The "Can't Say No" case serves as a powerful reminder of the need for empathy, understanding, and informed action in the face of coercive control. By working together, we can create a safer, more just, and more compassionate society for all.

The court recognized that coercive control is a critical factor in many cases of intimate partner violence and that it can render victims unable to escape or resist their abusers. The ruling established that, in cases where a defendant claims to have acted in self-defense or under duress due to coercive control, expert testimony on the dynamics of coercive control is admissible and relevant.

The jury ultimately found Casey guilty of first-degree murder, and she was sentenced to 12 years to life in prison.

On October 29, 2016, Casey and Russell engaged in a heated argument, which culminated in Russell's death. Casey claimed that she had acted in self-defense, while prosecutors argued that she had intentionally murdered her husband.

Casey Calvert was a 37-year-old woman who had been married to her husband, Russell Calvert, for over a decade. During their marriage, Casey claimed that Russell had subjected her to a pattern of coercive control, including emotional manipulation, financial abuse, and physical violence. Despite her allegations, Casey had never previously reported the abuse to authorities or sought a restraining order.

As we move forward, it is essential to prioritize education, awareness, and training on coercive control among professionals and stakeholders. We must also work to create a more supportive and empowering environment for survivors of coercive control, providing them with the resources and tools they need to regain control over their lives.

Thirdly, the "Can't Say No" case has implications for the way we conceptualize and address intimate partner violence. It emphasizes the need for a more holistic approach that takes into account the complex psychological, emotional, and social factors at play in these cases.

Secondly, the case highlights the importance of expert testimony in cases involving coercive control. By allowing expert testimony on the dynamics of coercive control, courts can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the victim's experiences and behaviors.