## Facts

- Margaret Ann Malott lived for about 19 years with the deceased, her common-law husband, and they had two children.
- Over the relationship, he abused her physically, sexually, psychologically, and emotionally.
- When Malott sought police help, the deceased’s status as a police informant led police to alert him to her complaints, and his violence escalated.
- Months before the killing, the deceased moved in with a girlfriend, but he continued regularly attending his mother’s home where Malott lived with their daughter.
- On the day of the killing, Malott was to accompany the deceased to obtain prescription drugs intended for his illegal drug trade.
- Before leaving, Malott took a pistol from the deceased’s gun cabinet, loaded it, and carried it in her purse.
- In a medical clinic parking lot, Malott shot the deceased to death.
- Afterward, she went to the girlfriend’s home, where she shot and stabbed the girlfriend; the girlfriend survived and testified for the prosecution.
- At trial, Malott testified about the abuse and introduced expert evidence that she suffered from battered woman syndrome; the prosecution conceded she had suffered severe abuse.
- A jury convicted Malott of second-degree murder and attempted murder; only the second-degree murder conviction was reviewed on appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial judge’s instructions on self-defence properly integrated battered woman syndrome evidence when applying the governing self-defence provision.
2. How battered woman syndrome evidence should inform the assessment of the reasonableness of an accused’s perceptions and actions for self-defence.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal and affirmed the second-degree murder conviction.
- The Court held that jury instructions must be assessed as a whole, and minor imperfections do not warrant reversal if the law is correctly conveyed overall.
- The Court concluded the self-defence charge adequately directed jurors to consider Malott’s history of abuse and battered woman syndrome in evaluating her perceptions, beliefs, and the reasonableness of her actions.

## Legal Principles

- Appellate review of jury instructions focuses on the charge as a whole, not isolated phrases.
- Self-defence where the victim is killed requires proof of: (1) an unlawful assault, (2) a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm, and (3) a reasonable belief that killing is necessary to preserve oneself.
- The self-defence inquiry contains subjective and objective components; “reasonableness” must be assessed in light of the accused’s circumstances.
- Expert evidence on battered woman syndrome may be relevant to how an accused perceives danger, whether leaving was a realistic option, and what options appeared reasonably available at the time.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Malott’s conviction, ruling that the jury was sufficiently instructed to evaluate self-defence by considering battered woman syndrome evidence within the required elements and an overall context-sensitive assessment of reasonableness.


R. v. Malott, 1 S.C.R. 123 (Can. 1998)