PEOPLE V. HUMPHREY

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome everyone to Inside the Badge. We delve deep into
understanding criminal law. So let's get started. Have you ever
wondered what your fairy friend is really thinking? Well, let

(00:23):
me introduce to you my new book, Dog Psychology by
doctor Carlos Vasquez. As a psychology professor with over ten
years experience, I've unlocked the secrets of the canine psyche.
I will teach you how to understand your dog's body language,
to code their barks and wines, solved behavioral puzzles, and
strengthen your bond like never before. With Dog Psychology, you'll

(00:46):
see the world through your dog's eyes. Don't just be
a dog owner, become a dog whisperer. So go get
Dog Psychology by doctor Carlos Vasquez, available now on kindle
or paperback on Amazon to us. Like I promised, we

(01:07):
would talk about People versus Humphrey. In nineteen ninety six
is the California Supreme Court People versus Humphrey. The Court
delivered a groundbreak and ruling that reshaped how self defense
claims were evaluated in criminal trials involving victims of prolonged
domestic abuse. The defendant, a battered woman, was charged with
the killing of her abusive husband. At the heart of

(01:27):
the case was whether her perception of danger in her
belief that at deadly force was necessary, could be considered
reasonable under the law, even if her actions might not
align with traditional standards of immediacy or proportionality in self defense.
The court held that evidence of battered Women's syndrome is
relevant to determining whether a defendant acted in self defense. Importantly,

(01:47):
the justices ruled that juries must be allowed to consider
such evidence when assessing both the subjective belief of the defendant,
whether she honestly believed she was an eminent danger, and
the objective reasonableness of that belief. This marked a significant
shift in legal thinking, recognizing the individuals who've suffered chronic
abuse may perceive threats differently due to their psychological effects

(02:09):
of battering people. Versus Humphrey expanded the scoop of what
is considered reasonable in self defense claims, allowing courts to
more fully contextualize the defendant's experience, particularly in cases involving
intimate partner violence. The decision acknowledged the importance of expert
testimony and educating juries about the psychological consequences of sustained abuse,

(02:31):
helping to ensure fair trials. Now, the ruling was a
step forward, it did not create a blanket justification for
violence by victims of abuse. Defendants must still prove that
their belief in the need to use force was both
honest and objectively reasonable under the circumstances. And keep in
mind that this ruling only applies within California, as it
was decided by the California Supreme Court. The core idea

(02:55):
that expert testimony and batter Women's whom can help jury
understand a defendant self to flace defense claim has influenced
courts and legislation. Though across the US admissibility of the
BWS batter women syndrome. Most states now allow the BWS
evidence in some form, particularly in criminal trials where an
abuse survivor is charged with harming or killing their abuser.

(03:18):
Courts often permit the BWS testimony to explain how prolonged
abuse can affect the person's perception of danger and decision
making and self defense. However, the Supreme Court has not
issued a specific warning on BWS and self defense cases.
Lower federal courts. In many state courts do recognize as
psychological evidence like BWS may be relevant under the rules

(03:38):
of evidence, so it's not binding nationwide, but its reasoning
has influenced courts across the US, and the admissibility of
BWS varies by states.