This Judge is unbelievable. The case is horrific but he also blames her? Murder of Carmen Miron Buchacra

[vivizone]

I am so angry. How is this possible?

7 years for killing your partner with a 7 week baby because as Judge said:

'I accept what caused you to lose self control was the cumulative effect of emotional abuse by Gaby over a significant period.

Because they had been arguing by text all day. So clearly she abused him.

What planet are these Judges from?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297700/Financial-advisor-strangled-PHD-student-girlfriend-death-brutal-assault-recorded-friends-voicemail-jailed-seven-years.html

[flippinada]

Also, why are you bringing up the McCann case? If you mean Madeleine McCann there hasn't been a trial, has there?

[Moominsarehippos]

I don't believe you can 'snap' and launch such a long, calculated attack. A slap, maybe, several, possibly, but to throttle her trice whilst threatening to kill her - no.

I'm suprised he didn't try to claim 'temporary insanity'. No matter what provocation in this case, it was murder. He was not in any physical danger. Did she attack him with a knife? Try to poison him? Aim her car at him? No. Just words.

[runningforthebusinheels]

Even the comments under the article are coming out in support of the victim - putting their usual misogyny to one side for a change. Usually I totally despair after reading the DM comments....

Here are a couple of the green-arrowed comments:

"It was her that was vunerable, she needed help and support with a newborn. If he was a good father he woudn't be drinking at a party. She was right to complain, he was absolutely wrong and so was the Judge. He shouldn't have any excuse for taking a life. Seven years is a joke!"

and: "I once had an abusive partner - when I threw him out lots of friends 'sided' with him because he was so convincing about me being the 'abuser' in the relationship. How can these people sit in court and say that this woman was the emotional abuser when she was not there to defend herself. It come's across that she was complicit in her own death - an outrageous implication. People like this guy are often psychopaths and completely convincing. There is simply no excuse for what he did."

[BoneyBackJefferson]

Sorry but "he murdered her" is your opinion. They had a murder trial and the outcome was manslaughter.

Why bring up the McCann case? because people still don't know what happened yet people/poosters still spread stories.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes
I haven't said that the defense council made anything up. I'm saying that we only know some of the information.

[JustGiveMeFiveMinutes]

Where did I say you did BoneyBackJefferson

[BoneyBackJefferson]

sorry just

anyway, stepping away from the thread..

[flippinada]

The McCann "case" is completely irrelevant. A young girl disappeared and nobody knows what happened.

Here, a woman has been murdered and we do know what happened so it isn't remotely similar.

And anyway say he did "snap" - that doesn't tally at all with the prolonged and sadistic attack that we know did happen.

[runningforthebusinheels]

I do think she was totally failed by the justice system. Makes me wonder just what a man has to do for it to be 'murder' when he kills his partner.

2 women a week.

[suburbophobe]

This made me cry.... (reading the link).

That poor poor woman. And the poor baby. Thank god she has a loving family in Mexico who will bring her up.

Jesus....

[EntWife]

I am loathe to add to this thread as it appears full of agendas and pre conceived notions but,
the "all day drinking session" that several people have commented on as being proof of the fathers status as a bad dad was a work event. He worked for an investment firm. Those kind of all day events are very common in financial services. The amount he had to drink over the close of the day does not seem excessive for the type of event.

Secondly, you only have my word for this but I have had several professional dealings with Justice Eder and the man is scrupulous in the way he runs his court room. If he felt defence counsel where gas lighting the jury with allegations against the victim he would not have hesitated to call them on it. I have seen him do it. He is actually a pain in the arse because if he doesn't follow the logic of you're argument he will formally pick it apart. Defence arguments must have had some substance to have made it past his radar.

[Kiriwawa]

I couldn't give a shit about his job EntWife - believe it or not, women regularly get invited to these kind of shindigs. Generally though, especially if we are lowly admin staff as Peter is, we aren't under any great pressure to attend which means that we're able to be at home rather than at work if necessary. Although I expect Gaby wished he'd stayed on his drinking trip rather than smashing in the front door as he did and then hitting her over and over again before strangling her.

Just quoting facts here, not speculation. Obviously

[ecclesvet]

I bet a load of people wondered how the jury could be so stupid as to buy the defence in R v Ahluwalia too. The right for abuse victims to have their provocation recognised was hard won. Of course some internet commenters will always have far more information and common sense than the judge and jury who actually heard the case.

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

Sorry, but I don't think that Paul Keene is remotely comparable to Ahluwalia.

Quite offensive to imply that.

