From the Houston Chronicle.
Does the the prolonged abuse of a spouse justify the murder of the offender?
Personally since this women has not tried to seek any treatment for her and her husband prior to stabbing him 200 times, I think she should face full repercussions of her actions.

I think -- in this case -- it'll matter more in sentencing than in her trial. It's an explanation of mitigating circumstances, not a defense.

Now, if he had been actively beating her at the moment she picked up the knife, then that's another story. But that doesn't appear to be the story, since it seems he was tied up at the time.

The woman who stabbed her husband you are speaking of should be aquitted on the grounds of self defense. The fact that her husband was tied only shows that she was afraid of him and the number of times she stabbed him shows the extent of that fear. She was making sure that he was dead and would not be able to attack her again at some future date. It is easy to say go for treatment or just leave but as the husband of a wonderful woman who was beaten senseless time after time for years by a former husband I know different. As for leaving two years after she left and divorced him he was still using their child as leverage to be able to thump her some more. Only the appearance of a very large and very determined body guard namely me, stopped the man.
I firmly believe that the first time a man beats his wife or girlfriend she is justified in blowing his head off. She has no physical recourse as she will undoubtly lose if she fights back possibly inciteing greater injury to herself as a result. Many women have been killed by their spouse in retaliation for the simple act of trying to leave or seek help. The batterer will with out exception threaten the woman if she shows any sign of leaving or trying to seek help. Call the police. I can hear that already forming in someones mind. Yes if there has been violence and the guy is still there, they will arrest him. He will make bail in 24 hours and quite possibly return and beat the woman near death in retaliation if not kill her outright. If she lives she will have learned that calling the cops just sets her up for a worse beating by a now furious husband.
So Rev suppose you are living with someone much larger and stronger than you. And for the slightest reason or no reason at all he blacks your eyes breaks your nose punches you around or if hes smart inflicts terrible pain on you without leaving marks. You call the police, and when he gets out and returns home shows you just what he can do to you if you make that mistake again. You sneak out and leave, but short of being on the run for the rest of your life, he invariably finds you stalks you beats you threatens to kill you unless you come back. With really no choice that is viable you return hoping things will be better but they are not. And this continues for years getting worse and worse all the time until you are sure he will either on purpose or just by losing all control beat you to death. Unless he has beaten the will to live out of you, you will fight back to live. And since you cant match strength with strength, even you and I Rev will resort to what we can do. Bide our time, use suprize and strike a lethal blow or blows by any means we can, because we know that to attack and let this bastard live will result in our death.
In my opinion count the world better off that hes gone and let the woman get what peace out of her life that she can. She isnt a criminal. Just a person who wanted to live.

Difficult to say based on the story cited. There was no mention of "fear" associated with the woman's failure to leave the marriage, only "religious reasons". There was also no mention of prior acts, police reports, restraining orders or the like that would show a pattern of abuse. We are basically left, based on the story cited with her claims that he was a bad person and her only way out was to kill him. Frankly, I'm a little bit on the skeptical side here. I'm hardly an expert on religions, but I sure as heck have never heard about one that says it's wrong to leave your husband, but it's ok to kill him. If there's one like that out there, I'd like to know so I can tell my friends to steer clear of it.

Please, not only did she stab him 193 times. They also found melted candlewax in his groin area. She obviously tortured him before killing him. You cannot argue self-defense, regardless of past behavior of the victim, when the victim is tied up, tortured, and stabbed 193 times. There is also little evidence of past domestic abuse. When a woman is caught red-handed, after killing her husband, this is the defense she is left with; or insanity.

I'd have to agree with you on this one. Her story sounds very
far-fetched. Women can be very cruel to men too, and
they have the upper hand in that they can bring out the
"He abused me, and threatened to kill me" plea.
It's actually not that hard to steer clear of abusive relationships.
I've never been in one, and I'm no genius when it comes to
choosing men.

I may misunderstand the question asked here. I thought the topic was does long term abuse justify murder with this one case used as an example. I am not that familiar with this particular case as to candle wax and such and I assumed that it was a case of long term abuse. I plead quilty to taking some things for granted on this particular case based on the way the topic is worded.
However in general, where long term physical abuse is reasonably proven I stand by my statements.

Prolonged abuse would mean that the woman has stayed in an
abusive relationship for a long period of time. In any relationship, there
are warning signs. The first time a man uses physical force
with a woman should be the last time. She should get out. If she
chooses to stay, and become a "victim", then she will pay the price
for her lack of sound judgment.

