Women as an identifiable group under attack: Part 2

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
remind remind's picture

yes,  I think so too Ghislaine, can't hardly wait to read it.

 sorry  do not know how you prepare them and arm them with actual self esteem, as oppopsed to their wrongly believing that the more they look like a living doll or centerfold the better their self esteem would be. Other than encouraging education education education.

 

For awhile the granddaughter was upset, if you can imagine, because she was being labelled "smart" as  she is fluently bilingual, and has always gone to an ecole. This apparently sets them apart from their peers in straight english schools and sets them up as targets for mocking.

 

But nowadays she gets it, or at least some of it and she has two stark realities in her  extended family to compare to. Her fathers side are surface people who live a patriarchial norm, that is full of violence, mainly verbal and emotional, though it is hidden beneath the surface of supposedly upper middle class posturing, and her feminist matriarchial family where that type of VAW stuff does not exist. And where there is no societal posturing occuring.

 

So she "sees" for herself and them comes to me to speak of social feminism, much more so than her mother did actually. Her mother, my daughter, did not start accepting feminist thought until a few years ago, as she wrongly believed broad sociatal sexism did not exist any longer, because it did not exist in her family and amongst the larger social network we exist in.

Unfortunately that false belief of hers lead her to  world of hurt that she is just beginning to recover from.

 

Having said that though, she also owns her own home, and business, and she just turned 30. Which indicates that some things have progressed for women  of the next generation in some ways.

 

Just not in the sexual objectification and VAW ways.

remind remind's picture

Interesting blog writings on this study's findings

 

Sabotaging birth control - sinister new face of sexual violence

Quote:
Washington, Jan 25 (IANS) Researchers have unmasked a new yet sinister face of sexual violence against young women and teenage girls.

Male partners force them into pregnancy by damaging condoms and sabotaging birth control efforts, acts linked with physical or sexual violence, known as 'reproductive coercion,' says a new study by a University of California-Davis (UC-D) team.

"What this study shows is that reproductive coercion likely explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens," said Jay Silverman, study co-author and associate professor at the Harvard School of public health.

 

and then this one really lays it out

 

Quote:
It's sometimes assumed that unmarried teenagers and young women become pregnant because they don't use contraception or because they want a baby. But the authors of a new study say there's another reason. Some women are coerced into pregnancy by their boyfriends. Young women even report that their boyfriends sabotage birth control to get them pregnant.

Researchers at UC Davis conducted a survey of 1,300 young women at five reproductive health clinics in Northern California. The women ranged in age from 16 to 29. They were asked questions about birth-control sabotage, pregnancy coercion and partner violence. The study found that one in five women said they had experienced pregnancy coercion and 15% had experienced birth-control sabotage. More than half had experienced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner. The researchers concluded that the rate of unintended pregnancy was double among women who experienced reproductive coercion and partner violence. The study is published online today in the journal Contraception.

"This study highlights an under-recognized phenomenon where male partners actively attempt to promote pregnancy against the will of their female partners," Elizabeth Miller, a co-author of the study, said in a news release.

"What this study shows is that reproductive coercion likely explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens," Jay Silverman, a co-author of the study and a professor at Harvard School of Public Health, said in a news release.

 

Rates of unintended pregnancy might decline if more young women learned to recognize, avoid or leave abusive relationships or were given the skills and support to do so.

 

And there i believe ghislaine lays part of your answer in red....

Ghislaine

Definitely, remind. It just seems so overwhelming what girls and young women are up against.

I am not surprised by these new findings - as it would seem an abusive male can cause a partner to become even more dependant and unwilling to leave if he gets her pregnant.

I don't know what it is like in other provinces, but I know that here on the Island and there is not nearly close to enough time spent in sex-ed on abusive relationships, what constitutes abuse, how to recognize, how to leave, what your rights are, etc. ,etc. There needs to be a lot more down in all grades to educate both boys and girls.

remind remind's picture

And then in the USA women are getting hit with a double whammy after experiencing forced pregnancy....and other acts of violence.

