WHO Poll
Q: Manuel Pellegrini - What should we do
a. A good man & a good coach we should stick with him
12%
  
b. A busted flush & he's outstayed his welcome, time to go
38%
  
c. What difference does it really make who's in charge while the current owners are still in control
50%
  



Sven Roeder 9:15 Fri Jun 7
‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Sally Challen released after it was decided she wouldn’t face a retrial and her manslaughter plea accepted.
Had been sentenced to life in jail in 2011 after murdering her husband.
He was an abusive shit but they were separated when she went round and hit him on the head with a hammer 20 times as he ate lunch.
He was an arse but given they were separated what sort of control was he exerting?

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

Hermit Road 1:57 Wed Jun 12
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
The good thing about psychologists is that if you pick the right one, they'll say whatever you want them to say. Only economics is less of an actual science whilst claiming to be scientific.

Russ of the BML 1:34 Wed Jun 12
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Chigwell 8:44 Tue Jun 11

"The CPS then instructed its own psychologist, who seems to have agreed with the new evidence that the accused was so influenced by the victim's coercive behaviour that she lost control as required for a manslaughter conviction".

That's my problem. Had he been abusing her for years and was in the process of attacking her and she lost control and killed him then yes. Manslaughter.

But to claim she lost control. Then whilst at home put a hammer in her bag, went round to his house, caved his head in and told the police 'if i can't have him then nobody can' tells me that a lot of forethought has gone into it and its therefore pre-meditated and consequently murder.

Eerie Descent 9:40 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
"So, what's the specific name they've given for your affective disorder?"


Neckphobia

Crassus 9:34 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
'if I can't have him, no one will'

That and a claw hammer through the skull, repeatedly, after a journey to do so, to a home of his, not hers

Yep, absolutely his fault

Hammer and Pickle 9:33 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
"You're a useless cunt, but that doesn't mean you don't deserved to be pummelled to death with a hammer."

So, what's the specific name they've given for your affective disorder?

Eerie Descent 9:29 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
You didn't answer the question. What a shock.

The geezer was a cunt, everyone would agree. And what he did was no doubt wrong, but they were split up, he had nothing to do with her anymore, and she went round to his gaff with a hammer and caved his head in. Those of you that think that is not pre-meditated murder, and should be treated as such, should seek help.

You're a useless cunt, but that doesn't mean you don't deserved to be pummelled to death with a hammer. The extramarital affair was punishment enough.

Hammer and Pickle 9:11 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Eerie Descent 6:04 Tue Jun 11

What makes you come to that conclusion Arserent?

Is it because you are such a social case you have completely lost the plot on who the abuser is here, and all you really want to do is talk crap with the rest of the social cases?

If there ever was a case of mitigating circumstances being considered by a prosecutor, this is one for manslaughter charges rather than murder (where the roles of aggressor and victim are clear rather than entangled). No doubt about any miscarriage here at all.

Eerie Descent 9:05 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
I'm aware that no 'Legal' precedent has been set. That would have to include men getting away with this sort of stuff as well.

Far Cough 8:51 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Arf

Nurse Ratched 8:50 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
No need. I have my teeth and fingernails.

Far Cough 8:47 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
I foresee a run on club hammers at the local B & Q with Ratched at the front :-)

Chigwell 8:44 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Actually Eerie no legal precedent has been set. All the Court of Appeal did was set aside the murder conviction on the basis that new evidence has come up which a new jury should hear. In other words, there should be a fresh murder trial. The CPS then instructed its own psychologist, who seems to have agreed with the new evidence that the accused was so influenced by the victim's coercive behaviour that she lost control as required for a manslaughter conviction. So the CPS then said they would not seek a murder retrial. The accused had already pleaded guilty to manslaughter, so that was the conviction which stood.
No change in the law has happened, because no higher court has said that coercive control is a valid defence to murder.

Eerie Descent 7:32 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Not now the precedent has been set. Have you not been taking any of this in?

, 7:30 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
No, rather you'll get banged up for eight years guilty of manslaughter.

Nurse Ratched 7:21 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
"And the floodgates open"

Yes. I am warming to this development.

I can bludgeon one or more exes to death and just get my children to say in court what cads the chaps were, and I'll walk.

mashed in maryland 7:11 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
"It's a losing battle when the majority of western males are either self proclaimed feminists or White Knight doormats."


Hahahaa, calm down King Leonidas meets Tormund Giantsbane.

Russ of the BML 6:55 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Fifth Column 5:34 Tue Jun 11

Yes. I agree. But my whole point is that by defining her crime as manslaughter, which goes against the legal definition of what manslaughter is, they set a dangerous precedent and open a very big fat can of worms.

Russ of the BML 6:53 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Hammer and Pickle 5:48 Tue Jun 11

You talk such shit. There was a decent debate going on here until you come on and soak the thread with your piss soaked cobblers.

It's fuck all to do with interested parties and who identifies with who. The debate is about what is murder and what is manslaughter.

Now fuck off back to the referendum thread and continue to stink that up with your constant droning and nonsense.

Nurse Ratched 6:26 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Pickle wants to be a part of this because he feels excluded. Same old.

Eerie Descent 6:04 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Hammer and Pickle 5:48 Tue Jun 11

You are such a fucking idiot.

So if your daughter gets married, but is not the nicest to her husband and cheats on him, which breaks his heart and he loses the plot, you think it's fair game if he caves your daughters head in with a meat cleaver?

, 5:50 Tue Jun 11
Re: ‘Coercive control’ & hitting your husband with a hammer 20 times
Look, faced with the same type of scenario it is likely that the CPS would press for murder at trial. However the defence counsel would strive for a reduction to manslaughter due to the perp being coercively controlled. The jury will hear the arguments listen to the cross examined experts and decide for themselves whether or not the perp was of sound mind at the time of the crime.

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: