Research On Judicial Determination Of Self-defense In Domestic Violence

As far as the current judicial practice in our country is concerned,in cases where women who have suffered abuse in their family life retaliate and cause the abuser’s death,the general judgment result will usually end with a charge of intentional homicide or intentional injury,even if there are many circumstances in which the defendants could have been charged with a lesser offense and given a lighter sentence.However,there are almost no cases that are recognized as legitimate self-defense to defend their legitimate rights.This article studies the specific identification problems of legitimate defense for abused women who resist domestic violence in judicial practice.The article is divided into four parts: The first part mainly reviews the current judicial recognition of legitimate defense against domestic violence.In terms of specific judgments,most cases are classified as intentional crimes,with a clear phenomenon of different judgments for the same case and a bias towards heavy sentencing.In terms of defense conditions,there is a deviation in the recognition of defense causes and a trend towards constriction of defense limits.The second part mainly analyzes the specificity of domestic violence and the controversial points of judicial determination of self-defense in domestic violence.The specificity of domestic violence includes its hidden nature,the fact that the perpetrator and victim are specific family members,and the cumulative nature of the perpetrator’s behavior.The controversial points mainly involve the unclear boundary between intentional criminal behavior and self-defense in domestic violence,the vague time conditions for self-defense in domestic violence,and misunderstandings about the limits of self-defense in domestic violence.The third part deconstructs the issues and reasons for judicial determination of self-defense in domestic violence.The issues mainly include excessively strict defense limits,cases where the cause of defense was not considered in the verdict,and difficulties in obtaining evidence of domestic violence.The reasons mainly include the application of traditional self-defense theory being too strict for domestic violence,the "cautious criminalization" and emphasis on sentencing in judicial practice,and the overemphasis on balancing legal interests in case verdicts.The fourth part proposes suggestions for the judicial determination of self-defense in domestic violence.Firstly,to recognize correctly the cause of defense in domestic violence cases,abandon the "results-oriented" approach,make the victim’s fault a statutory factor in self-defense determination,and moderately relax the conditions for self-defense.Secondly,to improve the corresponding evidence rules for domestic violence defense determination,incorporate expert testimony into the trial process to increase the accuracy of defense determination,and improve the case guidance system to make up for deficiencies in conviction and sentencing.