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?

@Noname99 stop being ridiculous, you have lost your point and now resorting to stupid comments...

@RonaldMcDonald, years ago women were locked into mental institutions as they were deemed mad, they were actually suffering from PND. So by your analogy, once it was realised they were suffering from a completely treatable MH illness, they should still be left there?

@noname I agree with you when you say the self defence against coercive control is not to bash someone’s head in with a hammer. Perhaps she was so mentally damaged that she bashed her husbands head in with a hammer- if so I don’t like the idea she gets a shorter sentence as such a person is clearly quite dangerous. It really takes a lot to do that and I’d rather such a person was not walking among us.

And @howwillwedeal what a bizarre response. Of course she has the right not to be mentally abused. It doesn’t affect in the slightest his right not to be beaten to death. Maybe he was awful person but I can’t agree when you say “he reaped what he sowed”. We all have the right not to be beaten to death regardless of whether or not you happen to think that person is worthy of life or not.

Also to all snarky comments about “mr (presumably men’s rights) I’m a feminist and believe in human rights. I don’t support killing of men even bad ones especially where there is no element of self defence.

I don't agree with with the PP who said that if you push someone they will eventually break.
We've all been in shit situations but that doesn;t mean we all bash someones head in with a hammer because they pissed us off enough.
I could quite easily have done that to my exh because of all his gaslighting......but I didn;t.

Also, to those who believe she took the hammer with her in order to defend herself, I get that. But to hit someone that amount of times smacks of rage or jealousy, not defense.

It doesn’t strike me that she took the hammer defend herself either- not from physical violence anyway. There was no allegations of any at all and you don’t get to use a hammer in response to psychological abuse. It’s one thing to use violence to defend yourself and preserve your life in the face of physical violence, it’s quite another to use it to punish someone for cheating on you.

It seems more likely it was for revenge. Many people have been pushed to the limit but I also don’t agree that we would all do that. Most women don’t react like that at all - the vast vast majority don’t kill their husbands even when they are abusive.

Think it was then QC Helena Kennedy who pointed out that whereas a man can kill a woman with his bare hands alone, a woman will almost always require a weapon, which may require planning which makes it a pre-meditated act and one which the law handles more harshly. A man can strangle a woman with his bare hands and just say he snapped in the heat of the moment. And gets the lighter sentence.

We've all been in shit situations but that doesn;t mean we all bash someones head in with a hammer because they pissed us off enough.

This is akin to people comparing being "fed up" to "clinical depression", yes we've all been in shit situations, but luckily very few have been coerced for 40 odd years.

The suggestion is that the charge should now have been manslaughter due to diminished responsibility. Nothing to do with self defence or premeditation. The husbands continued abuse rendered her so mentally unwell that she did not have mental capacity to commit the offence.

I have every Sympathy with her
So
Much
And the fact her children are supporting her speaks volumes
But if all abused women took hammers to their men’s heads ..... she still
Broke the law

she still Broke the law

The whole point of partial defences like diminished responsibility is that, whilst the killing remain unlawful, the level of culpability is changed, with an accompanying change to the appropriate sentence.

I imagine you would agree that there should be a difference in how we treat a mother who steals food from a shop to feed her children, and a gang of ram raiders who take millions in jewellery?

Yes she still committed an offence - but it was manslaughter and not murder, and she’s served long enough

Challen briefly left her husband and started divorce proceedings, but returned and signed an agreement he allegedly drew up, denying her financial entitlement and forbidding her from interrupting him or speaking to strangers

That’s from an article in The Independent.

That’s what she was going back to. Then he sent her out to get lunch so he could call a woman from a dating site.

Her husband would reportedly tell her what to eat, wear, where she could go and who she could socialise with

That’s The Gazette. This had been going on since she was 15, remember.

He would refer to her publicly as thunder thighs. There were multiple affairs, and when Mrs Challen challenged him, he would refer to her as deranged or unwell – classic behaviour often referred to as "gaslighting"

There were also reports of physical abuse, one serious sexual assault and financially controlling behaviour.

Several newspapers have that one.

*This reconciliation was dependent on her agreement to a financial arrangement – which only benefitted him

Moments before the hammer attack, Mrs Challen found evidence of an affair

Then was the stark realisation that she would consent to the financial arrangement, following which he was going to divorce her. She had been misled again

Gazette, but again, several have it.

