I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Domestic violence victims may get defence for murder in Australia

If you are a man you may become part of "open season" for hunting in OZ based on new legislation being contemplated. It is supposed to be gender neutral but those of us who have been victims of battering by ex wives clearly know it is targeted at men. Have your say by clicking here.

Article from: The Courier-Mail Australia

Patrick Lion

October 14, 2008 12:00am

VICTIMS of domestic violence who kill their abuser will be able to claim a defence against murder or manslaughter charges under new laws.

The so-called "battered person" defence for homicide trials is scheduled to be introduced next year, after the Bligh Government approved changes to the Criminal Code. The proposal comes after a recent Queensland Law Reform Commission report on the defence of accident and provocation recommended the creation of a separate defence for seriously abusive relationships.
Should battery be a murder defence? Have your say.
The move received mixed support from interest groups, but Attorney-General Kerry Shine described the overhaul as groundbreaking. It would also apply to family violence involving adults, children and both genders. "This is an important change that allows juries to specifically consider the impact that domestic violence or serious abuse in a relationship may have upon a person," Mr Shine said. The law is expected to be introduced in the first half of next year while the Government considered its response to other recommendations. The QLRC report recommended no changes to the excuse of accident but called for several changes to the partial defence of provocation. Queensland Homicide Victims Support Group chief executive Jonty Bush reserved judgment on the domestic violence proposal, saying the move was a contentious issue. "On the one hand, people ask is there ever a reason to take another's life?" Ms Bush said. "On the other, when people are regularly beaten and subjected to life-threatening and humiliating experiences, they may not see any other option." Queensland Bar Association honorary secretary Roger Traves, SC, supported the reform, saying the current law was too narrow because the terms dealt only with acts in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation. "The defence of provocation in NSW is broader than that in Queensland and we would welcome reform of these laws," he said. Opposition justice spokesman Mike Horan said he wanted to see the detail but was concerned about murder defences based on past behaviour. "Murder is murder and we have to be very careful. It may lull people into thinking they have the right to shoot or murder someone for things that have happened in the past," he said

VICTIMS of domestic violence who kill their abuser will be able to claim a defence against murder or manslaughter charges under new laws.

The so-called "battered person" defence for homicide trials is scheduled to be introduced next year, after the Bligh Government approved changes to the Criminal Code. The proposal comes after a recent Queensland Law Reform Commission report on the defence of accident and provocation recommended the creation of a separate defence for seriously abusive relationships.
Should battery be a murder defence? Have your say.
The move received mixed support from interest groups, but Attorney-General Kerry Shine described the overhaul as groundbreaking.

(Ed note: The following are a sample of comments received to date on the Oz site including mine and one other from Canada. MJM)

Luke Geurtsen said..... "You can call me sexist, but this defence should only be available to women. I know women can be physically abusive too, but men tend to defend themsleves or leave the relationship. Just look at the number of women vs men who die from an abusive spouse."

I will call you sexist and chauvinist to boot. Males are at least a quarter of deaths(and growing) and a third of serious injuries in domestic situations. You would deny abused men justice but can you imagine the outrage at women being denied anything at all because there are fewer of them.


Jeff Dunne said... "Bout bloody time, maybe now these so called "Men" might think before they act. Any man who abuses a woman deserves to have his ass kicked. It must take a lot of strength and balls to pick on a woman. Good to see that the law is finally on their side when they fight back. Andrew Z, i think getting your teeth knocked out is a lot worse than getting emotionally upset. Only weak men feel its alright to beat a lady, you wanna hit something try someone who can hit back!!"...

The typical conditioning for males is to be ├╝ber protective of females. You've demonstrated this very well yourself. The male who abuses a woman is experiencing a serious break from conditioning he has undergone from a very early age. You, Jeff, are the patriarchy. Absurdly protective of women. Willing to do anything to any male should he even look askance at one of your "harem". YOU are what womens' lib originally set out to defeat before subsequently feminists found it much more productive to collude with the patriarchs instead...

Be careful what you wish for Jeff. You like to cast yourself as a knight in shining armour but you are only a simple, unproven allegation away from having the dung kicked out of you by other like minded, chivalrous, patriarchal men.


shi said... Batman, please for the love of god learn to read and punctuate. FTA: "the amendment would ensure the defence was available to men, women and children"...

It will be worded in gender neutral language. I do not expect the application will be gender neutral in the slightest. Our sexual assault laws were "gender neutralised" a decade ago but we still refuse to punish women who rape boys. The over protection of women has become so strong in the feminist patriarchy that we can't even criticise women let alone punish them for their wrongdoing.

Posted by: Greg Allan of Bendigo 3:11pm October 19, 2008 Comment 54 of 54

If this law is passed it would appear, if I lived in Australia, that I would be justified in killing my wife for the 14 years I was battered.

Hmmm...when will Canada become so enlightened as to allow such a mechanism to be enacted to free all members and all genders from their batterers.

On reflection does this appear to be a good law? Will Australia apply it equally to men and women. Make certain you know what you are precipitating because in most families in English speaking countries the woman initiates violence at least as often as the man - but there is more - as battering can be emotional - my ex among many other acts of egregious misjudgment committed theft fraud and forgery against my former employer, ruining my career and my reputation. That was only the beginning. I have been attacked emotionally, financially and physically. over the 14 years. Does that give me the right to kill her?

I think not. Murder is murder. Its a bad move. Fight it or it will be open season on men worse than it is now.

