Killer Mary Winkler gets her kids back. I have no words to describe how unfair the justice system is towards men who are slaughtered by their wives.
Labels: female violence
posted by Helen at 7:03 AM
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Contributors
Previous Posts
- Ask Dr. Helen: Preparing for Disaster--Prudent or ...
- Dating Advice for Men
- Blogger Problem Resolved
- Nifong was "Intoxicated by the Media"
- More Summer Reading
- "In general, a restraining order is only enforceab...
- The View from My Window
- Church Shooting in Knoxville
- Blogging Sucks: Women, minorities hardest hit.
- Going Fishing
40 Comments:
somewhere along the line I read that the children had nightmares of being reunited with their mother.
Heck, I know I would not want to be in her care
From the article: "According to the testimony from Matthew Winkler's oldest daughter, Patricia, the dead father--who as he lay dying looked at his wife and asked "why?"--was a good man and did not abuse her mother."
The real abuse is making these children live with the piece of human scum who murdered their father. And I'd say the same thing if it were reversed and the father had murdered the mother, although we know the reverse will never happen.
This is extremely disturbing news. I fear for the children,nw, effectively chattel in thehands of this lying, murdering sack of s***.
And the victim's familyand his kids have been further victimised by granting that lying, killing sack of doo-doo.
The Jurors at her trial must have been total idiots for net being able to see throuhg her totally false story. And the Judge too was stupid to allow her the battered woman defense.
The only words that I can think of are: "and you're surprised by this?"
pdwalker,
No, not surprised, mostly disgusted.
Disgusting, outrageous, ridiculous, idiotic, ...
Dammit, I left my thesaurus at home. I truly feel sorry for these kids.
Yes, it is disgusting, and a direct consequence of the many changes in North American culture over the last 30 years.
Women, there is no need to divorce him now, just shoot him in the back. It's much quicker that way even if he bleeds out slowly over a couple of hours.
"... just shoot him in the back."
-------------
Call me old-fashioned and chivalrous, but I don't think women should have to be subjected to the loud noise of a gun and the unpleasant smell of the gunpowder etc.
With just a small increase in taxes, a national disposal center could be set up for men - when the woman calls the toll-free number, a crew comes out, separates the man from any residual money he has on him, and takes him away for disposal.
"I have no words to describe how unfair the justice system is towards men who are slaughtered by their wives."
I completely sympathize. Nobody ever cares about the welfare of the dead, as they don't have the vote.
Also, judges are generally stupid, gutless cowards who fear for their jobs, IMHO.
I have words for it. Oh my, do I have words for it. However, this being polite company, I shall not express them here.
Yes, I agree. It's a very sad day. I don't believe Mary Winkler's testimony whatsoever. There were so many contradictions it isn't even funny.
Hmm, so verbal abuse, if there was any, is a good excuse for terminal abuse?
And I just saw this a.m. an article on growing old single. Maybe its for the best. I guess unless one wants kids do not get married.
Men, do not get married. Just don't do it.
The murder of a husband is now winked at by the law, if adverted to it at all. Since Mary Winkler's children have been returned to her, I can only conclude that the government either (1) doesn't think she did anything wrong or (2) condones what she did.
In any event, men have zero legal protection in a marriage, even from harm against their person. Absolutely NONE.
These bitches need to be left alone and childless. If you must get married, do it somewhere where men still have rights in a marriage. That means leaving the United States.
Oh, and don't bring her back either, because she'll get Oprahized in a very few months.
What is informative is to read these various news accounts and posts and then read the comments from women about it.
Its not a random sample, of course .... but just reading the comments from this self-selected group women is terrifying... you will see the same attitudes, beliefs, misandry, illogic ( the sheer crazy irrationality ) and , sense of entitlement,etc... many , many times over if you just read or listen to women.
I never really delved into the Mary Winkler case but Helen seems interested in it so I've been reading the MW threads here sort of passively. About 2 weeks ago there was some news program about the case on one of those news channels, I can't remember which one. On it 2 women, I have no clue as to who they were or what made them an expert, were discussing the case. They put up a picture of those platform shoes that MW's husband asked her to wear. One of the news ladies said, "You have to put this in perspective, see what Mary Winkler's husband made her wear?, you have to get into the mindset of what Mary Winkler was going through." So I'm looking at this picture of a 6 inch platform shoe, being asked to wear the shoes really isn't all that bad. Mary Winkler could have easily told her husband she chose not to wear the shoes if she didn't wish to do so. If the shoes really bothered her, I would have suggested that she get a divorce, as there is a divorce lawyer on every street corner these days.
