A WOMAN who killed her husband after a jury found he forced her to take part in kinky sex and threesomes has argued that her seven year jail term was too harsh.

Defence barrister Peter Morrissey SC told the Court of Appeal today that Eileen Creamer's moral culpability was low because of the cruelty and psychological torment inflicted by her husband.

Creamer, 54, was acquitted of murder but found guilty of defensive homicide in the Supreme Court last year and Mr Morrissey said she was only one of three women convicted of the crime in Victoria since it was introduced in 2005.

He said because there were so few convictions of women there were no sentencing guidelines for judges and Creamer's jail term was too harsh given her treatment at the hands of her husband.

At the trial she admitted stabbing David Creamer and bashing him with an African tribal stick at their Moe home.

Creamer has appealed against her sentence which had an 11-year maximum term.

In convicting her of defensive homicide, jurors found she killed believing she was acting in self-defence, but without a reasonable basis for that belief.

Creamer told the jury her husband wanted her to sleep with other men as he watched, and pestered her to join in group sex and threesomes.

She said he spent the fatal weekend abusing her, calling her names and assaulting her and she eventually "snapped".

Tom Gyorffy SC, for the Crown, told the appeal court that Creamer had a high level of culpability and argued that defensive homicide was a more serious crime than manslaughter.

Mr Gyorffy said that Creamer "just got across the line" on defensive homicide and there was clear evidence both she and her husband had lovers.

It was also put at the trial that the reason Creamer killed her husband was that he planned to return to his first wife in South Africa.

Justices Mark Weinberg, Bernard Bongiorno and Terry Forrest reserved their decision.