Posted by: Mike Murphy of Sault Ste. Marie, ON 3:24am October 19, 2008 Comment 52 of 54

The utter stupidity of passing laws that, in essence, state that it is excusable carry out homicide rather than a phone call to the police makes government's extension of entitlement without responsibility infinitely absurd.

It's so sad to see the politics of fascism appropriated with this passive aggressive assault on justice and sensibility.

Posted by: DNH 12:42am October 19, 2008 Comment 51 of 54

This is feminist jurisprudence run amok!

Posted by: Laura Hoagland 12:41am October 19, 2008 Comment 50 of 54

Premeditated murder will soon be legal in Australia ? What else is it when a partner plots and plans for years or even maybe a few days can get away withh this crime. Bravo Australia - who says there is no bottom to stupidity. Just remember, for every 6 battered women there are 5 battered men. Sooooo....whatcha gonna do when those victims with penises start using that defense? But this is what happens when hysterics take control. We men have no one to blame but ourselves for not being more vocal in court. Shame on all. William Levy Ethics Committee Status of Men Canada

Posted by: william levy of Canada- Status of men Canada 12:09am October 19, 2008 Comment 49 of 54


Anonymous said...

“Richard Gardner's theory positing the existence of ‘parental alienation syndrome’ or ‘PAS’ has been discredited by the scientific community.
Testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the syndrome should therefore be ruled inadmissible both under the standard established in Daubert and the stricter Frye standard.”

Navigating Custody & Visitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence: A Judge’s Guide (2nd edition).
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (2006). Reno, NV

Michael J. Murphy said...

None of this information you have provided has any substance whatsoever. You have pulled it from a feminist song book that lacks any semblance of credibility.

The misinformation provided in the songbook that sits on many feminist blogs is wishful thinking - no more and probably less. Spokespersons used such as the out of touch with reality GWU Professor, Joan Meier, have been proven unreliable and not credible. Why she is still used as a spokesperson is perplexing.

You speak from a theoretical construct with no basis in fact. Those, such as myself, speak clearly, passionately, from real world experience and observation as targets and with great love for the children emotionally kidnapped from our lives by abusing ex's. It is true that some could and do use use any manner of devices in a bitter divorce feud and false allegations form a great portion of court time, mostly I might add by female litigants, but not exclusively. Some of the worst alienation cases are perpetrated by men on their ex's and children. These people are scumbags as well. There is no excuse for this abuse by any parent male or female.

What you also need to think about is how you are enabling the very child abuse you do not think exists. You, by doing so, continue to allow abuse of children. It ought not to be this way. Have you done this yourself and are you in denial?

Is it OK when a women performs this abuse on her children to target a man?

Check here for information on your arguments which are false. http://www.glennsacks.com/pbs/pas-apa.php and read my blog further for the kind of abuse a female can perpetrate on a male and the children. One chapter or section does not give you the right focus on a very long and complex deconstructing of a relationship.

I do appreciate you taking the time to comment. You have passion for your cause, even if it lacks the right information.

Luke said...

Wow, I just found your obscure little blog.

Do you know how many males in Australia convicted of killing their spouse try on the old, "but she abused me" excuse. Even despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. A court system does not need to waste time and money entertaining such BS arguments. These gutless wonders don't need any more legal excuses than what they have.

So yeah, if you're an abused male. Grow some balls and walk away or take legal action. The very first things that most abusive males do is make sure that their female partners have no means of financial independance, so as to limit their ability to do either. How many females do that?

Michael J. Murphy said...

My goodness Mr. Geursten you do have a very large ego don't you. When you posted this you were working on Ozzy taxpayer time it would appear? You seem to have a good job down there in Brisbane, in the Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Counsel and based on some of your blog posts have opinions on the judiciary of your country. Hopefully you wouldn’t try to influence them in your job as a public servant – or would you?

Usually when feminists such as yourself find blogs discussing Father’s Rights or, in my case, Parental Alienation as well and that disagree with your own rather skewed and unknowing version of the world they say “stubbled upon” but not you – no sirree - you found an obscure blog way up here in Canada. You are not geographically challenged at all are you! That was my 2nd hint you had a very large ego. The first was the really big one though and that was searching for yourself on the internet on Ozzy taxpayer time. Tsk, Tsk have you no shame? It appears not, based on your over blown opinions with no real understanding of Domestic Abuse at all. To say that I need “balls” and should walk away tells me a lot about your character and how little you know or understand DV. Based on your facebook picture it would appear you are basking in the glory of your exalted position in those hallowed chambers paid for by the hard working taxpayers of Queensland.
I’m not really going to waste a lot of my time on your comments. They speak for themselves. That you may be in a position of influencing legislation, however, is of greater concern given your limited capacity to absorb the nature of abuse no matter the source. For that reason I will be doing the following in addition to posting my reply to you.
PS. (Do you stroke anything else besides your ego on taxpayer time Luke my boy!) You do seem to like preening for the feminists – do you have issues with women that cause you to want to look more favourable in their eyes – such as going from an Alpha to Beta male. A lot of your male feminist colleagues do – seems they missed out a lot in high school with the girls)

Michael J. Murphy said...

There you go Lukey my boy I've created a special post just for you so now when you stroke your ego some more you will see my "obscure little blog" every time. http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com/2009/01/luke-geursten-and-office-of-queensland.html

By gosh instead of being an obscure little bureaucrat with the Queensland Government way down in OZ you might become internationally known, aside from the Commonwealth Association of
Legislative Counsel.

How's that for not being obscure.