Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t! This week, lawyer Kyla Lee discusses battered woman syndrome.
Acumen Law Corporation lawyer Kyla Lee gives her take on a made-in-Canada court case each week and discusses why these cases should have been heard by Canada’s highest court: the Supreme Court of Canada.
Deborah Doonanco shot her husband and at trial she argued that she was justified in killing her husband pm the basis of the fact that she was suffering from battered woman syndrome. She argued that she should get a lighter sentence as a result of this action that was taken in self-defence.
One of the issues that came up at trial was the Crown’s use of expert evidence to disprove that she was suffering from the symptoms of battered person syndrome including a psychological examination that was done of her. The Crown failed to deliver these reports to Mrs. Doonanco in an appropriate time frame. The trial judge admitted the expert report and proceeded with the trial in any event.
The court of appeal upheld the conviction and upheld the trial judge’s finding relying on the expert evidence that there was no battered person syndrome in her case, despite the fact that the Crown had not complied with the time requirements.
This case raises a very important issue: If you’re advancing an affirmative defence, do you have to provide your expert evidence to Crown prior to them providing theirs to you? And do somehow the provisions of the Criminal Code that relate to the timeliness of Crown disclosing an expert report no longer apply?
Watch the video for more.