 

Quote:
mothers who have had custody of their children denied
to them, simply because they allege abuse on the part of their abusive
ex-husbands.  These moms are punished by a court system that gives custody
to batterers instead of to battered women, or to child molesters instead of
to the mothers who are trying to protect them.

Barry Goldstein is the primary author of the statement below from NOMAS'
Child Custody Task Group...on the Web at

http://www.nomas.org/node/222 .

Request to Men's Organizations and Allies for Support of Protective Child
Custody (with Spanish translation below and French translation in next
message)

Male supremacist groups ("Father's Rights") have caused unspeakable harm to
our country and to our children by encouraging abusive fathers, often with
little past involvement with their children, to seek custody as a tactic to
pressure a mother to return or to punish her for leaving. "Shared
parenting", "friendly parent", involvement of both parents and other
concepts that seem fair and benevolent have instead been used to manipulate
courts and legislatures to help abusive fathers. For instance, women are
routinely denied custody of their children after being classified as
"unfriendly" for asserting that the husband has abused them or their
children.

Parental Alienation Syndrome (sometimes disguised by use of other names for
the discredited practice) is an unscientific theory that is used to prevent
investigation of children's reports of their father's abuse. Unscrupulous
professionals use it as a way to make money while ignoring the destructive
impact on children's lives. Male supremacists debase the discussion of child
custody issues by personal attacks and attempts to substitute repeated lies
for information based on scientific research. NOMAS condemns the male
supremacist tactics and instead supports the work of protective mothers to
make safety of children the highest priority of custody courts.

Male supremacists do not speak for the vast majority of men and fathers. We
invite organizations of men opposed to men's violence against women and
exploitation of children to join us in speaking out in support of protective
mothers and for reforms in the custody court system so that children will no
longer be sent to live with abusers or separated from safe, protective
mothers.

remind remind's picture

Over here we see how trivial women lives are nowadays...

Stargazer

Today started out a good day, I was happy and in a good mood, until I was made aware of this on Facebook:

 

http://tiny.cc/AXSNn

 

Report this group if you are on Facebook. Please, all help is needed.

 

Bacchus

Dear God, don't they have automatic filters for certain words like killing or hookers.

 

Reported to senior management of facebook that I know

remind remind's picture

This thread contains comments that are another good example of attacks that come disguised as info and fact but are not.

Stargazer

No, actually, the thread doesn't contain anything nefarious against women. We know you have an axe to grind with Susan, and you want to see prostitution gone but that is no reason to stir up shit with her - yet again.

 

besides that this thread was important and about women under attack. Last time I checked, sex workers were also women.

remind remind's picture

Stargazer, am not going to get into this with you, so I will only say this:

 

Susan has made that spurious and false accusation here before, and it is not abolitionists who are harming women,  and killing them, it is MEN, aka Johns, and no one else, other than perhaps pimps and procurers.

 

As such, making such false claims is an attack upon women who view things differently than she does. And frankly I am not going to put up with it and let it go unchallenged.

Michelle

I totally agree with Susan in that thread.  You're not the only feminist game in town, remind.  I think it's ironic that you're attacking feminist sex workers on babble in a thread about identifiable groups of women being attacked.

Stargazer

I disagree, and sorry remind, it is you who have the problem. If you truly care about women and violence then you would support ALL women who suffer or potentially suffer from it. Not just women who are not sex workers.

 

She made zero attacks. You used her post to marginalize her. I am shocked actually, especially after the facebook group that was about killing hookers (and that you paid absolutely no attention to nor even show disgust over). That is far more telling to me.

And yes, remind, your postion on sex workers harms women. We've been over this time and time again. We will have to agree to disagree, just as we had already done but when you personally attack another women whose views you don't hold, you become part of the problem, not the solution.

Stargazer

Michelle seems we cross posted!

SparkyOne

Women shouldn't attack other women we see enough of that from men.

 

Quote:
If you truly care about women and violence then you would support ALL women who suffer or potentially suffer from it. Not just women who are not sex workers.

Great comment Stargazer.

remind remind's picture

No....frankly, she attacked feminists and women, and indeed I  find her words slanderous, as well as giving those men who hurt women an excuse or reason to say it is not their fault. Or actually by saying such a false thing, she gives them, the abusers, license to  keep on doing it.

 

Men who hurt woman, no matter what the woman does for a living, are to blame for hurting said woman, not someone else. Full stop.

 

It is not abolitionists who are to blame for women in sex work who get hurt and killed, and saying so is an attack and slander.

 

Michelle... great example on differing types of feminism, as the street goes 2 ways on that comment of yours, as feminists by that very same token, who support the legalization of pimps and procurers are not the only feminist game in town. And when such a feminist states that other feminists, who are abolitionists, are to blame for the violence against sex workers and prostitutes, then they better expect to be called on it.

Do you see me running around blamming feminists, such as yourselves, for prostitutes and sex workers getting harmed?

 

NO, even though I believe differently, than you on this, I know who to blame.

 

It is the persons doing the harm, who are the ones who do the harm, scapgoating those who do the harm, is unacceptable. And to blame it on abolitionist feminists is even more unacceptable,  as such it was/is an attack upon both types IMV, as a comment it was geared to set up controversy, just as it did before.

 

Feminists do not blame other women, and/or feminists in my feminist world at least, especially when men are the perps of violence against us, just as we do not blame victims of any type.

Stargazer

remind wrote:

No....frankly, she attacked feminists and women, and indeed I  find her words slanderous, as well as giving those men who hurt women an excuse or reason to say it is not their fault. Or actually by saying such a false thing, she gives them, the abusers, license to  keep on doing it.

 

Men who hurt woman, no matter what the woman does for a living, are to blame for hurting said woman, not someone else. Full stop.

 

It is not abolitionists who are to blame for women in sex work who get hurt and killed, and saying so is an attack and slander.

 

Michelle... great example on differing types of feminism, as the street goes 2 ways on that comment of yours, as feminists by that very same token, who support the legalization of pimps and procurers are not the only feminist game in town. And when such a feminist states that other feminists, who are abolitionists, are to blame for the violence against sex workers and prostitutes, then they better expect to be called on it.

Do you see me running around blamming feminists, such as yourselves, for prostitutes and sex workers getting harmed?

 

NO, even though I believe differently, than you on this, I know who to blame.

 

It is the persons doing the harm, who are the ones who do the harm, scapgoating those who do the harm, is unacceptable. And to blame it on abolitionist feminists is even more unacceptable,  as such it was/is an attack upon both types IMV, as a comment it was geared to set up controversy, just as it did before.

 

Feminists do not blame other women, and/or feminists in my feminist world at least, especially when men are the perps of violence against us, just as we do not blame victims of any type.

 

You should take your own advice. Apparently you took the time to blame susan for women's downfall.

Oh and it sure as hell is not "slander" to say that abolishment is and has done harm to women. Shall we play a game of stats?

Prostitution is not going away just because you wish to wage war on it. How is the War on Drugs coming along? Did prohibition help anything? BTW, these are rhetorical questions.

Do you have anything to say about groups that call for the death of sex workers? This made news around the globe.

That's my say and my take and I approve of this post. (where is the Like button?)

remind remind's picture

Quote:
Apparently you took the time to blame susan for women's downfall.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth, and that is me putting it nicely, as you well know you were.

 

Quote:
Oh and it sure as hell is not "slander" to say that abolishment is and has done harm to women. Shall we play a game of stats?

 

She did not say that, she said abolisionists were to blame, so how about you reread what she said, as opposed to spinning what you think she said.

 

It is slander to  state that I, for example, or indeed any other babbler, am to blame for the harm johns and pimps/procurers have done, and do, to prostitues and  sex workers.  As that is exactly what she did,  call all those who are against the legalizing of johns, pimps and procurers  murderers and assaulters.

 

And I will not take false attacks like that and let them go....not by a long freaking shot.

 

Again, not only is it slander, it scapegoats those who are you know, actually commiting the  acts of violence.

 

 

Stargazer

Okay..whatever. Not worth it.

remind remind's picture

And the following is what happens, or could happen, in other countries, who put male penises before the rights of women. And we already know the increased violence against ALL women, legalized non-regulated prostitution, has brought to the Netherlands.

