Husband killers to get released

I have a reader who doubts that California is controlled by extreme leftist feminists. Yes, Gov. Brown signed leftist bills. Here is the latest:

Brenda Clubine is a platinum blonde with focused blue eyes and a no-nonsense demeanor.

She spent 26 years in prison for killing her husband. After enduring beatings and emergency room visits, she says, it finally ended in a locked motel room where he told her to give him her wedding rings.

"I said, 'Why?' He said, 'Because tomorrow they won't be able to identify your body without them,' " Clubine says.

She hit him in the head with a wine bottle, and he died of blunt force trauma. She got out of prison four years ago, but many women with stories similar to Clubine's are still behind bars.

Now, those women may have a chance at release. California Gov. Jerry Brown recently signed a bill to allow new evidence to be considered in the cases of women serving decades-long sentences for killing their abusive partners.

No, Clubine's story is not plausible. Dead bodies are identified by relatives and by dental records, not wedding rings. If he really wanted to kill her, he would kill her and remove the rings himself.

This feminist bill is a capitulation to demands to let husband-murderers out of prison. And they will not even have to register as sex offenders after they get out!

Husband-murderers are hard to convict in California because of this evidence code rule:

1107. (a) In a criminal action, expert testimony is admissible by either the prosecution or the defense regarding intimate partner battering and its effects, including the nature and effect of physical, emotional, or mental abuse on the beliefs, perceptions, or behavior of victims of domestic violence, except when offered against a criminal defendant to prove the occurrence of the act or acts of abuse which form the basis of the criminal charge.

So a bogus feminist psychologist can argue for the defense that the killer has battered wife syndrome, but the prosecution cannot offer such evidence against. The defense attorney then convinces the gullible jury that the poor abused woman had to kill her husband.

The stated purpose of this new law is to free the husband killers who were convicted before the above evidence rule was enacted.

These laws and expert testimony are contrary to common sense and established facts. Here is a new study:

Conventional wisdom suggests that women usually kill their spouses in self defence or as a final, desperate reaction to chronic battery, the burning-bed syndrome that is sometimes cited as a defence in murder trials. A new Canadian study, however, suggests that barely a quarter of husband-killers are victims of domestic abuse, less than half suffer from any identified psychological problem, and fewer still have had trouble with police.

The majority of the slayings – perpetrated by knife, gun and strangulation — appear generally unheralded, suggests the analysis of 20 years of Quebec homicide files.

“Women rarely gave a warning before killing their mates,” concluded the study, co-authored by Dr. Dominique Bourget, a forensic psychiatrist at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre. “In the vast majority of cases of women who killed their mates, there were very few indicators that might have signalled the risk and helped predict the violent, lethal behaviour.” ...

“We’ve got a stereoptye about domestic violence … that the oppressor or perpetrator is the male and when female violence happens, it’s a reaction against male violence,” he said. “The stereotype is so strong, that when you look at the actual data, you’re shocked.”

Every female murderer in California just got a get-out-of-jail-free card. All she has to do is to invent some saga of abuse.