Penelope Jackson-jailed for 18 years for murdering husband

[happydappy2]

I just don't understand how a woman who has murdered her husband has been given 18 years, when we have men killing their wives when they 'snap' and get let off. Obviously killing someone is wrong but the double standards here are shocking. Anthony Williams admitted he literally chocked the living daylights out of his wife, yet was cleared of murder...he chased her downstairs and killed her, yet was allowed to walk free. Where is the logic?

Because it was premeditated. She also stabbed him again whilst he was on the phone to police. They also didn't believe her story.

There is no logic. Men killing women is understandable; women killing men is an abomination and against the natural order.

Unfortunately I think in this case the way she spoke about the crime to the call handlers and to the police arresting her meant she was screwed from the outset. Right or wrong, I'm not sure.

Read the whole story, her daughter does not support what her mother has said and has stated she will never forgive her. She joked on the phone about killing him - her fourth husband, her third one killed himself.

I did have sympathy before I heard her 999 calla and then saw the police camera footage when they turned up at the house. It’s also emerged that her last husband (3 out of 4) killed himself and she said in court that she’d driven him to it. I’m not saying men don’t deserve tougher sentences but this women deserves 18 years.

I don't know the details of this case, but this article is interesting: www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26047614.amp

[quote BrandineDelRoy]I don't know the details of this case, but this article is interesting: www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26047614.amp[/quote]
www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26047614.amp

I think that the recorded calls of her actually stabbing him twice more whilst he was on the line to 999, plus her call and the video afterwards where she admitted to it and was not at all upset or remorseful is the difference. Those are very impactful and striking, once they were show to a jury you are very unlikely to override those with any sympathy for her.

There was intent. She was clear that she meant to kill him and hoped he would die. It was premeditated, in that she got a knife and attacked him rather than defended herself or killed him accidentally whilst non-fatally attacking him.

It's definitely a case that sentences for the men you have mentioned are far too lenient and manslaughter convictions are more likely than murder, rather than this sentence for Jackson being overly harsh.

I think she has clearly list her mind and should have been put in a mental hospital because it was bat shit crazy what she said and did

To reach an informed view about this case you've got to start with the recording of her encounter with the police who first attended the scene of the murder. You'll never have heard anything like it.

Had a male murderer said the same as she did, he would also have been put away for a long time.

@nauticant

To reach an informed view about this case you've got to start with the recording of her encounter with the police who first attended the scene of the murder. You'll never have heard anything like it.

Had a male murderer said the same as she did, he would also have been put away for a long time.

I feel like that recording is actually at least as convincing as evidence that that she wasn’t in her right mind as anything else. That perhaps she had been driven to it. It is unusual to say the least to cheerfully admit to murder. Self-interest dictates you’d be better off lining up your excuses.

I think it clearly shows intention, but absolutely nothing whatsoever about why, the events leading up to the killing or her character.

I feel she has had a raw deal especially since men have got away with saying a woman stabbed herself in the back and get away with it

Saying that I clearly believe she is mentally unwell and would benefit from hospitalization rather than prison

In that case I'd like to be informed better by reading the psychiatric assessments submitted by her defence into the court ClafoutisSurprise.

I don't think there's logic to any of it.

If I recall correctly, Sally Challen was separated from her husband. Once she heard he was seeing another woman, she picked up a hammer, drove to his house, snuck up behind him and bludgeoned him to death with 20 blows to the head from the hammer.

I think Challen served enough time in prison and I agree it's not the place for her. But despite everything she endured during the marriage, I can't understand how she's not guilty of murder.

Men absolutely ought to receive much, much tougher sentences, however.

I don’t think there is double standard. You’re cherry picking. Anthony Williams was convicted of manslaughter not murder because of diminished responsibility which the evidence supported. You need to compare murder to murder.

A more comparable case is that of Wilfred Jacob who stabbed his wife and was convicted of murder and sentenced to life, with minimum of 18yrs.

Not saying it DOES evidence that she’s lost the plot (and clearly the jury who heard all the evidence did find her culpable), Nauticant, just that unlike many/most people I didn’t watch that video and come away with the view that it was conclusive proof that she is a cool killer. It’s so odd that I don’t find it says anything really about her. Some people are commenting on the fact she was worrying about her coat - but that could be the disordered thought processes of someone in serious shock. Or not. It’s solid evidence that the killing was intentional and not an accident or self-defence, of course. But in and of itself it could be read in different ways.

I don't think she had a raw deal. I think she was in a folie à deux with her husband, inasmuch as she was complicit in the violence in their relationship. I have worked, and do work, with women in abusive relationships, and this was fundamentally different from, for example, the Sally Challen case. Very different.

@ClafoutisSurprise

Not saying it DOES evidence that she’s lost the plot (and clearly the jury who heard all the evidence did find her culpable), Nauticant, just that unlike many/most people I didn’t watch that video and come away with the view that it was conclusive proof that she is a cool killer. It’s so odd that I don’t find it says anything really about her. Some people are commenting on the fact she was worrying about her coat - but that could be the disordered thought processes of someone in serious shock. Or not. It’s solid evidence that the killing was intentional and not an accident or self-defence, of course. But in and of itself it could be read in different ways.

I agree with some of this, Clafoutis. But I would guess that the verdict rests on whether she knew, in that moment, the difference between right and wrong. She did, I think. She is disordered, yes, but I have seen many people who are disordered who did not murder someone, and in the way she did - by going back when she realised she hadn't killed him.

Her fixation on her coat felt like a denial of what had happened. That's still not enough to plead loss of personal responsibility.

There have been cases of men (see we can't consent to this website) who have literally killed someone gone to bed stepped over a dead body washed the car then rang in and they have a lesser sentence or none

I get that it's not the same thing but that man was cold and didn't get the sentence she did

@WhatMattersMost

I don't think she had a raw deal. I think she was in a folie à deux with her husband, inasmuch as she was complicit in the violence in their relationship. I have worked, and do work, with women in abusive relationships, and this was fundamentally different from, for example, the Sally Challen case. Very different.

Jesus Christ that is one of the most chilling things I have read on here. Legally you cannot consent to being assaulted yet you WORK with domestic violence victims and see some of them as complicit?

@Theunamedcat

There have been cases of men (see we can't consent to this website) who have literally killed someone gone to bed stepped over a dead body washed the car then rang in and they have a lesser sentence or none

I get that it's not the same thing but that man was cold and didn't get the sentence she did

I just went to the website and the “lesser sentence or none” are few and far between for the cases listed. Most of the men listed were convicted of murder and given a similar sentence.

I don't have a share token but there is a new Times article today that paints a detailed picture of the background to this case and the couple's life together, and my goodness, this was not a stable woman. I don't know what to think about this case. I tend to think that many of those other men got off too lightly, not that she's been sentenced too harshly.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5bcb7ca4-38f5-11ec-b83a-bd8490b9f48d?shareToken=1d31733f840c7b767d7be0e819833ff4

A complicated life for both of them.

@KimikosNightmare

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5bcb7ca4-38f5-11ec-b83a-bd8490b9f48d?shareToken=1d31733f840c7b767d7be0e819833ff4

A complicated life for both of them.

Wow. There is a LOT going on there.

@RJnomore1 - Yes. Complicity is the most difficult and controversial aspect to certain cases in domestic violence.

Perhaps the answer is that violent men get tougher sentences, rather than violent women get less?