Facts
Ibn Tamas was charged with the murder of her husband. She had shot him, but she claimed out of self-defense. She testifies that she had endured over two years of his violence and shot, believing that he was to cause a serious harm to her. At the original trial, the testimony and opinion of Dr. Walker, a clinical psychologist, was rejected by the trial judge on the grounds that it deviated from the issue of guilt. If Dr. Walker had been allowed to testify on Ibn Tamas's behalf, he would have shed light on her behavior as a “battered woman”, explaining why her behavior and mentality greatly differs from that of other women. The defendant appeals.
Issue
Can Ibn Tamas still be convicted of second degree murder despite being a “battered wife”?
Ruling
The conviction is overturned. Dr. Walker's testimony would have both been able to give credibility to Ibn Tamas's claim that she acted out of self defence and that on the day of the shooting, her husband had caused her great fear. His testimony would have also had minimal prejudicial impact and the importance of this testimony on the behalf of Ibn Tamas would outweigh the risks of deviating from the issue of guilt.