Controlled completely from being 15. Told it was her being mad, not him. Raped. Physically assaulted. Isolated. Then she managed to leave - I can absolutely guarantee the control ramped up further at this point - then went back. Signed an agreement that essentially robbed her of any financial security AND demanded she avert her eyes from everyone on the planet. Then realised he was probably going to leave her anyway.

I’d like MNHQ to do an awareness raising campaign about coercive control.

@SmileEachDay harsh, frightening and enlightening post, I too read all that and agree awareness into coercive awareness is needed.

Of course the nay sayers will say she didn't have to sigh..,.,,.

Almost all the formative years of Sally has been controlled by him.

I imagine you would agree that there should be a difference in how we treat a mother who steals food from a shop to feed her children, and a gang of ram raiders who take millions in jewellery?

I think her husband is better off dead . And I have huge sympathy for her. I can well
Imagine what he did to her mentally

But honestly - if I was sat on that jury and hear that despite all the factors she went there with a hammer and with intent bashed his skull . I would have a real integrity struggle

I am Not denying his evil and how it impacted her. But the facts and truth need
To dictate her sentencing .

To reiterate I am glad than man is dead . I have nothing but contempt for him
And deep sympathy for her

The lack of understanding around this is seriously disturbing, and another vote for raising awareness of coercive control, and its horrifying effects.

Is her psychiatric condition not a fact, or true?

If you were on the jury, you would have heard the evidence, and had explained to you the elements that would render manslaughter, rather than murder the proper outcome.

None of us know what our view might be as that evidence has not yet been given. So prattling on about integrity (what bloody integrity when you even say you think he's "better off dead") is utterly meaningless.

Well I am hardly going to listen and learn if you use such an aggressive tone

It’s not appropriate for me to
Comment and I hope her lawyer and the jury make the right decision

But how can we learn and discuss if people just hurl abuse as people who think differently and maybe don’t know what you do ?

Your tone is disgusting and maybe I would have learnt something as I often do on MN

But not when you speak so abusively

Shame
On you

But not when you speak so abusively

There’s an irony that you say this because a poster said you were “prattling” in the context of this thread.

You seem pretty impervious to any information offered to you, as it goes.

And I won't be too upset about being called "disgusting" by someone who actually says they are glad another human being is dead.

I often learn a lot from this site . When people speak the others with a modicum of respect . All you have done is insult me because I said I would struggle with the case (on the limited facts I have)

You are presumably intelligent women in possession of useful information that could help educate people around this issue .

I am saying you might get further if when pointing out your view you don’t insult people

And honestly I am glad he is dead. I can think of not one single reason that would benenfit humanity were he alive . That’s my opinion . There are worse things than can happen to people
than death , as you presumably know ?

I can't post the link but there is an article in the Guardian on 29th September 2019 which gives more background.

At trial the defence did not give details of the provocation she suffered in her marriage but relied on her suffering from diminished responsibility and depression. She was the daughter of a brigadier born when her four older brothers were teenagers. She was 15 when she met Challen and at 17 her brothers took her to Harley St for a late abortion and Challen denied responsibility. Her husband was described as sleazy, having sent out Christmas cards showing him with nude or topless women.

Now the murder conviction has been overturned CPS has two weeks to charge Sally Challen and set a date for a retrial. With the new evidence it will be interesting to see if CPS go with murder or the lesser charge of manslaughter, which her family hope for so she would probably be free for time served. I hope she is released.

If he deserved to die, then why do you want his killer to have a life sentence? Surely you should be campaigning to get her a medal?

It is awful that he is dead. He must have died a terrifying, agonising death. It doesn't matter what he had done in life. No one deserves what he got.

But if it is established that Sally killed him whilst suffering from such psychiatric damage that she lacked the necessary mental elements required for the offence of murder to be made out, then she should not be punished for murder.

The poor woman. One has to wonder what is left of her capacity to live outside of institions, and actually, she must have felt free for the first time since meeting him even in prison! I really hope they would have helped her inside.

When someone hits you in one way or another all day, every day of your life, can anyone imagine what that does.

because men are scared women will laugh at them
... because women are scared men will kill them

Only just realised the missing word ...kill