Sally challen and malice aforethought

[jessicawessica]

Whilst i have every sympathy with her 40 years living with an abusive and coercive husband, i can't help wondering how the court of appeal missed one vital issue.
She didn't go to her ex husband's house, get into an argument, find a random hammer lying about in the kitchen, then beat him to death. she already had the hammer in her bag when she arrived at her ex husband's house.
Ergo malice aforethought. Or am I missing something?

She'd intended doing a little light hammering when she got there - maybe mending a few fences? Putting up a shed?

Yes you're missing the effect that sustained abuse has on a person.

The reason her appeal was allowed was because of the mental illness the abuse caused. Mental illness as we know can make people do awful things.

Malice aforethought doesn't mean what you think it does.

It means intent to kill. Not premeditation.

*p.s I am not a lawyer

But it obviously was premeditated because she went to his house with the hammer in her handbag. what did she intend to do with it?

The murder conviction was quashed as new evidence came to light that was not available at the original trial ie using coercive control as a defence. She will have to be charged again should CPS decide to proceed with a further trial. They could charge her and decide that time served was reasonable. That's how I understand it.

Maybe the woman was in fear for her life, after the horrendous abuse she suffered, and thought if she didn’t kill him, he was going to kill her. Maybe she thought this was the only way she was able to stay safe from him. Maybe in her shattered mind, this was the only way out.

That’s precisely what has been troubling me. My father violently abused and coercively controlled (as it’s now recognised) my mother - and all of us - until she escaped him and got us away when I was 10 so I have nothing but empathy for Sally. But I’ve also served as a juror and we all took that role incredibly seriously, I was so impressed by just how considered my fellow jurors from all walks of life were.
We only have the media reports but they do indeed all state that Sally drove to her family home with the hammer already in her bag. It was allegedly only after she arrived there that she discovered her undoubtedly abusive husband’s infidelity. On the face of it, malice aforethought.,My heart would tell me to acquit but my head would also be saying clear intent .
God what an awful situation. The law is often too black and white. On balance, I hope the hearts win out.

I can't get my head around her splitting up with him in 2010, and leaving him, and then going back.

I know domestic violence is a very real thing, but something doesn't sit right with this IMO. She says he was abusive to her for several decades, but only killed him when she found out he had cheated on her.

At the end of the day it was a premeditated murder, (which I believe she did because he cheated on her,) and I am shocked it has been reduced to manslaughter.

I also have issue over the fact that they had already separated once, but he then returned.T
he only reason I can see for he willingness to return is that she had become used to the lifestyle that he could give her, as opposed to the single parent divorced lifestyle.
If, as she claimed, her marriage was so toxic, why leave then return?
The majority of women who leave an abusive relationship do not go back.
And I speak from experience.

Its extremely rare to get an appeal heard against a conviction so the evidence of coercive control must have been an extremely strong argument for the Judges to quash the original conviction. As part of the appeal the Crown defended the original murder conviction.

This man had a history of affairs, he liked young women and having agreed to go back to him she found he was having another affair.

100% agree with you jessica.

She probably did found out that he was having an affair but a "crime of passion" surely doesn't stand up in court as a defense nowadays, does it/

I was speaking to a friend who is a current magistrate today. Often there have been 30 reports of DV before cases come to court. 30 reports, so probably some others before the victim starts reporting.

No, a 'crime of passion' is not a reason to kill - and that is why (IMO) she is laying on the abuse accusations, as an excuse to kill him.

JMO.

Of course victims of abuse return to those relationships. That's why so many women are murdered by partners.

It's worth remembering that her sons and the whole family support her. They saw what it was really like.

Look, I get the the fact that she was in a horrible marriage. she was coerced, mentally, abused physically, and was left feeling like a shell of her former self.
HOWEVER....she did not go to his house to talk about a "reconciliation" with a hammer in her handbag

The Court of Appeal hasn't decided whether it was or was not murder. It has decided that her earlier trial was seriously flawed because evidence was not advanced about her mental state that could provide her with at least a partial defence to murder. That evidence must be heard.

It is incredibly common for abuse victims to be hurt by the abuser's infidelity. That's how domestic abuse works. The victim still loves their abuser. It's often incomprehensible and infuriating to those looking in, but it is drearily familiar to anyone with experience of working with victims.

Hoppity I agree

Read this article: www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/29/devoted-wife-who-killed-husband-with-hammer-sally-challen

Coercive control is a horrible thing. Sally's husband abused her for her entire adult life.

A woman will generally suffer domestic abuse 50 times before they report it to the police. Due to the abuse they will also withdraw their statement numerous times before they will proceed. They will also return to their abuser numerous times, again due to the abuse and mental mind games their abusers plays.

I am lucky that I have never been a victim of domestic abuse but I can see why it isn’t as simple as just leave or don’t go back. I’m shocked that people who have been victims of this type of thing can’t see that it isn’t that easy.

The people who were the closest witnesses and who still love the victim - their sons - maintain that their mother should not be in prison, because of the abuse she suffered. Who am I to gainsay that on the basis of media coverage with all its bias and pandering to the lowest common denominator?

Her legal team originally did not put forward a defence that highlighted her suffering.
I think a few posters are imposing their emotional state and thoughts onto Ms Challen but just because they think like that or have responded to abuse in that way it doesn't mean she will. Her emotional armour was formed by her life circumstances and personality.
At the end of the day the court needs to consider whether she was able to feel that she had another choice.

Just as a random point someone else made about how she did it after finding out about the affair. I had an incredibly abusive (physically sexually emptionally) partner and I put up with it all but the day I found out he cheated was the day I said No more and left. I know of a couple of other ladies who also put up with the abuse but drew the line st cheating. It's hard to explain but I can understand why it was the straw to break the camel's back