I did try really hard to see the killing of her husband from Mary Winkler's perspective. I perceive that she is a murderer, there isn't much else that I could come up with. I also think she was given a pass because she did the deed in Tennessee, where her lawyers was able to play on the fact MW was a minister's wife. She would have been given a stiffer sentence in most other places.
Mary Winkler shouldn't have her kids back, she should be in prison where she belongs.
I think a lot of the blame has to go to the prosecutors. They were simply under-prepared and out-lawyered.
That's one thing it shares with the O. J. Simpson case. Clark and Darden took a winnable case and fumbled it away.
You're probably right there, Craig. Most prosecutors, when they have a solid case, operate under the assumption that the case is going to settle. So they're often caught off-guard when a case actually goes to trial, and the jury will think the case is bad just because the presentation is bad. And if you put that up against slick defense lawyers who know what they're doing, it's a recipe for disaster. The movie Chicago is a satire of exactly that.
Any minimally competent lawyer could have gotten Winkler off-- its a no-brainer--
just completely slime the deceased male with uncorroborated allegations that arouse contempt, anger , disgust ( the CAD triad) and more.
Its a well-honed recipe ( esp since 1978 or so, but always used) that almost ALWAYS gets women who kill/maim their husbands/lovers off-- no matter what the circumstances.
Its all a pre-text--- almost all women always believe that if a woman killed a man-- he "deserved it" ( misandry and gynophiliaism). So they just look for something they "know" must be there and when it is merely alleged-- and it should involve forced , unnatural sex acts and harming small children--
you'll get the "Amen" from women everywhere.
The AOL News post has generated some 2,000 posts--- again, its not a random sample, and its self-selected, but if you want to get nauseated and disgusted, go read the comments women have left.
Are any of the children boys? I fear for him the most. Someone needs to keep an eye out on her, especially if she takes a life insurance policy out on her boy. The daughters, hopefully, will not grow to be like her. When she runs low on cash, she'll marry again. And some idiot in that town will be happy to marry her.
br549,
The three children are all girls. I can't imagine what these girls must feel, knowing that their mother killed their father.
The three children are all girls. I can't imagine what these girls must feel, knowing that their mother killed their father.
One can't help but wonder how many girls, including these 3, will internalize the contempt (for men and boys) inherent in this trial verdict.
Randian,
The problem is, there is no message to counteract the contempt for men and boys for many girls. If their mother tells her version of the story and the media and political storyline is that men are predators, evil and bad, then it will be difficult to come to the conclusion that men are just human beings like everyone else with feelings, flaws, and good points. Hopefully, somewhere along the line, their love for their father, their own intelligence or good role models will help them understand what happened.
I think the modern media is a great threat to our freedom and safety. They don't even deserve the title media, they are really activists (often bigots) masquerading as non-partial journalists.
They're having an interesting discussion on a related issue over at the XX Factor on Slate. Here's the first post: Kidnapping, Divorce, and How Feminism Short Shrifts Dads. The only consensus so far seems to be that the system is deeply unfair. :)
And people wonder why increasing numbers of men are not willing to tie the knot....
I find it particularly disturbing that the oldest child's words meant nothing to the jury.
Unfortunately, our society is rewarding people for bad behavior. All this does, is encourage others to mimic said behavior. How long until we hear about another incident where a man is shot while sleeping, and the perpatrator (woman) claims "I was afraid".
Great example to the kids, huh?
As the Bible records-- women have been murdering /maiming sleeping men since the dawn of time.
Judges 4:21--------
" But Jael, Heber's wife, took a tent peg and seized a hammer in her hand, and went secretly to him and drove the peg into his temple, and it went through and into the ground; for he was sound asleep and exhausted. So he died"
Just google 'sleeping husband' or 'asleep husband"--- attacking unconscious men in their sleep is typically the way women effect murder.
BUT she is not serving any time behind bars, correct? By YOUR law, she wasn't found guilty as punishable by spending time in jail.
Hmmm, whether you agree or not those are her children. LAW dictates this; YOUR law.