Women need to take responsibility for the choices they make in life.
If we play with fire, we will get burned.

Never ever ever ever ever an excuse. ONLY IMINENT self defense is an excuse i.e. "he was coming after me with his fists clenched". If the person is competent to stand trial, they are competent to leave the person THE FIRST TIME they abuse the other person.

This is the common defense now in almost every case of spousal murder commited by the wife. I have to help all the time with determining culpability in these cases, and I very rarely see a case where this is a valid defense. This is the new "defense de' jour" for attorney's to play on the juries heart strings.

Abuse is rarely a one way street either, especially in long term relationships (though, of course, I am not condoning or saying this is alright or is ALWAYS the case)- but there is almost always a relationship dynamic between these two poeple- the woman is emotionally and verbally abusive to the man until he explodes and uses violence. Once again, I am not being insensitive to abuse, because it is horrible, but there is a dynamic here that does not make it completely one sided as one might think. Worse, both spouses usually come from homes that had this same dynamic. The Mom yells at everyone- dad gets drunk and beats mom.

The thing is- there is no reason on God's green earth she stays till she snaps. The courts are completely one sided and don't even recognize abuse from females in many states, and shelters won't even accept men that are abused by women. Nor do the courts in divorce cases recognize abuse from the women either, unless she does it to the kids as well.

Sooo- she has all the resources and none of the draw backs , and therefore, no excuse.

Ask yourself this- would anything she would have done to him exonarated him doing the same to her?

Im sorry cruiseingram but I have to disagree. That sounds good on its face by the actual truth is that to many women are murdered by husbands who have went berserk after they left. If a woman is found by her abusive husband and she hasnt armed herself she will have little choice but to return to the home as he will continure to harrass and promise and abuse her until he wears her down or makes her believe that he has changed. I do not believe this woman snapped as in went insane. I do believe she feared for her life and saw no other way out. I also beleive that the way the attack was carried out bears out how much fear she had of this man. She is not a professional killer with knowedge of how much damage is needed to kill. She feared if he got free once she had retaliated she faced certain death and simply struck until she was certain he could no longer harm her. I have not heard how the candle wax got on his pubic area but absent any evidence it could have gotten there any number of ways. It would certainly not be for torture as hot candle wax cools very quickly and causes little if any pain.
I believe that this woman should walk. She struck in self defense, is not a danger to society in general, nor do I believe is she a danger to any male she might marry as long as he doenst treat her like an animal. She, in only my opinon, has preformed a service to society by riding the world of a brutal and cruel person. Of course I place any man who will strike a woman in anger no matter what the provocation excluding of course defending his life in that catagory and believe the world is better off without them.

And you came to this belief... how? What article did you read different from the one posted that provided more details on how she was abused? Or are you just taking her word for it now that she's up for trial?

I agree that IF she was abused repeatedly for a long time that it might be mitigating circumstances in her trial, but I haven't seen any evidence that this was true. But your posting is so definite-sounding that I wonder what you read.

Just curious.

I believe it depends on the circumstances of which the crime was committed. Under certain circumstances it would be justifiable. I am not sure about Susan Wright's case, although it does look suspicious, but hopefully her jury will get enough information to make the right decision.


Doomed I have a hard time with this argument. You fail to consider that some women can not get out. That their husbands and/or boyfriends will not let them. Yes they need help, yes they shouldn't resort to killing in order to end that fear, but in some circumstances they don't know how to end the cycle of violence without killing the abuser. A woman is a victim the first time a man abuses her. Whether that abuse is verbal or physical. I am not condoning Susan Wright's actions because I don't have the evidence to say she was or was not abused. To say that women, who are abused and don't get out should pay the price is unconscionable.


Gee I wonder where you got that one from there seems to a lot more homicides (30%) against women than women against men (6%). I don't see that this is a common "defense" theme. Perhaps they were the only ones to end it before they were actually killed. I am not saying that all instances where a woman claims prolonged abuse is valid. She would need to prove that in order for that defense to be reasonable and valid.

edited to try and get the quotes to work.

I will try to find and post some stats on this- but for me, the argument boils down to a couple of thoughts:

1) If the roles were reversed, would you feel the same way for the man? Or as archer said, his torture killing her justified and ridding the world of her evil presence?

2) Culpability and criminal thinking. Is a woman less culpable of a crime than a man? For instance, is there a way that you can find the same pity for a man to kill his children like in the Andrea Yates case?

