think it is a very bad day for "justice"..
"justice" meaning doing the right thing which is not always legal "justice"..
for example....shouldn't the woman who caused all of this be on trial as well?...should the victim who purportedly mentally abused his wife and cheated on her and the family, perhaps his "estate" should pay a fine...
finding your scum husband in the clutches of his scum home-wrecker would send most people over the edge..
when she went there..she did not intend to do harm, at least not fatal harm...remember , she had a passenger that day...
so , flame me is you want...I see the likes of oj out there and question why we are sending a woman of good character to do 20 yrs in prison while he and his ilk are free..
that attorney for her was a total and complete failure at sentencing...he actually brought up the fact that the boys would lose two parents if Clara went to prison, even though it was Clara who got rid of the other parent...
why would he ever be hired again is beyond me...
afterall, he had the family of the slain man in the palm of his hand, and he still couldn't get the jury to give less than 20 yrs...unbelievable....
It's this stupid jury system we have here. The gall of these people-- actually expecting a murderer to do prison time. The husband got what he deserved, and then some, and now it's her turn to face the consequences.
Well, with the numbers up around 60-70% for adultery, among both men and women, then by your standards, more than half of our married population deserves to die. Or at least that their spouses deserve no punishment for killing them.
Every day, millions of people do selfish, mean, stupid things that hurt themselves and the people they love and who love them, and help or give pleasure to bad people.
There are alot of bad things that aren't against the law, but are often grounds for civil action., like DIVORCE.
She didn't find them in bed, but in a bar. Did she not brag to the step-daughter that she "could kill him and get away with it" before she did it?
She killed him because she was mad at him. She tried to make it seem as if she was driven insane by grief and love, two emotions that "sound" less culpable than anger. But if she was so grief-stricken, why didn't she go out and kill herself instead of him? (Note for the battle of the sexes -- 10 times more men than women kill themselves within one year of divorce.)
She killed him out of anger and jealousy. He wouldn't obey her, so she killed him in a very painful, sadistic way. She didn't do it when she first found out about the affair, so that "heat of the moment" excuse that sometimes justifies a temporary insanity defense wasn't there.
She stalked him(looked for him and found him at the bar), harassed him, assaulted him and the other woman, then killed him. She ran him over(that had to hurt), then while he lying on the asphalt in agony, she turned around and ran over him again(gee, that has to hurt), then she circled all the way around the parking lot and ran over him again, and parked the car on him(ouch!). Then she got out of the car and told him she was sorry.
That is NOT OK, cherry.
Some people called for the death penalty, some wanted to let her off completely, I think 20 years is darn near perfect.
She may not be a menace to society, but she is a menace. Maybe she's not a cold-blooded killer, but she's a "hot-blooded killer."
I am pleasantly surprised that a jury of mostly women did the right thing, here. The "we women get to do whatever we're want, cause we're special" crew is becoming a minority in the real world, even if there are still a few left here on FR.
If the relationship is not what you want, move on! It's NOT "OK" to kill people you can't control!
The circumstances where homicide is justified are very, very limited. Somebody wanting to be away from you is not sufficient justification.