Deal with it :)
To Wonder Woman:
Right!! When a man is injured, it's men's fault. When a woman is injured, it's men's fault. If men do what they do because that's what feminazi bigots demand, then it's still men's fault if anything goes wrong. And if men don't do what feminazi bigots demand, then men are monsters.
Do you notice a pattern here?
Wonder Woman,
And the law is wrong in this case, happens all the time which is why people are upset. Next time a woman is murdered and a guy gets off (when hell freezes over), maybe you'll eat your words.
Wonder Woman:
I don't quite get the stress on YOUR law.
I assume you mean that the legislator is majority male, so whatever those people decide is "men's law", so all men have to accept that "they" made the law. Is that what you are getting at?
There is the "front man" fallacy - the majority of voters are women, so you have to assume that women are at least assisting in putting these people - men or women - in office and that they at least represent women's views in part.
Then there is the issue of whether men act the same as women in power. In other words, if female legislators would only push women's issues, is that the same case with men? Probably not, because men are operating under chivalry for women, that's why there are people like Joe Biden who pushed through the one-sided VAWA laws.
Lastly, I don't know if the problem here lies with the statute itself or with the actions of the jury. There are certainly laws against murder with strict penalties, but the jury didn't seem to want to go that route here.
Lastly, are you a young person? LOL. I hope daddy isn't still paying for you.
There is a point where the view of all events as actions of a "class" of people fails. It no longer works as a model.
Here, Wonder Woman is so immersed in her world view of men vs. women that she ONLY thinks of events in those terms.
Not in more realistic terms, for instance a person who committed a gruesome murder got away with it (kind of like OJ Simpson - that wasn't right either, and it was possibly based on race not gender).
Side note: I meant "legislature" above, not "legislator".
There was a skit on David Letterman many, many years ago (that wasn't particularly funny) about a dentist reviewing movies. All of his reviews revolved around the actor's teeth in some way.
That's kind of what feminists do: All of their thoughts are based on male/female and more likely Bad Man / Good Woman.
So that's how they view the world. It isn't reality, though, any more than the dentist's view of the world is any more than a small slice of reality.
Second side note: Eliminate "lastly" in the penultimate paragraph above. There are too many "lastly"s.
@jg "I don't quite get the stress on YOUR law."
It is sort of like the mother who says "wait until your father gets home." The mother is judge, jury, and sets the sentence, but leaves the impression that it is the father who is in control.
Women for whatever reason don't run for office as much as men (by their own choice), but they do vote more, so it is they who elect the most legislators. So there is a great deal of pandering to women and influence by women, but the preception that men have more power than they actually do.
The notion that because something is law that it is just is absurd. Slavery was legal, and women's voting was illegal, and that hardly made the laws moral.
I understand a lot of people in Mary's community gave her a bunch of money, a new car (which she sold for the money) etc.
She loses a good chunk of the money her husband earned on a Nigerian scheme and on check-kiting, she then murders her husband in cold blood (probably just to avoid any uncomfortable confrontation about losing all that money), lies about the circumstances of his death, most likely lies about being abused by him, evades punishment with these lies - and people shower her with money, other gifts and praise.
It's downright scary.
Absolutely sickening.
I think it's not only an example of how unfair the justice system is towards men who are slaughtered by their wives, but it reveals a larger (and increasingly dominant) role-reversal mindset that sees criminal perpetrators and bullies as victims, and those they attack as less worthy of compassion.
It all depends on whether the perp belongs to a politically favored group, and the target to a politically disfavored one.
I agree that there are no words to describe how unfair this is in a free country supposedly built on the rule of law. Words can describe the mechanism, but there are no words to convey the sheer horror of our descent into mob rule (aided, of course, by media-fueled groupthink dynamics).
Stay away from women. They can imprison you at will. They can take your children. They can take your property. Under VAWA, they can force you out of your own house. They can kill children and get away with it. They can kill you and get away with it.
Just stay away from them.
視訊做愛聊天室avdvd-情色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費Ａ片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520plus論壇sex520免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費Ａ片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費Ａ片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片後宮0204movie免費影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片免費視訊聊天jp成人sex520免費影片
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
聊天室080聊天室找一夜聊天室找一夜視訊ggo聊天室找一夜聊天室找一夜聊天室找一夜聊天室ut聊天室ut聊天室ut聊天室ut聊天室ut聊天室尋夢園聊天室尋夢園視訊交友高雄網視訊交友聊天室尋夢園聊天室尋夢園
Post a Comment
<< Home