This dissertation undertakes a case review of South African court case judgments (between 1994 and 2021) in which women are charged with killing their abusive intimate partners. The dissertation examines how evidence of their abuse is used in respect of legal defences and mitigation of sentence. In addition to analysing the existing legal framework, the paper presents thematic qualitative information drawn from the judgments to show that a number of themes are apparent in the manner in which evidence is brought and dealt with by the courts. For instance, patterns of disregarding evidence of abuse, and a lack of calling for further evidence where needed. In addition to this, judgments often 'play armchair expert' and show lack of sensitivity and compassion to abused women - this is tightly linked with the concept of victim blaming. Other themes include deterrence as emphasised in sentencing, the notion of a turning point during an abusive spell, the rights of the children involved in abusive relationships, and considering motives for retaliation. The paper concludes by arguing that a contemporary approach to private defence, in light of the developments made in the Engelbrecht case, ought to be the way forward in exonerating women of their criminal culpability where those requirements are met.
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations