Modern Day Man-Killing Witch?

	posted by Scott on Thursday January 03, @02:29PM from the domestic-violence dept.
	DaveW submitted this UK Independent article and writes "Authorities use insurance fraud laws to prosecute this modern-day, man-killing witch." This story confirms again that women who murder their husbands often use subversive methods rather than direct ones. Also, do you see the term "domestic violence" anywhere in this article?

	Source: The Independent [UK newspaper] Title: 'Witch' is charged over death of three partners Author: Rupert Cornwell Date: January 3, 2002

<  Post Column on Poor Men | Army Training "Too Tough for Women"  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No "domestic violence" but.... (Score:1) by MayaMan on Friday January 25, @02:45PM EST (#1) (User #631 Info) Okay, I agree that there isn't any mention of domestic violence. I agree that the prosecution isn't trying for a murder charge. But that isn't necessarily mysandric. After all, it calls the woman a man-killing witch, for goodness sakes. A man-killing witch. Not a murderer, sure. And I guess you could go with the thought that not saying "murderer" specifically could show that killing men isn't really murder. I disagree with that. I think calling someone a "man-killing witch" is a bit worse. The article very much implies and directly states that the woman in question was involved in the death of her husbands, but the way that it was done was through third parties who failed to testify. What more can you ask for. They WANTED to charge murder, but with no witnesses when a third party is involved you are stuck, legally. But the legal system in this case STILL pursued the woman, not giving up, and now has another angle which is much easier to prove. (civil law needs a "preponderance of evidence" while criminal law needs to be "beyond reasonable doubt" or "beyond the shadow of a doubt" which is much more stringent). The woman is being persecuted. The woman is being called evil names. The woman is being tried by the government, despite difficulty and obstacles in doing so. I fail to see how this is favoring the woman. In fact, if a man had done the same, and had been called "a woman-hating warlock" we'd be pretty pissed. I call this one as not discriminatory. Credendo Vides (By believing, one sees)

[an error occurred while processing this directive]