Although Lombroso and Freud found reasons for attributing female criminality to characteristics of their physical makeup, most biologists and neurophysiologists who have examined violent behavior have found no neurological, neurochemical, or physiological basis for violent behavior and homicide. Research on the sociology of female homicide is much more impressive and informative. Martin (1976), Hilberman, and Munson (1977-78) describe the classic picture of the battered wife who eventually murders her husband. Such a woman often comes from a home where she has observed and experienced parental violence, so that she sees violence as a norm in social interaction and as a solution for conflict. The potential offender often chooses a mate with a high penchant for violence. She has been beaten repeatedly over a period of years. Lacking educational and financial resources, she describes a feeling of being trapped, and homicide is perceived as the only escape. Totman (1971) also studied the psychological and sociological characteristics of women imprisoned for killing a spouse or infant. Her data support the notion that murderesses are largely unsuccessful and dissatisfied with their previous educational and vocational achievements. Overall, studies indicate that the woman who murder their husbands belong as a group to the population type that Megargee has identified as those who overcontrol violent and aggressive impulses and who explode in a homicidal act after a long period of having been abused. Regarding defense strategies for such women, two female attorneys, Schneider and Jordan (1978), have developed a new strategy: self-defense. They emphasize the importance of presenting evidence of the victim's general reputation for violence or his prior commission of specific threats or violent acts. Twenty references are listed.