Ed Murder is fine ... if you're a woman

[joesixpack]

Are you perchance referring to the cruelty that boys show to each other?

Are you, perchance, trying to imply that violence committed by women against men and boys doesn't happen or doesn't matter?

I would be happy to be shown that women don't ever commit any acts of violence, or that the violence which they commit is not criminal.

 

[jj]

Wow, your sexism seems to be used to rationalize your racism. You should really think on that a bit.

Wow, classic right-wing-of-the-day rhetoric.* Make a couple of unsupported accusations and then tell the person to "think".

*Yes, this tactic used to be popular on the left, too.

 

[jj]

Women make false charges of domestic violence in divorce and child custody cases, so I'm more than certain that they do the same in order to escape punishment in murder trials.

As do men, children, lawyers, police, and social workers, at the very least. Could you please explain the relevance of your observation?

 

[joesixpack]

Wow, classic right-wing-of-the-day rhetoric.* Make a couple of unsupported accusations and then tell the person to "think".

*Yes, this tactic used to be popular on the left, too.

I beg your pardon? Would you like to explain how that post was in any way "right-wing" (other than the obvious fact that you disagree with it)?

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

What's a Mureder? Is it a bit like a Mondeo?

 

[jj]

Yes, i do, if a pattern of abuse could be shown, and the guy was willing to admit this, i believe he would be treated fairly in court, but possibly damned in the court of public opinion. If you can show evidence to the contrary , feel free to do so.

I'm certainly not convinced of that, either. You are asserting a belief, I think it's your turn to provide the evidence.

The anecdotal experience (not personal, thank you) that I am aware of suggests otherwise.

 

[jj]

I beg your pardon? Would you like to explain how that post was in any way "right-wing" (other than the obvious fact that you disagree with it)?

I think what I said was clear, you used a rhetorical tactic that the US right wing is using about once a minute right now.

It's a combination of well poisoning and picking a fight, without bothering to show cause for either.

But what you need to show is evidence for your accusation against Lefty. I'm waiting.

 

[gumboot]

It's amazing how many people can't read an article properly. According to the article linked in the OP, the woman set her husband alight because he cheated on her, NOT because he was abusing her.

 

[joesixpack]

As do men, children, lawyers, police, and social workers, at the very least. Could you please explain the relevance of your observation?

The relevance is that the news story contained absolutely no evidence of a history of domestic violence. A reasonable person reading the story critically would naturally wonder what evidence was used to sway the judge. I'm not saying that there was no history of violence, but the story is woefully silent in this regard. It completely begs the very question.

If you have a link to demonstrate that there was a history of severe abuse in this household then please share it. Otherwise, my comment in context is completely relevant.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

It's amazing how many people can't read an article properly. According to the article linked in the OP, the woman set her husband alight because he cheated on her, NOT because he was abusing her.

You know as well as anyone how very little it takes on JREF to switch a discussion to more or less a completely tangential topic.

 

[joesixpack]

I think what I said was clear, you used a rhetorical tactic that the US right wing is using about once a minute right now.

It's a combination of well poisoning and picking a fight, without bothering to show cause for either.

But what you need to show is evidence for your accusation against Lefty. I'm waiting.

My "right-wing bias" is not clear to me at all. The post stated clearly that being of a particular ethnicity practically assured the outcome of her being hunted down and murdered by her husband. This is what I responded to. Can you point out how characterizing men of south Asian extraction as misogynist thugs is somehow not fundamentally racist?

She had everyright to fear that he would track her down and kill her. It's an ethnic thing.

The statement is pretty clear. Men of this ethnicity will hunt down and kill a wife who runs away.

So you both agree with this and don't consider yourself a racist? Please explain.

 

[SanityGap]

It's amazing how many people can't read an article properly. According to the article linked in the OP, the woman set her husband alight because he cheated on her, NOT because he was abusing her.

Quoting the judge from the linked article,

"For the first time in your life you had confronted your husband, had found the courage to be assertive to the person who had mistreated you for 20 years," he said.

Presumably he had evidence that prompted him to say that that was not quoted in the article. I'm guessing he didn't pull it out his fundemental orifice.

Edit. The case went to appeal later in 2011 and was not overturned. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...nal-appeal-rules/story-e6frea83-1226085503026

 

[joesixpack]

Quoting the judge from the linked article,

"For the first time in your life you had confronted your husband, had found the courage to be assertive to the person who had mistreated you for 20 years," he said.

Presumably he had evidence that prompted him to say that that was not quoted in the article. I'm guessing he didn't pull it out his fundemental orifice.

Edit. The case went to appeal later in 2011 and was not overturned. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...nal-appeal-rules/story-e6frea83-1226085503026

She said she wanted to "burn a dot on his penis" with petrol and an "angel candle" she had been given by a fortune teller so that he would not leave her for the other woman.

She compared her "bizarre" idea to the Hindu love story of Lord Ram, who proved the purity of his wife, Sita, with fire after rescuing her from a demon king.

"It would be like circumcision, or just like he placed that red dot on my forehead at the wedding," she said at trial.

"It was like I had all the powers of the goddess to save my husband, my lord ... it did not occur to me that it was going to be dangerous."

Narayan admitted losing control and throwing the flame and accelerant onto Satish when he called her a "fat bitch".

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/pen...ee/story-e6frfkvr-1226038524894#ixzz1kPPyrwFg

I'm still not clear how this was a response to abuse.

 

[iknownothing]

First, the thread title is ridiculous.

