R. v. Lavallee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| R. v. Lavallee | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
|||||||||
| Hearing: October 31, 1989 Judgment: May 3, 1990 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| Court membership | |||||||||
|
Chief Justice: Brian Dickson |
|||||||||
| Reasons given | |||||||||
|
Majority by: Wilson J. |
|||||||||
R. v. Lavallee, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 852 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada case on the legal recognition of battered woman syndrome. The judgement, written by Bertha Wilson, is generally considered one of her most famous.
Contents |
[edit] Background
Angelique Lavallee was in an abusive common law relationship with Kevin Rust. During a particularly serious fight Rust threatened to harm her, saying "either you kill me or I'll get you". He turned around at which point Lavallee, who was hiding a gun, pulled it out and shot him in the back of the head. At trial, Lavallee argued self-defence, and had a psychiatrist testify in her support. He explained the effects of her circumstances on her mental state and that in the state she was in she felt she was going to be killed and had no alternative but to shoot him. Lavallee did not testify. The jury acquitted Lavallee, but the verdict was overturned on appeal.
At issue before the Supreme Court was whether the expert evidence on battered wife syndrome was admissible.
[edit] Reasons of the Court
Justice Wilson, writing for the Court, held that expert evidence is often needed when stereotypes and myths are inherent in a lay-person's reasoning. In particular here, the women's experience and perspective is relevant to inform the reasonable person's standard required for self-defence.
[edit] See also
- R. v. Malott, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 123
[edit] External links
- Full text of Supreme Court of Canada decision at LexUMand CanLII
- UofT Law Journal article on Lavallee
 |
This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
