So many people are just plain ignorant of what is going on and who are pulling the strings (feminazis). That's just one of the many reasons that I continue this effort to inform regardless of the personal sacrifice I make every day to help others to help themselves.
From Jeremy:
Compare these two (Australian) Child Murder cases, their outcomes and sex of alleged perpetrators...
Case 1:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/life-term-sought-for-mans-betrayal-of-sons/2007/10/26/1192941340584.html>
The Age (Melbourne)
27 October 2007
Life term sought for man's 'betrayal' of sons
By Karen Kissane
Robert Farquharson should spend the rest of his life in jail for murdering his three sons as revenge against his former wife, prosecutor Jeremy Rapke, QC, has told the Supreme Court.
Children trusted their parents to protect them from harm and love them, not use them in a shabby act of retribution, he said yesterday. "Mr Farquharson is to be sentenced as much for the monumental act of betrayal that the murder of his three children represents as for the loss of their young lives."
Mr Rapke said Farquharson should receive three life sentences with no minimum term.
Farquharson, 38, of Winchelsea, was convicted of murdering his sons by deliberately driving his car into a dam on Father's Day, 2005. Jai, 10, Tyler, 7, and Bailey, 2, all drowned. Farquharson pleaded not guilty, claiming he had a coughing fit, blacked out and found himself in the car in the water. He said he tried to save the children but failed.
The prosecution alleged that his motive was to punish the children's mother, Cindy Gambino. Farquharson resented that she had left him, taken up with another man, kept the better car and created financial difficulties for him.
Mr Rapke said the children were not so young that they would have been immune from "fear, shock, feelings of abandonment and plain terror in the last few moments of their lives. We shall not dwell on the scene that must have played out in the car as it sank below the surface of the dam and slowly filled with water … Where was the father of these three children as they fought for their lives? He swam for his life, made (according to him) some desultory attempts to save his children, and thereafter actively discouraged rescue attempts from brave strangers and others who were prepared to dive into the icy water to try to save the children … A father does not abandon his children like that."
Mr Rapke said Farquharson showed no remorse and had contemplated killing the children in this way off and on for months.
Defence counsel Peter Morrissey told Justice Philip Cummins that Farquharson maintained his innocence. Mr Morrissey said there was no
remorse because he had pleaded not guilty. Therefore no psychological or psychiatric evidence would be called in mitigation of the offence. He asked the judge not to impose a life sentence or, if he did, to set a minimum term.
Mr Morrissey asked the judge to consider Farquharson's previous good character, his history as a loving, attentive father, his excellent
prospects for rehabilitation and his grief over the loss of his children.
Farquharson's older sister Carmen Ross told the court that on anniversaries of the boys' deaths she would drive him to the cemetery where he would "cry at times for his boys".
He will be sentenced on November 16.
----------------------------------------------------------
Compare with the case against the above father: there were "conflicting
medical opinions" in that case but HE was still found guilty. This MOTHER
isn't even to come before a jury, yet FOUR children just died
'accidently'! Yeah?
Quote #1: The trial ruling followed a month-long committal hearing
dominated by conflicting medical opinions on the cause of her children's
deaths.
Quote #2: "I believe all the evidence points to all children having been
killed by non-accidental suffocation," she said.
Case 2:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/murder-case-collapses/2007/10/24/1192941107907.html
The Age (Melbourne)
24 October 2007
Child murder case collapses
By Reko Rennie
The case against a Victorian mother accused of suffocating four of her children has been withdrawn by the prosecution this morning in the Supreme Court.
Carol Louise Matthey, 27, of Bannockburn, 90 kilometres south-west of Melbourne, was arrested and charged in February 2005 with the murder of two sons and two daughters between December 1998 and April 2003.
Jacob was seven months, Chloe nine weeks, Joshua three months, and Shania three years at the time of their deaths.
Matthey was alleged to have been the only adult present when all four died.
In court this morning, Justice John Coldrey gave his perspective on why the case had collapsed.
"A detailed examination of the prosecution case revealed, in my view, elementary difficulties... and (in relation to) the quality of the evidence the Crown was seeking to lead."
Matthey emerged from the court smiling broadly, accompanied by an elderly woman thought to be a family friend.
Though clearly relieved that the prosecution had withdrawn their case, she declined to make any comment to the large media contingent waiting outside court.
The Victorian mother was arrested and charged in February 2005 with the murder of the four of her children.
Matthey was ordered to stand trial in the Supreme Court on April 6 last year and pleaded not guilty.
The trial ruling followed a month-long committal hearing dominated by conflicting medical opinions on the cause of her children's deaths.
A Victorian coroner found two of the children had died of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and another of a rare infection, but Dr Susan Beal, a consultant pediatrician and SIDS expert, had given evidence that murder was the most likely explanation for the four deaths.
"I believe all the evidence points to all children having been killed by non-accidental suffocation," she said.
More to come.
________________________________________
Distributed by
Jeremy Swanson
Fathers and Men's Rights Activist
"For The Children"
Ottawa, Ontario
Phone: (613) 237-1320 ext 2438
swanson@storm.ca
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
|
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Compare this gender bias!
Edit
Reply
Quote
