ABSOLUTE DEFENSE: Guilty or not guilty. IMPERFECT DEFENSE: Guilty of manslaughter (since no ‘malice’) MULTI-TIERED APPROACH: (MPC) Guilty of Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide.

Kelly (p. 763) Issue: Did the trial court err by excluding expert testimony on the battered woman’s syndrome? Yes. Crucial fact upon which expert testimony would bear is why defendant had not left the decedent. It would aid the jury in determining whether a reasonable person would have believed there was imminent danger of her life.

Norman (p. 776) Self defense: At the time of the killing it appeared to the defendant and she believed it to be necessary to kill the decedent to save herself from imminent death or great bodily harm. Imminent: Immediate danger, such as must be instantly met, such as cannot be guarded against by calling for the assistance of others or the protection of the law.

Alternatives to Imminence MPC §3.04(1): use of defense force allowed if it is “immediately necessary…on the present occasion.” State v. Janes: (p. 783, note 5). Relaxes the standard of imminence. “That the triggering behavior and the abusive episode are divided by time does not necessarily negate the reasonableness of the defendant’s perception of imminent harm.