Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Holy crap

10 months for killing her husband with an axe. Now that is a fucking disgrace. People are always moaning about lenient sentences but I can't see any justification for this one at all. He didn't abuse her. It was in cold blood. She hit him 11 times with an axe.


Fathers4Justice said...

If a man did that to his wife, he'd get 25 years for being a violent mentalist. Seriously. It's like the divorce courts, it's all bias against males. I know it's run by men, but the courts still favour women in almost every scenario. It's total bullshit.

bah said...

"Wadanahalugeder Chandrasekera?"

Did the journalist sneeze whilst typing?

bagelmouse said...

"but the courts still favour women in almost every scenario"

I'm going to assume that the exception you're referring to there is the appalling conviction rates and sentences handed down for rape?

The courts are generally buggered; look at the guy who got a fine and six penalty points for killing four cyclists. It's not all about the gender bias you know. It's about shit sentencing guidelines and bizarre decisions from judges.

Will said...

I think the sentences for rape these days are fine, it's the woeful conviction rate that's a problem. A lot of this I put down to police not taking these crimes seriously enough, but you also have to contend with the fact that in a lot of cases it's simply one person's word against another.

What is totally sexist, however, is being able to name the alleged attacker, whilst protecting the identity of the alleged victim. So you get the situation where someone's name becomes mud even if they've done absolutely nothing wrong.