 

Quote:
A union representing Dutch nurses will launch a national campaign Friday against demands for sexual services by patients who claim it should be part of their standard care

 

The young woman witnessed some of the man's other nurses offering him sexual gratification, the union said. When she refused to do the same, he tried to dismiss her on the grounds that she was unfit to provide care.

Bacchus
remind remind's picture

ya bacchus thanks for the info, as there is nothing like the guilt one experiences, after listening to your raped daughter scream in pain when a male RCMP officer is collecting "the rape evidence" after you have insisted she report it.

 

Saying it should be reported is something I would never ever do again to any girl or woman, in fact I would tell them to stay the hell away from the police.

 

And that is even though I know it is made rough for women and girls in order to keep male privilege alive and well.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
And the following is what happens, or could happen, in other countries, who put male penises before the rights of women.

 

"the following" seems to be a "news of the wierd"-type story of a lone individual who feels he should be offered sexual services as part of his care.

 

Oh no.

Stargazer

remind wrote:

Quote:
Apparently you took the time to blame susan for women's downfall.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth, and that is me putting it nicely, as you well know you were.

 

Quote:
Oh and it sure as hell is not "slander" to say that abolishment is and has done harm to women. Shall we play a game of stats?

 

She did not say that, she said abolisionists were to blame, so how about you reread what she said, as opposed to spinning what you think she said.

 

It is slander to  state that I, for example, or indeed any other babbler, am to blame for the harm johns and pimps/procurers have done, and do, to prostitues and  sex workers.  As that is exactly what she did,  call all those who are against the legalizing of johns, pimps and procurers  murderers and assaulters.

 

And I will not take false attacks like that and let them go....not by a long freaking shot.

 

Again, not only is it slander, it scapegoats those who are you know, actually commiting the  acts of violence.

 

 

 

Okay fuck it. I am dead tired of playing "nice" to you. Somewhere along the lines you seem to have acquired a hate on for sex workers. Don't tell me to shut up, or that I put words in your mouth. YOU stated you were a supporter of abolishment.  You stated that. Study after fucking study has shown that THIS WON'T and DOESN'T WORK. Not unlike Prohibition.It does put women in danger, even the police know this.

Your stand on transwomen is less than progressive judging by your posts. I consider them women and allies. Not people who need anyones "guidance" about how they should live their lives.

I am not a part of your team of purist feminists. I am pro-sex, pro-sex workers and pro complete control over our bodies.

Just like E. Tamaran was accused of constantly yelling racism you seem fit to constantly yell "male privilege" every freaking time, no matter what the issue. This is NOT going to win us allies. There is a way to discuss topics without shouting "male penis" and "male privilege". That shuts out debate completely. I just want people to know that this is NOT the brand of feminism I signed up for. You do not represent me.

You have been flying off the handle for awhile now with this divisive and unnecessary layering of who is deserving and who is not and I am not playing that freaking horrible game.

Lastly, it is not slander. Don't make me pull up all the horrible things you've said to sex workers who dared come here and tell us their stories.

 

Mods, if you want to give me a "time out" go ahead. I understand.

 

remind remind's picture

Snert you are not actually in this thread and forum are you, making grossly uninformed comments like that and indicating you read the article without comprehension?

 

Heads up, first of all the union would not be making a move without significant evidence it is a broadly occurring activity amongst their membership. And the article itself indicates a common place activity.

 

Secondly, I was a home care nurse for a very long time, and I lost count of the Canadian male patients, who thought they should get some sort of sexual jollies  from an attending nurse or caregiver.

That is not even mentioning the husbands of women patients who also sought the same thing.

Being met at the door with an open housecoat sporting a hard on, or a flaccid penis hoping for one, was not an unusual circumstance. Many nurses walked away and refused to go back, and I do not blame them for doing so. But personally, I usually just laughed and walked on by, or told them to put it away before it got hurt and it never usually happened again, as I did not believe their wives should be deprived of needed care because of their husband's idiocy.

If it was a male patient, I, like the other nurses would walk away, and  they were told by supervisors that if they kept it up, they would not be getting care. Some nurses and caregivers that I knew over the years even quit their jobs over the trauma of it. And one just quietly realized why.

