Oh, I shot my husband in the back with a shotgun as he slept. I took off in the family minivan to the Gulf Coast. I went to trial for killing him, and got convicted a few months ago.
I got out of jail today.
|
Categories: Tennessee & environs, The Law & The Courts
|
August 14th, 2007 at 9:18:29 pm
Unfreakingbelievable.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:23:40 pm
It’s hard to believe that ANYTHING is unbelievable anymore!
August 14th, 2007 at 9:28:37 pm
Obviously a jury, for whatever reason, believed her testimony of the brutal sexual and physical abuse she received from her husband. What some people call murder, other people would call self-defense, or at least and act of temporararily insane desperation.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:09:22 pm
temporararily insane desperation
She shot him in the back while he was sleeping. Cold-blooded murder. Period.
I’d love to see the look on her face at judgement day when they press the down elevator button
August 14th, 2007 at 10:14:57 pm
This case has just appalled me . Paris (and others) gets more jail time than this woman, who had “options”. I’m biased as I have already found her guilty in my mind.
The judge is equally culpable in this injustice. Her “god” will be the final judge and jury in this case.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:21:19 am
“Obviously a jury, for whatever reason, believed her testimony of the brutal sexual and physical abuse she received from her husband. What some people call murder, other people would call self-defense, or at least and act of temporararily insane desperation.”
Exactly. I mean, what was she supposed to do? Leave? Murder - er, self defense - against a brutally raging sleeping assailant was her only option.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:27:18 am
Where is this patriarchy I keep hearing about? Or does patriarchy mean, “Don’t worry, dear, Daddy will get you out of this.”
August 15th, 2007 at 12:36:52 am
Someone please differentiate for me how the rationale (she was oppressed, brutalized, terrorized therefore her premeditated act of homicide should not be deemed first degree murder) applies in the following two cases.
1) Mary Winkler.
2) A gambler who’s in too deep with his violent bookie and has been off-and-on for months and years.
If an 8 year old premeditatedly took someones life while that person slept, we would treat that 8 year old just like we’ve treated Mary Winkler. Ditto a severely mentally disabled person.
I think letting her off was treating her like an infant. I think it was done because she’s a woman, and that it was grossly misogynist.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:41:34 am
This is a huge failure of justice. Let’s say for a moment a man was abused by a woman as this woman said. Do you think he would get out of jail in a matter of days for such a heinous crime? What a joke. This was premeditated cold blooded murder to cover up her illicit activities. She was taken in by Nigerian scams. She was to meet with a bank officer in a matter of hours when she found a solution in killing her husband. What a bunch of idiot jurors. Now she will get to tell her “story” for the rest of her life while he rots.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:53:06 am
Instalanche! Jay, is this your first?
It oughta be a real high-traffic one, too, since it provides no context or information — people always click on those, to see what the heck they’re about.
Between this and the other three lingering links from Glenn, plus the “Dean effect,” I wouldn’t be surprised to see 10,000+ hits today. (I had 5,544 on Sunday, 7,209 on Monday, and 5,105 on Tuesday.)
In fact… already 1,268 today, and it’s only 12:51 AM! Ha! That’s gotta be one of my heaviest-trafficked hours ever. Yeah, definitely 10,000+ today.
August 15th, 2007 at 1:05:39 am
Oh yeah, and that’s terrible. About, you know, the dead guy and the miscarriage of justice and stuff.
But anyway, about my web traffic… ;)
August 15th, 2007 at 1:22:07 am
Well, like I said back at the time of the conviction/sentencing ( http://www.brendanloy.com/wp/2007/06/4210016.html#comment-483839 ),
Is it right? Probably not. Is it what the law required, based on the verdict? Pretty much.
August 15th, 2007 at 2:08:51 am
“I am woman, hear me roar…”
Except when I screw up, get caught taking bribes, or kill someone.
Then I’m just a girl.
And you aren’t supposed to be mean to girls.
August 15th, 2007 at 8:48:38 am
Let me guess: it’s either Tobey Maguire or Frodo.
August 15th, 2007 at 10:25:46 am
Well, there are no domestic-violence shelters, no domestic-violence laws, no psychologists, no police to call, no family or friends to turn to … clearly her only option was to shoot her husband in the back while he slept. Because, you know, he’s a terrible threat while sleeping.
August 15th, 2007 at 10:44:51 am
well, you know it is the south… so the little gold cross she wore around her neck counted for a lot right?
August 15th, 2007 at 11:04:36 am
But…but…he made her wear white platform shoes and a wig during sex! The horror!
August 15th, 2007 at 1:12:34 pm
Traffic update: 10,459 hits and counting. :)
August 15th, 2007 at 3:34:46 pm
“Is it right? Probably not. Is it what the law required, based on the verdict? Pretty much.”
I’m glad Ms. Winkler got good attorneys. I’m glad she isn’t gonna rot in prison. And I’m glad she’s not actually subject to many of the judgments expressed above; a jury here in TN is privy to better info than any of you, and they probably did the right thing. I’m glad the law here empowers them to do that.
