I will prepare a more detailed post shortly but I just want to mention that I will indeed be posting a comment on the Nicole Ryan appeal in Canada.
The law often allows the use of deadly force when it is necessary and escape from the home is impossible. Usually any escape route must be taken, not merely a desired or convenient one. Usually the law only looks at the possibility of a physical escape from immediate danger and does not concern itself with the ultimate success of such an escape. This means that a Battered Wife defense may be claimed only if physical escape was not possible. The fact that such escape would be futile due to the persistent malfeasance of the local police and welfare personnel is not usually an acceptable defense to the use of deadly force in the home.
A good many of the facts are in dispute and as is often the case the truth probably lies somewhere in between the assertions of the parties involved. The trial judge expanded the concept of Battered Wife defense to apply to a situation wherein a wife could make the decision based on her knowledge that an effective escape was not available to her even if she was aware that a temporary but futile escape was available to her.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
As the spouse of Michael Ryan, and as a person that is extremely disappointed and discouraged by the Judicial System of Nova Scotia. I would be very interested in hearing your un-bias perspective and opinions on this serious err in judgement.
-SH
Are you opposed to the newly extended Rule of Law that allows a person under threat to consider their practical options rather than there merely theoretical options? Or are you opposed to the nature of the evidence that was used to support the claim by Nicole Ryan that she was in a situation of threat and that the practical realities were that the threat would continue without effective intervention by the police and social welfare agencies?
Post a Comment