Opinion ID: 1229856
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Expert Testimony on Battered Woman Syndrome

Text: As an additional part of her defense, Riker attempted to introduce the testimony of Karil Klingbeil, an expert on the battered woman syndrome. In her offer of proof, Klingbeil testified that battered woman syndrome is generally considered a subset of post-traumatic stress syndrome. Klingbeil considered the relationship and the continuum of violence to be a very important aspect in arriving at a diagnosis that a person suffers from the battered woman syndrome. Klingbeil also described some of the behavioral characteristics that normally accompany the battered woman syndrome. For instance, she testified that such women usually exhibit learned helplessness. She explained that such a condition occurs when the woman is subjected to repeated threats, fears, coercion, physical battering episodes, most of which are predictable such that she comes to feel she has no options. RP, at 536-37. Klingbeil also testified that, in her opinion, Riker was a battered woman in June and July of 1987. She based her opinion on Riker's history of abusive relationships with the significant men in her life and stated that Riker's association with Burke could not be separated out from her prior relationships. However, Klingbeil admitted that use of the battered woman syndrome in a case where there was not an intimate relationship between the batterer and the victim was novel, and that she could not cite any studies applicable to this situation. Following this offer of proof, the trial court ruled that the testimony was inadmissible. At the close of the trial, the court took exceptions from counsel as to the jury instructions. The prosecutor had no objections to an instruction on duress. Both the State and the defendant agreed with the court's proposal not to instruct the jury regarding the applicable burden of proof on the duress defense. However, during deliberations, in response to a question from the jury, the court instructed the jury that the defendant had the burden of proving duress by a preponderance of the evidence. The jury found Riker guilty on all four counts. Riker received a sentence at the lowest end of the standard range  46 months  on each count, to be served concurrently. Riker appealed to the Court of Appeals and the case was transferred to this court.