 

Thirdly, even working in a hospital setting nurses are solicated sexually, I could not imagine how bad it would be if primary focus on the male penis was even greater than it is.

Merowe

'male' penis?

As opposed to what?

Sineed

remind wrote:
Many nurses walked away and refused to go back, and I do not blame them for doing so. But personally, I usually just laughed and walked on by, or told them to put it away before it got hurt and it never usually happened again, as I did not believe their wives should be deprived of needed care because of their husband's idiocy.

The sexual harassment of health care workers is ongoing and an enormous topic that's not adequately addressed - it tends to get shrugged off as coming from drugs or dementia, though many of the nurses I work with insist that the patients know exactly what they're doing.

remind remind's picture

Oh yes they do know Sineed, as evidenced by their halting of said behaviours, when told care will be suspended if such behaviour continues.

 

 

remind remind's picture

Pull them up Stargazer, however I am not waiting for it, as you can't....and it is not been me who has been flying off the handle, as you call it.

 

And just a heads up to you, if the majority of men, on the so called left,  were actual allies and interested in women's equity, we would have achieved it by now.

 

As such, I am not looking for allies, where there quite clearly aren't many, when all pretense has been put aside.

 

etd to put the missing m in

 

rework
remind remind's picture

Not that I even looked at 1 of the links, but if such is the case, then it is spreading of hate against an identifiable group.

 

And I like the "fakebook"  slang name, it seems appropriate.

Bacchus
Unionist

This wakeup call didn't get enough MSM play when it broke 4 days ago:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/03/31/rochefort-blog-hatred... code does not prohibit incitement of hatred against women, because women are not a minority! - Montréal judge[/url]

Quote:

A Montreal judge says that although she believes Jean-Claude Rochefort's blog incites hatred against women, the law does not make that a crime.

The ruling means there'll be no charge of inciting hatred for the website Rochefort created dedicated to Marc Lépine, who murdered 14 women at Montreal's École Polytechnique in 1989. [...]

Judge Hélène Morin said Wednesday that after reading more than 100 pages of entries to the blog, it's clear it incites hatred against women.

However, the judge said Parliament specifically intended the charge of incitement of hatred to protect minorities, which does not include women.

remind remind's picture

Yet more of us die from hatred inciting than any other identifiable group....

SparkyOne

I clikced on the first link.

4 out of the 6 members previewed were young women.

Second link about hiding dead hookers bodies.

6 our of 49 members.  First 5 were women.

These facebook groups are stupid but the disturbing thing is that a lot of people seem to think it's a joke but you can't blame facebook when we see the same thing acted out in video games.

 

 

Women shouldn't be considered a minority because we're not.

Instead of playing the who is a minority game why don't we consider ALL crimes of this nature as the same?

Hatred directly against me isn't more henious than a non-minority.

 

And thos facebook groups are stupid but the disturbing thing is that a lot of people seem to think it's a joke but you can't blame facebook when we see the same thing acted out in video games.

remind remind's picture

We are actually an identifable group which is targeted, not a minority.....

Unionist

Here's the problem - the definition of "identifiable group" in Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code:

Quote:
(4) In this section, “identifiable group” means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

Someone should research why the entire gang of buffoons known as Parliament decided to exclude advocating murder of women, the disabled, etc. from this provision.

 

SparkyOne

Can't you make the argument that any group could be an identifiable group?

 

Progressives could be an identifiable group. As could liberals couldn't they?

remind remind's picture

Unionist wrote:
Here's the problem - the definition of "identifiable group" in Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code:

Quote:
(4) In this section, “identifiable group” means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

Someone should research why the entire gang of buffoons known as Parliament decided to exclude advocating murder of women, the disabled, etc. from this provision.

Yes am aware of that, and the reasons why the exclusion, status quo is always so acceptable....especially forpatriarchy and privilege

Maysie Maysie's picture

SparkyOne wrote:

Can't you make the argument that any group could be an identifiable group?

Sure, and CEOs are identifiable, as are police officers and dentists.

