Ends justifying the means

[Dannyalcatraz]

The bottom line is that she tried nothing else. She went directly to murder.

Actually, we don't know if she tried leaving him before or anything like that. We only know how the case ended. For all we know, this was her first or thirty-third attempted remedy to her situation.

And it was manslaughter or "a homicide", not murder.

 

[Bedrockgames]

If the judge heard them then they were part of the trial. Who hired them becomes a pretty important bit of info. Basically, IMO, there's not enough evidence to suggest that they were definitely on the level - whether it was one, three or a hundred people.

It is one piece of data. That is all. And like i said, the fact that the judge suspended the sentence says a lot about how compelling their testimony was. That with all the other details we do know, suggest to me she was a seriously abused woman, making a difficult and risky decision in a less than ideal mental state. That is not someone i am willing to put into prison, and the judge agrees with me. Now you don't have to share my conclusion. That's up to you. But i don't share your opinion that she deserves to be in prison. I feel the circumstances warranted special consideration and she was acting to protect her child. Clearly you feel differently.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Odds are good that if there were 3 experts, at least one was hired by the state.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Actually, we don't know if she tried leaving him before or anything like that. We just know how the case ended.

Yes there is a lot we dont know about their relationship and a lot we can probably assume. In a case where the woman was abused for years by the husband, she believes he is about to molest her daughter, and he is forcing her to lure young women to the home through online chats, I am inclined to believe the woman felt this was the only way out and the only way to protect her child.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Actually, we don't know if she tried leaving him before or anything like that. We only know how the case ended. For all we know, this was her first or thirty-third attempted remedy to her situation.

And it was manslaughter or "a homicide", not murder.

Well, one of the things BWS is that people believe that the their abuser is omnipresent or omniscient. If the BWS claim is true, she probably wouldn't have tried to run because she would have been too afraid that he would know about it and punish her for it. That may explain why she contemplated killing herself. Suicide would have been the only means of escape for her where he would not be able to find her and punish her afterwards.

On a side note, I think BWS will end up categorized the same as insanity and insanity defenses. That is to say, it'll be a purely legal term. The of BWS are bettered classified with other diagosis. I don't see it coming together into a single diagnosis any time soon, if at all.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Odds are good that if there were 3 experts, at least one was hired by the state.

That's assuming that there were only three experts. There could have been more. The three mentioned may have been the ones hired by the defense.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

Actually, we don't know if she tried leaving him before or anything like that. We only know how the case ended. For all we know, this was her first or thirty-third attempted remedy to her situation.

And it was manslaughter or "a homicide", not murder.

What we do know is that on the date she murdered her husband that he was asleep at the time. She was also able to leave the home and use a neighbor's phone. These are all things that would have allowed her to leave the home and call for help. If she knew everything she said about her husband she could have relayed that information to the authorities and they would have been compelled to check it out.

And yes, I know what she was convicted of. It's not the actual crime she committed, though. That's kinda why I'm debating.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

Meh.
All a woman has to do is simply claim abuse and she automatically receives pity and automatically paints the male in a negative light, no matter if she is telling the truth or not.

And ZB is right. She could have left the home while the husband slept. Instead she kills him. Smells like murder to me.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That's assuming that there were only three experts. There could have been more. The three mentioned may have been the ones hired by the defense.

Allow me to clarify- it is highly unlikely that only defense experts would have examined her and testified. It is almost automatic that the state will hire its own expert as well, unless both sides agree to have a single, mutually chosen diagnostician.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

And yes, I know what she was convicted of. It's not the actual crime she committed, though. That's kinda why I'm debating.

Do you have some way to divine her mental state from press releases?

Murder requires a certain state of mind that the prosecution could not convince anyone she had, not even in the indictment phase. That's the part of the pre-trial proceedings in which the prosecution formally charges the defendant with the crimes they will be held over for trial..and of which it has been famously said that you can convince grand juries to indict a ham sandwich for murder.

Thus the term manslaughter or homicide is proper, whereas murder is probably not.