A Hierarchy of Compassion? Public Perceptions on when self-defence would and should be available

The authors present findings of an exploratory study in relation to when self-defence would and should be available in relation to eight self-defence-based vignettes. They found that various gradations of empathy and sympathy were demonstrated during discussions; empathy in the sense of participants more often being able to imagine themselves in the position of the defendant, for example, in the householder context. Participants tended to show sympathy with the defendant’s plight in circumstances where they felt they could not appreciate the circumstances fully or where they thought they might act differently, for example, in domestic abuse contexts and cases involving children.

The findings highlight that participants’ thoughts about self-defence were filtered through their individual experiences and those of others. Whilst the householder garnered most empathy, victims of domestic abuse were shown varying degrees of empathy and sympathy as well. Participants also showed recognition that an individual could make a mistake when drunk, generally expressing sympathy. During discussions, a hierarchy of empathy through to sympathy was demonstrated.

Participants seemed to oscillate between conceptualising victim-defendants as survivors placing responsibility for the violence against them within wider society, and responsibilising women as ’autonomous agents’ where blameworthiness is directly attributed to them for failing to leave the relationship particularly where children are involved.

Emotions of empathy and sympathy were often negated by perceived victim-defendant blameworthiness when a child or children were involved, with ‘othering’ most prevalent in those circumstances. Deontological standards applied that either the participant as a parent or a good parent would remove the child from the situation, and accordingly, the victim-defendant should have done the same.

Despite the inability or refusal to empathise or show compassion to victim-defendants with children, they still ranked higher in terms of being deserving of self-defence than those in the bar brawl context. Participants could imagine making a drunken mistake as to the need for self-defence but were unreceptive to self-defence being available in such contexts. In effect, sympathy was shown in recognition of the unfortunate circumstances but blameworthiness or just deserts eclipsed the sympathy experienced. The authors posit potential options for guiding jurors in circumstances of self-defence involving a pattern of behaviour perpetrated against the defendant, compared with one off incidents of violence on which self-defence is traditionally based.