Why shed a tear for Matthew Winkler? Mary Winkler will pay a heavy price for what she did, and so will her kids, but only she and God will be able to say in the end if she chose the lesser of two evils. I’m just glad I’ve never faced such a desperate choice.
I wish her and her kids grace and peace.
August 15th, 2007 at 4:32:28 pm
“Why shed a tear for Matthew Winkler?”
Because he was murdered in cold blood, then his good name was trashed with no evidence whatsoever?
“Mary Winkler will pay a heavy price for what she did”
Not as heavy as her husband.
“and so will her kids”
Because she murdered and slandered their Daddy.
“but only she and God will be able to say in the end if she chose the lesser of two evils.”
How about if she had just left? No evil at all!
“I’m just glad I’ve never faced such a desperate choice.”
See excellent tips above about calling police and staying with friends, family or shelters. You know, legal stuff. Or are those just pesky preliminaries before pulling out the Mossberg and blasting?
“I wish her and her kids grace and peace.”
I’m sure you do.
August 15th, 2007 at 10:27:57 pm
“I wish her and her kids grace and peace.â€
But not justice, apparently.
August 15th, 2007 at 11:52:21 pm
“Why shed a tear for Matthew Winkler?”
Because he was murdered in cold blood?
“Mary Winkler will pay a heavy price for what she did”
Not as heavy as Matthew’s. Dead and slandered is a bit worse than getting off scot-free with murder.
“and so will her kids”
No doubt. Mommy murdered Daddy.
“but only she and God will be able to say in the end if she chose the lesser of two evils. I’m just glad I’ve never faced such a desperate choice.”
See the helpful hints above - call the police, leave, etc. There are a few steps one can take before grabbing the Mossberg and blasting. And they have the bonus of being completely evil-free. In fact, they’re so simple, one might suspect that a woman who murders her allegedly abusive husband without a single police report or restraining order to support her claims could be - I dunno - less than truthful?
“I wish her and her kids grace and peace.”
Wonderful. Can you spare some for Matthew’s family?
August 15th, 2007 at 11:53:19 pm
Sorry for the double post - my comment hadn’t shown up for a few hours, so I thought it got lost in the ether.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:04:35 am
What a coincidence - the front page of my local fishwrap has a story about one Amy Pelletier, who in 2005 was acquitted of killing her husband. She’s in the pokey today for assaulting her new husband. No doubt the dead husband and the new guy were horrible abusers. What else could she do?
August 16th, 2007 at 5:35:47 pm
“See the helpful hints above - call the police, leave, etc. There are a few steps one can take before grabbing the Mossberg and blasting. And they have the bonus of being completely evil-free.”
Perhaps she feared that they’d also have the benefit of being completely ineffectual. Perhaps whatever had happened had deprived her of the ability to reason with the complete clarity you display, Dave.
“In fact, they’re so simple, one might suspect that a woman who murders her allegedly abusive husband without a single police report or restraining order to support her claims could be - I dunno - less than truthful?”
Sure. One might. But evidently a jury, who knew a lot more of the specifics than you or I do, I bet, found her persuasive. That’s what juries sometimes do.
And that’s how justice works here, Dave, at least sometimes. It doesn’t always fall into line with your categorical way of thinking about it. Life is pretty nuanced. You seem to wish it otherwise. I’m not saying that’s a bad wish, but that’s all it is.
August 16th, 2007 at 8:55:46 pm
It is possible that Ms. Winkler shot her husband in the back while he was sleeping because she is evil, and/or criminally insane, and cowardly as well. It is also possible that she did it because she was incredibly frightened of him for valid reasons, and saw this as the only way out. Going with your kids to a battered women’s shelter, or seeking out help from police, family, or friends is, objectively speaking, a great idea for a woman in the situation Ms. Winkler says she was in. On the other hand, if she was being seriously abused, her self-esteem was likely so low that she didn’t think anyone was going to believe her. She may also have been afraid of what her husband would do to her when he found her, or after she and the kids returned home. Since her husband was a respected, well-liked minister, there was also the strong possibility that anyone she went to for help would react with something like, “Oh, I can’t believe that nice Reverend Winkler would ever do anything like THAT!”
I’m not trying to justify what she did, but I do think that her situation deserves more understanding than many people are giving it.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:44:36 pm
4th 1:
Um, yeah. All that’s what I meant to say.
September 5th, 2007 at 2:11:45 am
I’m stunned at the number of people here who seriously believe that cold-blooded murder is an understandable alternative to leaving.
Of course, I’m sure if the sexes were reversed, you would feel the same, yes?
Disgusting.
And still, not one shred of evidence this murdered man was an abuser. Not one.
September 5th, 2007 at 2:14:25 am
Oh, yes, Raggie, your view is so very “nuanced.”
“Man bad. Woman victim. Believe woman.”
Talk about a “categorical way of thinking.” Good Lord.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:18:28 am
Well that he was a minster suggests to me that he was an abuser, however, it does not stand to reason that he abused his family simply because he was giving children paranoid fears and causing psychological repression and trauma every Sunday.