If you can not place a man in the place and give him the same "pass" for the crime- then she deserves the same sentence.

I understand Archer was a cop? He usually sees the domestic violence at the point of the crime- I usually see it later in the therapy mode. Alot more of the truth comes out at that time. We just had a very interesting case dealing with this where my unit psychologist testified against the defendent. A man, with documented history of being mentally berated and emotionally attacked daily for years finally snapped, and in a fit of rage, killed her. Not tying her up and stabbing her repeatedly, he picked up a bottle and hit her, killing her, one time. He got 35 years for this. There was no dispute on her treatment of him, by anyone, including her own mother on cross-examination.

But since he didn't leave her, too bad, so sad. They had kids together, and she repeatedly took him to court every time he tried to leave her and made it painfully obvious that he would be her economic slave the rest of his life if he left her.

The question of culpability hinged on PTSD, both in his own abusive childhood and by his deceased wife.

Now, was he less culpable than the lady in our question, well, yes. But I doubt she will serve half the time.

This is of course a very biased site- but at least it is a rebutal of the movement that denies any female culpability in any crime really:

http://www.menweb.org/throop/domestic-index.html

I would see it as a legitimate defense. I wouldn't argue that men didn't have a right to assert prolonged abuse and if they can prove it then it would be valid. The same goes for women, Unfortunately the trend lies more with women being killed and abused by their husbands/boyfriends rather than the other way around.

No a woman is not less culpable. In any case the evidence must be brought forth and heard by the jury. I don't remember asserting that women were less culpable then men. The question for debate was regarding a spouse murdering using a woman's specific case as prelude.

If a defendant claims prolonged abuse to justify their actions then it is up to them to prove that abuse. I don't disregard the fact that a woman or man will use the defense, even when it isn't true. That, though, does not change my belief that when their is prolonged abuse murder could be justified.

If you are being beaten (physically, or emotionally) by your spouse, leave him/her.

I am a man who was married for ten years to a woman who punched/scratched/kicked, and yes, "stabbed" me. Worse than that, she told terrible lies to my family, friends and employer ("you gotta keep this a secret, or he'll kill me"). She actually described the both of us, but switched the roles. She described (in secret to these people) things that she did to me, but in her stories she had me doing them to her. I never saw that in any of these "abused spouse" Thursday movies.

Call me a cissy, but I could have beaten her to a pulp, but never did. I only used my strength to deflect blows, and take away the knife. So why did I stay for ten years? Dunno. Before an abuser abuses, he/she needs to destroy self-esteem in the victim. I had nowhere to go. Nobody loved me. I believed her that I was the most disgusting human who had ever lived. It didin't happen on the first date. Can you imagine that ? Never would have seen her again.

There was a very slow "chipping away", a constant testing. Peice by peice, self-esteem was taken away. "You looked a complete fool tonight". "Your work-mates" laugh at you behind your back". "Everybody aks me why I'm married to you, when I could do do much better" and so on...
Obviously, most people would would run a mile from this. I was only 16 when I met her, and had an unhappy home life (where I would challenge my father to a fight just to prevent another beating of my mother).

After ten years, I couldn't take it anymore. I wanted her dead. Or, me dead. I could not kill her, because it is wrong to kill. I thought about killing myself, but, instead, decided to leave her, my job, my country and travel the world. There was a terrible withdrawal period. Never understood why I should greive the loss of horror. And still don't. I guess that it is similar to alcohol/drug addiction.

I started this reply to give my opinion that the woman committed murder, when she could have just left him, and should be punished for murder. But, in writing my reply I have now become confused. Old emotins and fears have been evoked. I had the intelligence and imagination to walk away. Maybe she didn't, or maybe she's lying. But I have to say that, if I was on the Jury, I might be moved to sympathize (or empathize). Maybe she's faking. The Jury should be made up of spousal abuse victims, bacause they will know if she is telling the truth, or trashing their hurt.

Tough one, this.

