Book Review: Negotiating Domestic Violence: Police, Criminal Justice and Victims
| Author | Elizabeth A. Stanko |
| DOI | 10.1177/096466390000900409 |
| Date | 01 December 2000 |
| Published date | 01 December 2000 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
insufficient. The intention of the mercy killer is not equated with the intention of the
killer motivated by satisfaction of his own sadistic pleasure.
Second, in looking at the reason for the action rather than the state of mind that
accompanied it we can openly judge whether the motivation displays a failure to respect
the worth of the victim, rather than labour to find (or fabricate) the required cognitive
state. This renders the traditional cognitive state unnecessary. It does not matter that
the frenzied killer at the time of the killing had no intention to kill if the motive for
engaging in that frenzied attack indicated a failure to respect the worth of the victim.
Pillsbury considers the value of clear legal doctrine to lie in providing an antidote
to unrestrained emotionalism (chapter 5) and a safeguard against ‘the otherness temp-
tation’ (pp. 69–70, 103) – vague law permits decision makers to engage in prejudicial
assessments of offenders from different groups to themselves.
Reforms of the principal homicide offences, including homicide under provocation,
are proposed in section II with model jury directions helpfully provided in an Appen-
dix. The results provide an interesting comparator to an approach dependent on
finding a hierarchy of culpability within different cognitive states, such as found in
Stanley Yeo’s proposals for reform over the same area of substantive law, which are
strongly influenced by the Indian Penal Code (Yeo, 1997, 1998). Notably, Pillsbury
would allow us to recognize a form of ‘extreme indifference’ murder, which might
provide a more transparent approach to that favoured in the English courts where the
category has been constructed on a purported form of intention.
One ironic fallout from Pillsbury’s substantive proposals is doubt of his general
model of criminal responsibility. The emphasis on the motive of the individual leads
to a judgement of selfishness (pp. 112, 175, 178, 184) but selfishness is essentially an
attribute of character not a description of conduct (notwithstanding the transferred
epithet on p. 26), which means that Pillsbury’s crucial distinction between character
and conduct is suspect. It is also possible to consider further how one can rely on
reasons for action as the location of culpabilty. If such reasons are distinct from the
internal mechanical processes of the mind, what is the aspect of human nature to
which they relate? Although Pillsbury initially steps away from models of the mind,
he subsequently resorts to insights of cognitive science to strengthen his case for
finding indifference culpable (chapter 9).
That we need more than this book provides to complete our understanding of crim-
inal responsibility is not a remark the author would challenge (p. xi). The particular
merits of this book allow it to refine our understanding of the issues involved, and
offer some serious suggestions on improving the practice of the law.
ANDREW HALPIN
Faculty of Law, Southampton University, UK
REFERENCES
Yeo, Stanley (1997) Fault in Homicide. Annandale, NSW: Federation Press.
Yeo, Stanley (1998) Unrestrained Killings and the Law. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
CAROLYN HOYLE, Negotiating Domestic Violence: Police, Criminal Justice and
Victims. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998, 248 pp., £40 (hbk).
Of all issues linked with domestic violence, its policing has attracted the most atten-
tion. The policing of domestic violence is probably the most studied aspect of police
BOOK REVIEWS 589
06 Reviews (jl/d) 30/10/00 2:47 pm Page 589
To continue reading
Request your trial