Claire Parry’s killer found NOT GUILTY of Murder.

ancientgran

Like the fact he was a police officer? Is there any evidence police officers get off with things or get lighter sentences?

This was only published last week.

“Dozens of Victoria Police officers were charged with family violence offences in the five years to 2019 but only one was found guilty and none had convictions recorded.”

www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-21/dozens-of-victoria-police-officers-charged-with-family-violence/12757988

My guess would be ... judges watch porn too. Women like it we don't so it cant be that bad, right?

But this was a jury verdict.

What's also shocking are the comments on the article.
"If only she'd kept her mouth shut, she was determined to have him." What the Hell? Absolute example of victim blaming right there.

Thank you for standing strong against them.

I'm confident I could square off against 7 or 8 angry and porn soaked men in a closed jury room, but could every woman - or every man for that matter?

I did and they tried to get me removed from the jury as it was apparently a conflict of interest for me to have experience working with women who had been sexually assaulted . There were three men who were always going to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt in case it "ruined his life".

Another fucking disgusting murderer getting away with it. God I’m so angry. If you put pressure on someone’s neck you should bloody well expect that it might harm or kill them and therefore in my eyes it should be automatically treated as murder/attempt murder. Absolutely disgraceful.

for Claire’s family

It's baffling, how can anyone possibly admit to strangling but without the intent to kill?

There are other violent actions where it's not quite so clear cut but how can anyone say that they weren't aware that death is the likely outcome of strangulation and they didn't mean to kill?

Not another one, not again. How many more of these will we see? Absolute travesty, and heartbreaking for her family - for women and girls.

His defence is on a par with the rape case where the rapist “fell” and his penis “just slipped into“ the victim.

I'm confident I could square off against 7 or 8 angry and porn soaked men in a closed jury room, but could every woman - or every man for that matter? The level of social change required to change outcomes in one of these jury decisions would be close to a race-hate trial in the old south. We're talking ingrained prejudice, entitlement and hate. Including internalised misogyny.

Absolutely this, PicsInRed. Excellent post.

Sentencing adjourned until 9.30am tmw.

Disgusting. And depressingly common.

What an absolute shitbag he is. The poor women who have encoutered him, the poor children whose lives he has permanently damaged. I hope no woman ever goes near him for the rest of his life.

Perhaps he had a good lawyer.

Me, I'm always strangling people by mistake.

Ooops.

Sorry

I meant "never"

I'm never strangling people by mistake

Not even once.

No sign of any reporting of the sentence yet. Might even be suspended. Nothing would surprise me after that verdict.

Yes, ie you intended to do the thing that a reasonable person would know could lead to death. The reasonable person is what we would expect people to know. It is therefore imputed that the killer knew and therefore intended it. So, if the killer says “I didn’t intend to kill them and I didn’t know that that was a possible/likely outcome” the prosecution can say that, in effect, they are lying. Hence intent is proved.

Ah yes he accidentally throttled her and the other woman he'd had an affair with who said he was controlling was what? A fantasist? A liar? A bit dim?
It really isn't hard for men to get away with Murder :(

This is why these sorts of trials need to become bench trials, with a lot of prescription of outcome (e.g. practice directions to follows) and plenty of public monitoring.

It’s also irrelevant that he brought a knife with the intention to kill himself. In fact he lied so much we can’t even be sure of that - he said that she attacked him with the knife bit he was caught because the wounds were clearly self inflicted. This points even more to culpability because it suggests he has deliberately tried to do a cover up. There are quite a lot of cases where murderers self harm themselves to make it look like they were also attacked.

[quote PaleBlueMoonlight]You do need intent. It is the intent that stops it from being manslaughter.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter[/quote]
Yes, but intent in law is carrying out an action where death or serious injury is, to a reasonable person, a likely outcome.

Its not the same thing as deliberately intending to kill them as that's not something that could ever be proven.

You do need intent. It is the intent that stops it from being manslaughter.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter

This is a fucking travesty, no justice at all.

Something very similar happened to someone I knew. Got off with manslaughter after essentially putting her life, mental health history on trial instead of him - the pillar of the community who first strangled his wife over a petty argument, then fetched a hammer from the shed to smash her head in. Manslaughter, and back on the street in under four years.

For Clare's family - know you have support, from decent people everywhere. This is not justice.