I am only speaking to the act of physical abuse. I realize that there is such a thing as emotional and mental abuse but that in itself would not justify at least to me killing the abuser. In those cases especially in a male who has the physical strength to leave regardless, I feel he should go.
A woman usually cannot repel her attacker by force and that fact I think mitigates the use of weapons by her. I guess my stand is caused by my belief that no woman or man should be subjected to physical beatings simply because they lack the strength to repel the attack. That is what I mean by saying that a woman who is being physically beaten by her husband, boyfriend, or whatever should not be convicted of a crime if she grabs a gun and blows him away. I also dont believe that where long term PHYSICAL abuse is proven, even though she has suffered the beatings before and not wound up dead, a woman unexpectedly attacks and kills the abuser should be convicted of a crime. In my mind these are clear cut cases of self defense, even though the woman may have to suprize her abuser in order to have a chance of survival of the encounter. I do not believe that the average healthy man can be physically intimidated by the average woman to the point that he cannot remove himself from the situation and summon help.
To confused: Sir you have my respect and admiration for your restraint. I do not view you as a whimp, but a man who though possessing the greater strength and the ability to inflict massive harm, has enough respect for himself and for his wife not to use it even though provoked. I salute you sir.
Yes I was a police officer for a time and the domestic violence calls I had occasion to answer ran the gamut from ridiculous to deadly. But the common factor in all of them was that the abuser was male, ususally a repeat offender, an obvious liar when confronted with his actions and cowardly both with myself and by reputation when confronted with anyone who might be able to smack him around a little. Usually heavy drinkers or drug users. Of all the domestic abuse calls I answered as an officer I only had one occasion to be met at the door by a very large and beligerent sober male who had the guts to try to do to me what he had obviously just done to his wife who was lying in a sobbing bloody heap on the living room floor behind him. I will admit that it gave me great pleasure to show him the same compassion he had just had for his wife.

Does prolonged abuse justify murder?

No! We just can't condone murder as a way to stop the abuse. These abusive people (mates, partners or parents) aren't worth one minute's time behind bars let alone a sentence of x number of years or life.

I question this particular case because there is so little information provided. I have read and heard about situations that were so hopeless (especially years ago before the authorities and the public were re-educated on abuse) in resolving even after all avenues of escape were exhausted. There was a movie based on a true story where the woman killed her husband and actually thought her prison sentence (8-10 years) was better than life with her abusive husband. She said she was at peace for the first time in decades!

Don't misunderstand me, I am not making light of the predicament of anyone that is in an abusive relationship nor do I excuse the abuser. The fact they were reared in a home where abuse existed or they were abused is a REASON but not an EXCUSE for the abusive cycle to continue.

There are almost ALWAYS exceptions to the rule...but I will stand by "No".

Well first off I opened this thread for all types of domestic abuse/ murder cases.
As stated before, I was using this one as an example.
As for this case, I think that the woman is lying because stabbing someone 200 times doesn't show fear, that shows hate and passion. Next there is the issue of him being tied to the bed. Since the defendant in the case was an ex-stripper I doubt she had any problem coercing her spouse to agree. Then there was the hot wax in the genetilia area, sure it might not burn other places, but genetelia area is pretty sensitive. Finally the $200,000 dollar life insurance policy. Hmmm, ex stripper (which I don't trust after knowing many of them) and life insurance policy. True she has had one black eye, which no one except the decease is going to dispute how it happened, and a tearful mother as a witness. No prior domestic violence calls, no attempts for counseling, it just sounds too much like a gold digger murder for me.
Now back to the issue. I am completely satisfied with our current laws. If he/she comes after you, then its all fair game, but if you premeditated it, it is no longer a murder in self defense but instead a murder of hate and should be prosecuted as such. Two wrongs don't make it right. I do not see how these people let this go on. I have offered my "services" to many abused spouses, but they simply pass on it. I think we need to make these abused people more aware of the resources that are available to them, and also increase the resources made available to them. Then, there should be a longer cooling off period, more then 24 hours, and mandatory consueling following an domestic violence call.

If there is a reasonable expectation that you are going to be killed by trying to leave is where the determination needs to be made. Physical abuse does not necessarily imply that the abused spouse has no reasonable fear that their life is in jeopardy.

I want to clarify that I don't believe spousal abuse is a complete justification for murder. Each instance needs to be judged on the facts behind each case. Once a spouse murder's another spouse and uses such a defense to exonerate themselves then they hold the responsibility of proving such a defense.

My quote is right there. I said that women who finds themselves in
abusive relationships should get out ASAP (as in, way before they
bring kids into such an environment). I then went on to say that
women who choose to stay with abusive men WILL pay the price.
It's inevitable. I did not say they SHOULD pay the price (just want
to clarify that).

Men can be charming and come across real sweet and all that,
in the beginning. But an astute woman will see warning signs.
It should be every woman's priority to make sure she involves
herself with non-violent men.

