School violence is a pervasive reality in these times. While it achieves its nadir in such widely publicized school shootings as at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and too many others, often it flies below the national radar. One common observation that runs through any meaningful analysis of this problem is that of the role of bullying. Bullying represents the most ubiquitous form of school violence. It is also the most fluid, as the line between victim and perpetrator shifts from one student to the other as former victims act out and become the latest perpetrator. In this powerful Article, the Author extensively documents the dynamic that develops between the bully and bullied and how, all too often, it ultimately manifests in more, and more horrific, violence. While state legislative efforts have sought to empower schools to prevent bullying, they are either in their infancy or incomplete. Instead, the Author argues, it is imperative that in dealing with the aftermath of these events courts permit the presentation of “battered child syndrome” as a possible justification defense for the acts of those formerly bullied children who now find themselves defendants to a criminal prosecution. The Author examines both the scientific research relating to this syndrome as well as its largely unsuccessful use in courts to date. The Author then draws apt comparisons to the more successful, yet largely similar, defense of “battered woman syndrome” and offers some novel suggestions to deal with the issues of imminence and reasonableness in justification defenses in the context of bullied child defendants.