Hammer killer begins ‘coercive control’ appeal
Sally Challen says she was a ‘hostage’ and wouldn’t have been guilty of husband’s murder under current laws
A WOMAN who bludgeoned her husband to death with a hammer began an appeal against her conviction yesterday, claiming the coercive control law change meant she was a “hostage” and not a murderer.
Georgina “Sally” Challen, 65, is arguing that the Court of Appeal should downgrade her conviction to manslaughter in light of the abuse husband Richard subjected her to over their 31year marriage.
In a landmark case, her lawyers argue that had the defence of coercive control, which passed into law in 2015, been available at the time of her trial in June 2011, she would not have been found guilty of murder.
More than 50 people turned out to support Challen yesterday in London, forcing proceedings to be moved to a larger courtroom in the afternoon.
In August 2010, Challen, an office manager for the police federation, cooked Mr Challen, 61, a final meal at their home in Claygate, Surrey, before striking him over the head with a hammer 20 times.
Her trial at Guildford Crown Court heard that she attacked the father of her two children after discovering he had been speaking to another woman. She was painted as a “jealous spouse” and sentenced to 22 years in prison, later downgraded to 18 on appeal.
But witnesses called to the appeal, including a domestic abuse expert and three psychiatrists, tried to paint a different picture of a wife with a dependent personality disorder and a controlling husband.
From the age of 15, when Challen first met Richard Challen, they say he controlled her access to friends and money, and made her run the house. It is also claimed he lied about cheating on her so she felt “gaslighted” – a term used to describe a process when an abuser manipulates a victim. He also raped her and drove her to attempt suicide. Prof Evan Stark, who coined the term “coercive control”, explained how psychological abuse could lead to the victim or abuser killing. “When a person is denied fundamental rights and liberties … it produces a hostagelike condition,” he said. This entrapment, he added, creates “a risk of homicide to both parties”.
Challen, whose birthday was yesterday, sobbed throughout proceedings, while supporters shook their heads when the Crown argued there was no evidence of a psychiatric disorder.
Outside the court, Challen’s son, David, said he had felt the effects of his father’s behaviour. “I feel like we were
‘I feel like we were all hostages. But we didn’t have the language to describe what was happening’
‘When a person is denied fundamental rights and liberties … it produces a hostage-like condition’
all hostages. But we didn’t have the language to describe what was happening and the control he had.”
Challen’s lawyer also brought new evidence of her borderline personality disorder, which could have made her dependent on her husband and contributed to diminished responsibility.
The Crown Prosecution Service disputed that Challen displayed symptoms of a mental disorder. It also said behaviour like Mr Challen’s had “been around for as long as people have been having relationships” and wasn’t therefore new evidence.
Supporters, including domestic abuse survivors Ryan Hart, 27, whose father killed his mother and sister in 2016, and Rachel Williams, 47, who was shot by an abusive partner, turned out yesterday. They welcomed the indepth look at coercive control and said more light needed to be shone on it.
Hugo Jenney, a lawyer and Mrs Challen’s nephew, said concerns that a decision to downgrade Mrs Challen’s sentence could “open the floodgates” to more appeals should be ignored.
“We’re not giving license to kill,” he said. “We’re just saying certain deaths are understandable when someone is suffering an abnormality of the mind and is in those circumstances. She’s no threat to the public.”