Are there cases where a woman had to kill her spouse, as a form
of self-defense? Yes!! Should the women in those cases have
been smarter in the beginning, when they first involved themselves
with such men? Yes!!

We are all accountable for our choices in life. Obviously, hindsight
is 20/20, but a little common sense will go a long way...

I was probably one good piece of advice away from being the subject of a discussion like this. Would I have been justified in fighting back? I don't know. Was I in fear for my life? Yes, it was years before I ever crossed a street without looking for my ex-wife behind the wheel of any car in the street that I was crossing...

In my divorce hearing, I testified about my first wife's habit of placing a knife at my throat while I was sleeping, then waking me and saying, "Talk to me!" Her rebuttal was, "It's just a little knife." I wasn't able to offer the knife in evidence as rebuttal. I tried to look up the specs for Gerber's Excalibur knife on the Internet just now. Apparently they no longer manufacture it. My recollection is that the blade was something in the neighborhood of 14 - 16" long; but I was looking at it more frequently from my pillow, than I ever looked at it while carving a turkey.

I was discussing that habit of hers with a therapist one day. "She woke me up again with a knife at my throat this morning. I felt like trying to wrestle it away from her. One of us would have likely died if I did." The therapist advised me to check into a motel for the night. I did, and the following day, my wife gave me a 5:00 PM deadline to get everything I wanted from the marriage out of the house.

Should I have stayed married for 22 years? No. Was I aware of other options? I had been married nearly 20 years the first time that I sat in a seminar on abuse and its effects. I had been raised that marriage was "Till death do us part." My parents had quit talking to my oldest brother once he divorced. Her parents separated to different cities for decades, but never divorced. I saw my parents kiss once. Usually, they were fighting at the top of their lungs if they were both home. When I got married the first time, we left the church and my bride took off her wedding ring and told me never to refer to her as my wife. She spent several hours visiting friends who hadn't made it to the wedding. The ensuing fight lasted 22 years. We really had no normal pattern to compare our lives to.

Well I have to wade in again I agree with rev that there has been a big improvement in the laws concerning domestic violence in the past few years. And I also agree that many wives I have had dealings with in this area do act like they seem to not want help other than getting the guy out of the house for a while. Domestic violence calls are some of the most dangerous for an officer as you never know what might happen. I have pulled a drunken husband off his wife only to be attacked by the wife! Make sense? No. Does it happen? Yep more frequently than you might think.
The problem seems to me, after talking with a number of spouses that were abused is that a lot of them have been made by the abuser to believe that it is somehow their own fault. If they just hadnt said this or that or if they would have supper ready or they refuse to have sex when the guy wants to and a ton of other excuses.
Many wives will not press charges though that has changed as the state will usually charge the abuser themselves now days. Some wives cite love while others cite fear as the main reasons for not pressing charges. The one constant that I did find was that for those who want to get out, fear of the abuser following them and killing them is the most common reason.
As for this specific case that is used as an example, I have to rely on what im hearing here as to the evidence, so my opinions may be totally off base concerning it. I have no doubt that the victim was suduced into being tied up as I doubt she could have forced him too. My instinct is that the candle wax on the genetal area probably got there as part of that suduction. Kinky I know but different strokes ya know A murder for money? That doesnt feel right to me either since is she is sneaky enough to set this all up and kill the guy for his insurance money I doubt that she would have stabbed him so many times as she would probably also have known that that would bring about more suspicion of her motives. I kinda doubt that she would have settled on this most violent of ways to kill him anyway if she was doing it in expectation of getting insureance money. Its possible and I could be wrong but my gut is telling me the money wasnt the reason. Hatred? Probably if he abused her as is claimed she did hate him and that could explain the excess of the attack but assuming that she was abused as she claims, I dont think that should keep her from a self defense plea. The problem I have with the "he has to be coming at her at the time" argument is that for the average woman it is to late to do anything in her own defense by then. And if after being abused for a long time, she does secretly arm herself in order to defend from a future attack by specifially her abuser then there are many that will say she premeditatedly set a trap for him. Common sense would seem to say that once attacked by a larger stronger adversary it would be nearly impossible for a woman to repel him long enough to gain the means to defend herself until the attack was over.
I am probably biased as I was forced to deal with the practical side of this issue instead of the intellectual side of it. I will stand on my own opinon that any man who hits a female for any reason EXCEPT in order to defend his life has given up his right to a place in the gene pool and my thanks to the woman who gets rid of him for the rest of society.

Confused and Curm- Thank you for sharing such personal stories with us. That was very courageous!