Justice may or may not have been served in any individual case. But to extrapolate that women get away with murder is ridiculous. You have done absolutely nothing to show that women, in general, get off easier than men. Or that women using a battered wife defense are less likely to be convicted or serve time.

Here's a website that makes the opposite claim:

there is evidence to suggest that women who kill in their own defense may face greater punishment than other defendants. A study conducted by The Michigan Battered Women’s Clemency Project of homicide convictions and sentences over a three year period from 1986 to 1988, inclusive, in Oakland County, Michigan, revealed startling levels of discrimination against defendants who are victims of domestic violence. Results showed that domestic violence victims had higher conviction rates and longer sentences than all others charged with homicide, including those with previous violent criminal records. Overall, a white female defendant with no criminal history who was convicted by a jury of killing a white person could expect an average sentence of 10 to 30 years. However, if the woman was a victim of domestic violence, her predicted sentence increased to life.

That's admittedly about 25 years old. So I'll grant that maybe it's changed since those statistics. Or maybe they're using bad numbers. Maybe you're right, and women are getting away with murder with phony domestic violence claims. But your 3 cases in 7 years doesn't do anything to show that.

 

[joesixpack]

over a three year period from 1986 to 1988, inclusive, in Oakland County, Michigan

Wow, what a poorly designed study. What do you think the sample size was? Just to give you a rough idea, the total population of the county in 1990 was less than 1.2 million, and the only crime stats I could dig up were from 2000. There were only 23 murders in the county that year. How many were women killing their husbands? I suspect it couldn't have been many, because that fact alone would have been noteworthy. I'll bet the sample size was less than 10.

Overall, a white female defendant with no criminal history who was convicted by a jury of killing a white person could expect an average sentence of 10 to 30 years. However, if the woman was a victim of domestic violence, her predicted sentence increased to life.

This does not state that she was actually convicted of murdering her abuser, and I think that's a rather important detail. In fact, the clumsy wording of that sentence leads me to believe that they're actively hiding that information.

Glad you put all the disclaimers at the bottom of your post because this article is advocacy of the most dishonest kind. To say that study was cherry-picked would be an understatement.

 

[Sabrina]

I would like to point something out you all seem to be neglecting.

The abuse does not have to be physical to be abuse.

There are approximately five different types of domestic abuse:

Physical Abuse
Sexual Abuse
Emotional Abuse
Financial Abuse
Identity Abuse

(Source) (And note, that's a gay men's domestic violence awareness type of website)

This woman could have suffered horribly from abuse and never had a single mark to prove it because the abuse was all emotional or mental. Just wanted to point that out.

Edit: Here's another website which points out that emotional abuse is just as bad as physical abuse.

 

[iknownothing]

Glad you put all the disclaimers at the bottom of your post because this article is advocacy of the most dishonest kind. To say that study was cherry-picked would be an understatement.

Ok, then, what have you got? Something to show that it is just fine to commit murder if you are a woman?

Was my post cherry picking, yes and no. It would be if I was trying to make a case that women are treated badly, despite a lot of evidence that they routinely get away with murder. What I found Googling around, was not much on the topic at all, one way or the other. I threw out one instance I came across of an argument made the other way.

All the OP shows is instances of cases when justice may not have been served. Well, I will agree that justice often is not served. But I don't see it adding up to a trend that women get away with murdering men.

But if I'm wrong, show me! I just haven't seen any reason to believe the thread title yet.

ETA: And what I posted was not just some disclaimers to hide my dishonest intentions. What I said was what I meant: maybe it is bad information, and if so show me! With real answers, not those 3 cases in 7 years.

 

[joesixpack]

Ok, then, what have you got? Something to show that it is just fine to commit murder if you are a woman?

No, sorry, I wasn't saying that. The title of the thread was (I imagine) meant to be inflammatory. Perhaps the guy was posting from the hyperbolic chamber.

However, there is a clear bias in both public perception and in the courts that favors the female=victim, male=abuser model. As I pointed out earlier, women are just as likely to initiate physical violence as men, yet men are far more likely to be jailed for it.

This case, as you correctly pointed out, is an outlier among outliers and really doesn't "prove" the assertion that women get away with murder (because they generally don't), but, to my mind it underscores the way that violence against men by women is often treated as a complex issue, whereas violence against women by men is treated as a simple case of a bully hurting a helpless woman.

 

[joesixpack]

I would like to point something out you all seem to be neglecting.

The abuse does not have to be physical to be abuse.

There are approximately five different types of domestic abuse:

Physical Abuse
Sexual Abuse
Emotional Abuse
Financial Abuse
Identity Abuse

(Source) (And note, that's a gay men's domestic violence awareness type of website)

This woman could have suffered horribly from abuse and never had a single mark to prove it because the abuse was all emotional or mental. Just wanted to point that out.

Edit: Here's another website which points out that emotional abuse is just as bad as physical abuse.

I suffered both emotional and financial abuse, but there is no way that a murder charge would have been reduced to manslaughter without millions of dollars worth of lawyers, and even then there'd be no guarantee of the outcome. I'd likely hang.

If you or anyone you know is in an abusive relationship (man or woman, straight or gay) the best thing to do for them is help them find a way out.

 

[fuelair]

My wife was abused for twenty years by her ex husband. She still bears the physical scars and suffers every day because of the abuse (tinnitus, nose bleeds and dental problems to name some).
He has never been charged with any offence.
I guess women's lives mean nothing in our modern society.

Is it (ex) still alve? Really shouldn't be, you know.