[LessMissAbs]

Need to read the case report but in general its become ridiculously difficult in the UK to obtain guilty verdicts for major crimes if the evidence isn't perfect. Evidence is very rarely perfect hence crimes are downgraded to lesser offences to ensure a guilty verdict. Our system is adversarial rather than inquisatorial but very little research is done on the effect of this on justice and rates of recidivism, particularly from a comparitive perspective.

As I have said, I need to read the actual case report, but comments by a judge which appear to open the floodgates are generally unwise - is any show of emotion by a partner now a defence to murder and can this be taken from Elder J's comments as opening the floodgates? I think it requires clarification in law and would hope to see an appeal.

[edam]

Abuse victims don't smash in the front door to get to the abuser. That's the act of an aggressor, not a victim.

[ecclesvet]

When abuse victims 'snap' they often resemble aggressors rather than victims. Fortunately it is for a judge and jury to hear all the evidence to come to a more thorough understanding of the context.

[moonabove]

I can't understand what has happened in this case. It is clearly murder - horrific, brutal, drawn-out murder, I feel sick reading the transcript of the call.

I really feel for the family and the police who must have felt certain of justice given the weight of evidence. I am going to use the link given early in the thread to make a complaint.

[FastidiaBlueberry]

bruffin the case you refer to as the burning bed, is kiranjit Ahluwalia and she was found guilty of murder and went to prison.

There was a massive campaign to free her but it took years.

Posting one or two cases where emotional abuse has actually been an effective defence for a woman, doesn't alter the figures: women get higher sentences on average for murdering their partners (which they do far more rarely by the way) than men do.

I think what this shows is the fact that men can use the defence of "emotional abuse" when their chattels female partners get uppity. That is what is a real danger here - the emotional abuse defence can be a valid one, but I bet you that we are going to see it used more and more successfully by violent men to justify their murders of uppity women. A woman with a new baby who sees her husband behave abusively, will have her wish to set boundaries and possibly take the nuclear option of leaving, be re-defined as emotional abuse and psychological bullying.

And let's make no mistake about this please, a new father who goes on an alcoholic bender is behaving abusively. The ludicrous idea that he's forced to go on a bender for work purposes is just bending over backwards to make excuses for his abusive behaviour. He might have to go and show his face for a bit, but there isn't an employer in the country who force-feeds their workers booze and would look askance at a new father who leaves a social event involving alcohol early in order to be with his child. That's what a normal father would do, the abusive ones stay there, get pissed and claim it's all for work - and there are actually women who buy that and tell other women that we should believe it.

This tendency of violent men to claim that any measure women take to stand up for themselves or set boundaries in our relationships is emotional abuse or psychological bullying, is just the newest tactic in the age old war on women. It sounds so plausible doesn't it? The "women can be abusive too!" crowd will love it - you know, the ones who think a new mother expecting her co-parent to actually do some parenting is controlling and manipulative, while a man who breaks down a door and rejects one murder weapon in favour of a more effective one is actually being oppressed by the unreasonable demands of his victim - I expect to see more and more violent murderers walk free or get reduced sentences in the future as they take advantage of the average jury's misogynist attitudes.

Women, don't you dare threaten to leave an abusive man.

That's emotional abuse, innit.

[Moominsarehippos]

Call me old fashioned, call me sexist, but we were raised to believe that a 'man' never raised his hand to a woman (restrain yes, hit no) and a woman should never raise her hand either.

Strangling (twice) as she begs for her life, hardly an accident is it? Or Red Mist - and I get this (real rages, althgough very very rarely) but have never hurt another human being (a few phones though).

[DreamingOfTheMaldives]

Edam, are you an expert on the behaviour of ALL abuse victims?!

Have any of you who have decided that the jury were obviously wrong and that you know better bothered to research the law on loss of control?

No, thought not.

[ElegantSufficiency]

That is horrendous. The poor woman. What a travesty. Judge is a fool.

[moonabove]

I also don't buy this idea that there was some evidence given in court which would have explained this outcome. When people say that, they are in effect agreeing that the facts we know make the sentence an unacceptable injustice.

What we know is what the judge and jury knew - the murder was horrifically violent and prolonged, the victim was helpless and the defence was 'low-level emotional abuse'. Sickening.

[moonabove]

Please bestow on us your knowledge of the 'law' on loss of control Dreaming.

[LandofTute]

I think some people seem to be unable to believe that a woman could ever be capable of being abusive to her partner. The jury chose to believe that Carmen was a lot more than just "uppity" or "wishing to set boundaries" because they were party to the evidence that we were not. My own mother was bullying and emotionally and physically abusive, so I know only too well that women can be abusive.

[bruffin]

Fastida
That is not the case i am referring to at all, but that is beside the point. We know nothing of this couples relationship and everyone on here is relying on a tiny snapshot.There was obviously days of evidence on both sides that the jury made their decision that nobody seemsvthat interested in