6.

Admitting she killed her husband, appellant anchors her prayer for acquittal on a novel theory -- the
"battered woman syndrome" (BWS), which allegedly constitutes self-defense.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs.

MARIVIC GENOSA, appellant.
PANGANIBAN, J.:
G.R. No. 135981 January 15, 2004

FACTS:
During the first year of marriage, Marivic and Ben lived happily but thereafter, the couple would
always quarrel and sometimes a violent one. Marivic, the wife and pregnant during that time, testified
that every time her husband become drunk, Ben would provoke her and sometimes beat her. She
consulted medical doctors who testified during the trial. On the night of the killing, the couple intensely
quarreled and Ben beat Marivic. The wife admitted she killed her husband with the use of a gun. The
information for parricide against her, however, alleged that the cause of death was by beating through
the use of a lead pipe. She invoked self-defense and defense of her unborn child. After trial, the Regional
Trial Court found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide with an aggravating
circumstance of treachery and imposed the penalty of death.

Per automatic review of the Supreme Court, Marivic filed an urgent omnibus motion praying that
the Honorable Court allow the exhumation of the deceased; and the re-examination of the cause of his
death; the examination of Marivic Genosa by qualified psychologists and psychiatrists to determine her
state of mind at the time she killed her husband; and finally, the inclusion of the said experts’ reports in
the records of the case for purposes of the automatic review. The Supreme Court partly granted the
urgent omnibus motion of the appellant. It remanded the case to the trial court for reception of expert
psychological and/or psychiatric opinion on the novel “battered woman syndrome” plea. Testimonies of
two expert witnesses on the “battered woman syndrome”, were presented and admitted by the trial court
and subsequently submitted to the Supreme Court as part of the records.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the Battered Woman Syndrome be invoked to constitute self-defense.

RULING:
NO. The battered Woman Syndrome cannot be invoked to constitute self-defense.
The Court held that for self-defense arising from the battered woman syndrome be
invoked, the following must concur: (a) each of the phases of the cycle of violence must be
proven to have characterized at least two battering episodes between the appellant and her
intimate partner; (b) the final acute battering episode preceding the killing of the batterer must
have produced in the battered persons mind an actual fear of an imminent harm from her
batterer and an honest belief that she needed to use force in order to save her life; and (c) at
the time of the killing, the batterer must have posed probable – not necessarily immediate and
actual – grave harm to the accused, based on the history of violence perpetrated by the former
against the latter. Altogether these satisfy the requisites of self-defense.
The foregoing facts shows that not all of these requisites were duly established. It was
found that there was a sufficient time interval between the unlawful aggression of Ben and her
fatal attack upon him. In fact, she had already been able to withdraw from his violent behavior
and escape to their children’s bedroom. The attack had apparently ceased and the reality or
even imminence of the danger he posed had ended altogether. Ben was no longer in a position
that presented an actual threat on her life or safety.