Ok still by saying "then she will pay the price" implies that it is her fault. Domestic violence is not and never will be the fault of the abusee. That responsibility lies squarely on the shoulder's of the abuser.

I also read an implication that non action on the abused spouse's part is that they always have a choice in leaving. That is not always the case.

Not all people have the self-esteem and/or healthy relationship models to build on. It is nice and easy to proclaim that all abused spouses should leave the second it happens but in reality that is not the case. Till you walk a mile in someone elses shoes can judgement be made as to whether or not they are able to get out of the relationship safely.

Usually in hindsight. If you saw the warning signs clearly you would not continue.
There are all kinds of dynamics, a most common goes somewhat like... the beginning is all hearts and flowers, then come the little commentaries and acts which undermine ones self esteem, perhaps jealousy or control issues arise which cause nervousness, uncertainty, some fear of the partner but without knowing why.. soon irrational arguements where one cannot defend oneself and is always at fault, with constant nitpicking or silent treatments. One tries to make it all right again, but nothing is ever right again. With or without substance abuse by the attacker, the other becomes co-dependant or utterly unsure or insecure of oneself, but it happens so slowly its almost imperceptable , then, when weakened and confused, the situation escalates...by then one is a victim and is too scared and disturbed to make good choices, sometimes feeling totally paralysed and to blame for what is happening...having probably hidden the abuse from friends and family and/or having children complicates the matter, and of course the promises that last time was the last time.....The abuser during moments of repentance resorts to crying, pleading and making claims of not being able to live without the other. And viola', you are in the loop of an unhealthy abusive relationship.

Basically its not a simple scenario as proposed by the 'you should have seen it coming" philosophy. If it were there wouldnt be so many shelters in the world.



All people should be smarter. More people should not physically abuse their partners or their children.

I agree that a woman would be hard pressed to defend herself once an attack has started, even with a weapon and she might end up dead because of it.
I myself once, finally, picked up a bottle in hopes of crashing it over his head, well, thats not what happened, and you have someone doubly infuriated. How dare you defend yourself!

As far as knowing if your partner is an abuser ahead of time, theres not always a way to tell. Women have been beaten or murdered suddenly for any number of reasons with no previous warning, getting pregnant for example, or having another man look at them or talk to them.

Does prolonged (physical) abuse of a spouse justify murder? Probably not, but its understandable.

I wouldnt have bothered with the seduction I would have done it in his sleep. She didnt do it for money or she wouldnt have stabbed him so many times, nor buried him in the backyard (no body--no insurance for years) it would be more calculated. She obviously hated the man for whatever reasons.
I think its funny that she says she had religious concerns about divorcing him, but obviously not about stabbing him to death.

Thankfully, the jury didn't buy it:

Woman Guilty of Stabbing Husband 193 Times



She should tried a different defense, like "my hand slipped... 193 times".

Curmudgeon, we are both men and posted tales of abuse by women. I believe that mostly, women get abused by men, but am I wrong? It is not easy for a man to reveal that he permitted his wife to abuse him constantly.

Obviously, neither of us could (or wanted) to fill the board with how it came to be. Two things that you said stung me.

My parents fought all the time, also.
My (catholic) parents disowned a brother when he became divorced. Divorce is a great shame in my family, and helped me to stay in the abusive relationship.

To the rest of you. I grew up in a housing project and cannot recall how many punch-ups I was invloved in as a youth. It was many. But, spousal abuse is unlike any fight I ever experienced. The abuser will only land the punch when he/she knows, with absolute certainty, that the victim will not retaliate or inform.

It is not about punches, but mental control. I would not wish it upon anyone. I am far out of reach of her swing now, but the mental scar means that I can never have a permanent relationship again. Every girlfriend I had since, got canned after her first cross word from her.

To the topic, I will say that I can understand why people kill their abuser even if he/she is not under "immediate" threat. Although Curmudgeon and I had the imagination to walk away, I have to tell you that the threat never goes away while you are in the relationship. Just cause they ain't beating you now, doesn't mean they ain't gonna kill you tomorrow. Again, it's the mental strain that drives you to insane acts.

Ever been terrified of placing a glass too loudly on the table? If not, then you cannot understand what an abusee suffers. Yes, I think massive leniency should be given to those who kill under those circumstances, but those who falsely use it as an excuse should be punished harder.

