a reasonable belief.
3.
Zecevic v DPP (Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645, 657 (Wilson, Dawson and Toohey JJ).
4.
Secretary (1995) 5 NTLR 96, 104; see also, R v McKay [1957] VR 560, 562–563; Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316, 382 (Kirby J).
5.
Zecevic v DPP (Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645, 662 (Wilson, Dawson and Toohey JJ).
6.
R v Conlon (1993) 69 A Crim R 92, 98 (Hunt CJ).
7.
R v Conlon (1993) 69 A Crim R 92, 99 (Hunt CJ).
8.
Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316, 337 (Gaudron and Gummow JJ) 378 (Kirby J).
9.
Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316, 375 (Kirby J).
10.
R v Portelli (2004) 148 A Crim R 282, 295.
11.
Zecevic v DPP(Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645; the defence of excessive self-defence has been reintroduced by statute in New South Wales, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia: see Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 421; Criminal Law Consolidation Act1935 (SA) s 15(2); Crimes Act1958 (Vic) s 9AC and Criminal Code 1913 (WA) s 248(3).
12.
R v Portelli (2004) 148 A Crim R 282, 293.
13.
R v Conlon (1993) 69 A Crim R 92, 99 (Hunt CJ) expressing the view that it is a factor to be considered in relation to the reasonableness of a belief; R v Katarzynski [2002] NSWSC 613, [26] doubting this proposition.
14.
R v Conlon (1993) 69 A Crim R 92, 99 (Hunt CJ).
15.
Zecevic v DPP(Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645, 662–663.
16.
Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316, 376 (Kirby J).
17.
StubbsJulieTolmieJulia, ‘Falling short of the challenge? A comparative assessment of the Australian use of expert evidence on the Battered Woman Syndrome’ (1995) 23:3Melbourne University Law Review709, 730.
18.
SheedyElizabethStubbsJulieTolmieJulia, ‘“Defending Battered Women on Trial” the Battered Woman Syndrome and its limitations’ (1992) 16Criminal Law Journal369, 395.
19.
See R v Parr (2009) 21 VR 590, but note discussion of the judicial practice of directing in terms of the common law self-defence and statutory self-defence until such time as determinative ruling made by Court of Criminal Appeal.
20.
Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 9AC and 9AE.
21.
Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 9AE.
22.
Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 9AH(1)(c) and (d).
23.
Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 9AC.
24.
Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) ss 9AC and 9AD.
25.
Victorian Law Reform Commission, Defences to Homicide: Final Report (2004) 61, Recommendation No. 6, 89–90.
26.
Crimes Act 1999 (NSW) s418; see also Criminal Code (ACT) s 42 and Criminal Code (NT) s 29 have adopted the Model Criminal Code formulation, though in the Northern Territory, the perception itself must also be reasonable.
27.
R v Trevenna [2004] NSW CCA 43 (Unreported, Santow JA, 4 March 2004) [38].
28.
BradfieldRebecca, in Victorian Law Reform Commission, above n 25, 135.
29.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, Review of the Law of Homicide: Final Report (2007) 97, Recommendations41 & 42, 293–294. It is apparent then that the common law of self-defence all but requires the fact finder to walk in the shoes of the battered woman in assessing her claim of self-defence.
30.
Criminal Code 1913 (WA) s 248, s 249.
31.
Criminal Code 1913 (WA) s 222.
32.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, above n 29, 167; see also, Knight (1988) 35 A Crim R 314.
33.
See particularly Secretary (1996) 131 FLR 124 in which the NT Court of Criminal Appeal construed an equivalent provision to apply to circumstances in which the accused had killed her batterer whilst he slept.
34.
Law Reform Commission of WA, above n 29, 97, 167.
35.
Ibid, 165–166.
36.
Criminal Code1913 (WA) s 248(4)(a).
37.
Criminal Code1913 (WA) s 248.
38.
Law Reform Commission of WA, above n 29, 97, 160.
39.
Ibid, Recommendation 23, 172, see also 170.
40.
Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) s 304(1)(a).
41.
Vidler (2000) 110 A Crim R 77, 81.
42.
R v Muratovic [1967] QdR 15, 19–20 (Gibbs J, with whom Lucas J agreed).
43.
R v McKenzie (2000) 113 A Crim R 534, 547–548 (McPherson JA, with whom McMurdo P and Dutney J agreed); R v Babsek [1998] QCA 116 (unreported, 2 June 1998, Moynihan J, with whom Davies and McPherson JJA agreed) [11].
