Now that Murdering Mary Winkler has gotten custody of her kids?

Question

What are the chances for the rest of us men now that it is established that a woman can murder their children's father and still some how gain sympathy from the court? Do we need any furthur proof that the court system favors women? Or does this pretty much shore up any doubt in our minds?

Answer 1

That says it all.  Unbelievable.

Answer 2

Doesn't this case just beat all that is sane and right? That woman knew what she was doing and shot her husband in the back...how a jury could let her off is beyond my understanding...this woman is evil...

Answer 3

I don't think the court had any choice.   Several states have tried to get laws put in place that would automatically terminate parental rights if a person is convicted of killing the other parent.   There would be an exception- if the killing was due to self defense or in response years of abuse.  So since they were able to prove that - she would still get her children back.  

I think that the parents would have had a better chance to retain custody if they had supported her right to visits- one of the custody factors that is supposed to be in place.   Courts are supposed to give custody to the party least likely to interfere with visitation.  

EDIT:

To the fools who think that this posting is supportive of this decision think again. No more idiocy based emails please.  

I have had some experience with helping people develop parenting plans for custody situations.  I do know what courts consider.

Answer 4

That b*****d made her wear lingerie, don't you think he deserved to die !

Answer 5

The court system has gone bananas.

Answer 6

Unbelievable. Hopefully this is an entirely isolated incident and it won't happen again. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if enough of an uproar was raised to reverse the decision.

Answer 7

Most battered women don't know any other way to get away from an abusive husband. Seeing as how she suffered from years of verbal and mental abuse the court had good enough reason to feel sympathy for her. I think she had every right to protect herself and her kids from him.

Answer 8

The court decision is so wrong. I guess one truly can get away with murder. I hope she doesn't hurt the kids. ♥ ∞

"In an insane world, it's the sane man that appears insane."

Answer 9

Wow, that Patriarchy is something, isn't it? Who would have thought that an evil, insidious Patriarchy would create an environment in which a woman could get away with cold-blooded murder of her husband? Hmmmm...

Answer 10

I think it's sick. I really don't think she should be free. I don't care how he made her dress up. I've seen the Investigative Reports where they talk about the abuse she sustained, but it didn't warrant her killing him.  

Answer 11

What you must do is to form a group of like minded fair and reasonable people to approach politicians and say we will vote for you if you make laws more fair. You will be amazed at how desperate politicians are to get elected especially independents. The other fact is that if a political party politician ignores you  but an independent doesn't then he can look forward to a reduced vote and not getting his seat. Try it. You've got nothing to lose and everything to gain. You can then call on feminists to back you in your fight for equality and berate them mercilessly in the media for their discrimination. After that you will find it hard to not be accepted. But first you need the power of numbers

Answer 12

The investigation proved that Mary was involved in one of those "Nigerian scams" and had sent a considerable amount of their savings to the scammers.  That right there tells me that she isn't particularly intelligent and shouldn't be trusted to handle the money that is for the raising of her children.  

I also don't remember hearing anything about abuse or "sexual perversions" that convinced me she was telling the truth.

The woman wasn't insane when she killed her husband, and she didn't do it in self-defense.  She did it to keep him from finding out that all their money was gone to some scammer.  She should have been in a mental hospital for a LOT more than just 2 months, and then she should have stayed in jail for the rest of her life.

This whole case and its resolution has just been WRONG, on so many levels.

Answer 13

I'm disgusted. If someone is beating the sh*t out of you and you defend yourself in the moment and it results in their death THAT is involuntary manslaughter. If you plot to shot him when hes not looking that's 1st degree murder.

The fact that she CHOSE to stay there year after year where she knew she would be abused, that's her choice, not an excuse to execute him. The grandparents should keep those kids and she should get VERY LIMITED time with them.

This whole thing is sick.

Answer 14

wow 3 years for voluntary manslaughter i think i feel my trigger finger getting Itchy,but seriously that's a lapse in better judgement anyone can claim physical and emotional abuse,because its hard to prove

Answer 15

I am not sure how I feel about it.  I want to say it is wrong that they could return kids back to a murderer but why did the grandparents hand the kids over without a court order?  I am against the idea that women can get away with murder.  I also have seen nothing of feminist supporting this judgment; only male right activist claiming that those blogs exist.  I checked 6 pages of google and really couldn't find anything from feminist supporting the decision.  Obviously this is a decision that should take a close look but we haven't heard from the kids; they are the ones who know the truth.  They know whether or not they have been abused and they decided to go with the mother.  This case is to iffy to determine whether I feel that it is unfair to get away with murder for a lie or if it is a victim, who became an attacker, and then served her time.  

I lean towards it is to early for her to have custody of her kids.  She shouldn't be trusted because of the scam she got involved with that proves she is definitly not in the right state of mind. Didn't O.J. get away with murder?  Mary had to serve time.