You have two guys on AD right now that are giving life stories of abuse by women- and how many active members do we have? Does it make you wonder if the percentage of stories reflect the percentage in society? I remember on the TV sitcom Christopher Titus, a really funny one, he had a girlfriend that abused him- and he made this remark "There were ____ amount of women that were abused and reported it last year in LA- but amount of 6'1" tall men in LA that reported abuse? 0.

The heart of this entire discussion, and in this case it looks very clear that she was lying, and the jury didn't buy it, also underlying my argument that almost every women that commits murder uses this defense in some manner or another, and in EVERY case I have had to go to as a possible witness ( I have been subpoened hundreds of times, but only had to testify in about 10 cases, and probably attended a little over a hundred in the 8 years I worked that ward) "Abuse" is the underlying argument to justify thier behavior.

Had Confused or Curmudgeon actually snapped one day and killed thier spouses, would have they really even realistically had the option of this defense? Absolutely not.

My ex-wife was not terribly physically abusive of me (took a swing at me once, and tried to choke me another time) but just as controlling and domineering and emotionally/psychologically abusive as any man could ever hope to be. When telling my tale to my lawyer he said "well, it's not fair, but really, men can't use any kind of "they were bad to me" gambit in divorce, because women just aren't held as accountable for thier action in court"- which is absolutely true.

So, I still say "no"- simply because there are ways out- and the resources are massive for a woman to get out, if anything, only the man has this justification- because there are virtually no avenues for him- he leaves her, she gets half (and usually more) of his stuff, no chance at custody of children etc etc.

I hear your stories, Curm and Confused and Cr, but, with all due respect, is this a recent viewpoint, with decades of abuse towards women having been considered ok within the societal norm?

Are your arguments not somewhat a sudden thought upon being abused yourselves? You did not like that. Noone does. Did you ever, or do you now reflect upon the acceptance of abuse of women as a norm in our society? What you have experienced is/has often been what we have lived with, what my mother and grandmother lived with. For every abused male there are ten times that in abused females. It sucks, and you know it now as well.

1/3 of all females you will ever meet has either been sexually assaulted, child molested, or raped in their lifetime.

Its terrible to be abused, isnt it?

CR, its tough going for abused males now, no doubt. We welcome you into the fold. However, history speaks for itself on this issue. You HAVE to undoubtably know in your field that the stacks are against females in physical abuse. Somehow, men have had the thought it was ok to beat on women for their own insecurities. Your own experience is not of abuse, but she was, as you said, 'as domineering and controlling as any man could hope to be'. Just that CR, 'as any man could hope to be.' Sort of a freudian slip dont you think, WHY?

Artemise, I didn't understand what you were questioning. My viewpoint? Victims of abuse should be given massive sympathy when judging self-defense.

Was this viewpoint recent? No. I came to it long ago, once enough time had elapsed since the realtionship. Before my experience, I never gave it much thought (but then, I was only a teenager).

I do not consider the abuse of anyone to be the norm in society today, but I acknowledge that in my Irish upbringing, it was definitely accepted as the norm a couple of decades ago for a wife to get beaten.

I suspect that you felt that my posts were about "hey, men get it too". Not so, I was posting that I thought victims of abuse could reasonably kill. I don't know why I told my story, I was thinking it and began hitting the keys. I agree that it must happen more often to women. I was just surprised that another man posted an abuse story too. I never met a man who revealed this. I was not starting a contest. I made two posts. In one I related a story of abuse. In the other, I tried to bond with Curmudgeon, who is the only other man who I know who admits to a similar experience. That's all. I am not contesting female abuse or beginning a competitve league.

My apologies, I was a little confused when I wrote this post. I was reacting to Cr seemingly saying that most women are lying about their abuse to win lawsuits, yet the reality is that too many women HAVE been abused and most have not gone to court over it. For too long it was acceptable to beat on women.

I guess my point is, as men dont like it much, we never did either. I can see why one would be able to kill over it especially when it was so commonly accepted that there was little sympathy towards someone in this situation for a long time. I get a little unnerved that because men are now experiencing abuse in kind that people are saying, well, it happens to men too and we dont get to win lawsuits! Seems bassackwards to me. Maybe the abuse defense is so exagerated because abuse is in fact rampant.

Artemise- you are correct- the reason the defense is "over-used" is because IT IS rampant- so we let the pendulum swing too far the other way. Also, there is now alot of money to be made in the domestic violence prevention circuit, so there is certainly some "over-reporting" done by many institutions- similar to what cops and teachers do to get extra funding. Also, there is little "root cause analysis" in so many cases that it is difficult for the law to see who is the victim and who is being victimized.

