Mom gets 10 years for drowning kids

How many years in prison would a father have received if the circumstances were reversed?
Not years, life:

(and it was 2 kids instead of 3)

She killed them, her boyfriend got life for their deaths - thank goodness we have equal rights in the Western World! I can't imagine what would have happened in any of those barbaric 2nd and 3rd world countries we force our world view onto through military actions or threats of military actions while denying them aid through sanctions. They might both have got life - or even death sentences there. Whew, thank God we don't punish women here, imagine what an awful place we'd live in if we actually locked up serial child killers who are anatomically female.

Oh, and the fact that she's their mother should be an AGGRAVATING FACTOR not a mitigating one. What greater breach of trust is there then being killed horribly in a slow, terrifying, and an incredibly painfully way by your own mother?

Oh, wait I forgot - she had a boyfriend and obviously he is evil and forced her to do it! That explains everything. Those loving, caring, nurturing dears that are females would never be capable of heartlessly slaughtering innocent children all by themselves. God damn patriarchy corrupting women to act against their perfect nature!

Puke

In the MSM, they only mention that her present stud-muffin did not want to be a step-father. Only in the local media is it mentioned that the bio-fathers (she had the kids by more than one man--any surprise?) and bio-grandparents were willing to take custody of her children.

Why wasn't that an option to her? Did she consider the kids as her property? Or did her boyfriend want it both ways--EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit http://www.irs.gov) meal tickets with one to be claimed by others (for a price, needless to say) without the responsibility and expense? (As a tax preparer that is among the shenannigans I see daily).

It doesn't surprise me that she got off so easy. She'll probably serve about half that sentence. It remains to be seen how long her stud actually serves--considerably longer obviously.

Her defense is working the math to get her pre-tiral time served to cover her whole 10 year sentence and the pussy whipped judge will likely allow it. After all, she's a grieving mother who's just lost her children and she's also the daughter of a grieving mother who has just lost her grandchildren and it would be cruel to take her daughter away from her as well.

Of course the judge already ignored one of the biological fathers of the murdered children who wanted the maximum sentence possible in favor of the crying mother of the murdering mommy who wanted leniency.

When was the last time a grieving mother was ignored by a judge in sentencing of the person who killed her children?

Her boyfriend got life with no parole so he's gone unless some MRA influenced governor comes to power in his lifetime and commutes his sentence.

Never for one second wonder why "justice" statistics show that men are overwhelmingly responsible for the crimes in our society when BS like this outcome is the rule not the exception. Men are indeed responsible for almost all crime, but that doesn't mean they commit any more crime then women. It just means that women are not responsible for crime - any crime. Hey, a serial child killer should receive the harshest sentence in the system since we hear every day that there is no more precious soul in the world then that of a child. To bad that's only true when a man kills a child. Women can commit all the crime they want, they'll just never be held responsible for it. If they are not held accountable for the absolute worst crime there is - serial child killer - then what hope is there for them to be held accountable for any lesser crime?