Luckily, the woman in this case was also stupid, so she didn't get away with it.

As criminal science and psych delve more and more into each other's realms, like profiling, we are able to expose more and more scams.

Artemise- you remember the case where the national gaurdsman was killed by a bomb at the amory a couple years ago, and the guy who did it and was convicted was thier next door neighbor? Turns out, looks like the wife may have manipulated the whole thing, but because of some quirks in the law, can never be prosecuted. This is now an object lesson up here in police work. Women do not use violence THEMSELVES but either trick others to using violence or trick the person into allowing violence to be done to themselves through manipulation- which is precisely what this woman did in our stabbing case.

You always hear how "the man was drunk and he beat her"- but you never hear she was drunk as well at the time, and a long drawn out argument was prior to this, so FOR HOURS she had the opportunity to get away (had a case lately on that one, where she badgered the guy for DAYS before he snapped, he slapped her, she stabbed him later, non-fatal, and then claimed abuse. They ruled she could have left anytime).

Assault is not justified unless you are being imminently threatened, murder is not justified unless you are being imminently threatened, and today, women have HUGE resources to get away, only men do not have that resource.

I want to begin with saying all the posters that have shared their experiences are courageous and insightful people. I have read the stories, my heart broke as I can't fathom how alone they must have felt, it sounds like a perpetual private hell. I might want to add with a smile that the very ability to share proves self respect, self worth, dignity and how absolutely beautiful they are! It is now the responsibility of the reader to hear these stories to be empathetic and honestly say to onself can I see this happening. If one is honest with oneself the answer is clear, yes it happens. We are human we have doubts, fears and insecurities they are not always logical but they exist. The next question is if I were in this persons shoes could I kill the abuser? I say for me, quite possibly, the reason is

Fight or Flightis a physiological/psychological response to a threat. During this automatic, involuntary response, an area of the brain stem will release increased quantity of NOREPINEPHRINE which in turn causes the ADRENAL glands to release more ADRENALINE. This increase in Adrenaline causes faster heart rate, pulse rate, respiration rate. There is also, shunting of the blood to more vital areas, and release of blood sugar, lactic acid and other chemicals, all of which is involved in getting the body ready for fighting the danger (a tiger, a mugger), or running away from the threat. Feelings of dread, fear, impending doom, are common.

I think I might fight because; when I was about 24 I caught a thief breaking into my car on a deserted street in Manhattan. He looked like a crack head so he was probably in need of something. It was lower midtown so it tends to be deserted late at night as it is a business district. I didn't stop to think it was a reaction I started running towards him screaming at him words I cannot repeat here. I was right next to him saw what he did to my locks started yelling how much it was going to cost to fix them LOL and then showed him that my flip up sunroof was open as the lock was broken. why did he have to ruin my locks for the stupid cheap radio! He just stood there like an idiot with his jaw on the floor! He must have thought I had a gun, he was probably afraid to run, I don't know, I finally told him to go away and he did. I think that would be a Fight response to a threat. I know that it is kind of funny, I realized on the drive home that yes he could have had a knife or gun, I was certainly close enough to him, he could have hurt me in ways I would rather not think about now.

In cases of domestic violence guilt and sentence are for the jury to decide. They will get the facts and evidence. Do I believe personally that it may justify murder? yes. Do I believe that it should apply to both sexes? of course. I also think with some community awareness we may even be able to create an environment where men can seek help. I have hope at least, if people can find in their hearts some empathy.

Im afraid that nothing can ever justify murder. I look at todays society and admit that it seems justifiable but its not. you just cant set limits of right or wrong when it comes to murder.

The answer to this one is obviously no. Under no circumstances save for possibly during the war and being tortured (which I doubt this woman has gone through) make murder legal. In the war case, You are allowed to kill because you are at war (though this is not always true), though not so much because you have been tortured as to the fact you (for the bazillionth time) are at war. If you are physically abused, report your abuser to the cops. If you have no way of reaching the cops, try to maim your attacker. If that doesnt work, duck and hope Arnold Shwarzenegger comes with a big machine gun to save you (which never happens, so just go for weak points). But I digress. This forum isn't on fighting stratyegy or the like. The point is, Murder is almost never legal to civilians. Dont try this at home, dont try this at your friend's house, dont try at all. You will fail, get caught, and wind up in prison with an ever-lonely cellmate named Bubba.
Sincerely, Psi-Sniper