But none of these groups are targetted, by individuals, the state, institutions and structures, for significant mistreatment and inequity in relation to others. Okay, maybe dentists are. (I am NOT an anti-dentite!)

Sparky One. We've had one full thread on this topic, and we're now coming up to a second full thread. If you have nothing to add to the discussion, and if in fact you disagree with the premise, as you appear to be doing, the thing to do is to stay out of the thread. This is not a suggestion, by the way. Thank you.

SparkyOne

My feeling was when does it stop? I'm not comfortable with a someone getting a harsher sentence for committing assault against me because I'm black over a woman who is white. Or a woman as an identifiable group over a man.

Why does someone have to be an identifible group to fall under this specific rule?

 

I'm not questioning the premise but still I guess I apologize for disagreeing?? and I will stay out of the thread as ordered.

I still believe women are playing a huge part in letting this shit happen. Just look at those facebook groups and watch the comments by "fellow women".

Have a good day (and you're welcome)

remind remind's picture

Preston manning and Allen Gregg are doing a bang up job of attacking women's rights, Murray Dobbin  indicates such

 

Quote:
His latest political gimmick was a poll, released a month ago, that purported, according to the headline on the Globe and Mail story, to show that "More Canadians [are] leaning right." His right-wing sidekick on this little project was the ubiquitous Allan Gregg, former Conservative pollster and still a man dedicated to much the same agenda that Manning is. He now works for the Harris-Decima polling outfit, one which all progressive Canadians should treat with great skepticism. Gregg is generally up to almost as much political mischief as Manning is and seeing them team up is no surprise.

Then we have the case that is currently before the Supremes, asking whether the right to rape a unconscious victim, is okay or not....

rework

SparkyOne wrote:

And thos facebook groups are stupid but the disturbing thing is that a lot of people seem to think it's a joke but you can't blame facebook when we see the same thing acted out in video games.

But I do blame Fakebook !

The first link is in the Category: Common Interest - Sexuality , not games or humor.

http://www.facebook.com/terms.php?ref=pf


"You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence."   (except references to hookers or comments veiled in humor)
I quess Fakebook is too big and too busy counting cash to search their own site for keywords like "Kill".  Appears it takes the police or media to make them act on their own policies.

Thinking of joining up and starting a group.
Maybe "Kill the cop so you don't have to pay the traffic ticket"
Or "Kill your children so you don't have to pay for their college"
Category: Common Interest - Humor
Would I get any flak for doing that ?
Wonder how many will think it"s funny.

Just found this, "four days after the complaints began - Facebook was adopting the social media strategy of sticking its fingers in its ears and singing la la la."

http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/webeditor/2010/02/facebook-hitting-women-row.html

Angella

"However, the judge said Parliament specifically intended the charge of incitement of hatred to protect minorities, which does not include women."

Wow, I sort of assumed incitement of hatred was wrong, period.

jas

Why intelligent people don't read the Winnipeg Sun:

"Love triangle blamed: Murder-suicide leaves woman, spurned man dead"

Quote:
An apparent love triangle led to a murder-suicide, which left a woman and a spurned man dead on the weekend and two southern Manitoba communities in shock.

Those love triangles sure are vicious, dangerous things that can "leave" both the victim, and the man who shot her, dead.

Caissa

Several female politicians and women's rights activists have denounced anti-abortion remarks made by the Catholic Church's top Canadian official over the weekend.

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, attending the Campagne Pro-Vie conference in Quebec City on Saturday, suggested that abortion can never be justified, even in cases where a woman has been raped.

He called abortion a "moral crime" as serious as murder.

Ouellet said he understands how a sexually assaulted woman has been traumatized and must be helped and that her attacker must be held accountable.

"But there is already a victim," he said. "Must there be another one?"

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/05/17/ouellet-marois-abortion-rape.html#ixzz0oCJXtEbP

remind remind's picture

Guess there is not enough children for the Catholic clergy to rape and brutalize.....and it so wonderful that men feel they can make comments on women's human rights.

SparkyOne

Good greif

remind remind's picture

Apparently cutting your little girls throat, wide open is deserved punishment for bad behaviour.

 

As that is what the step father did after having an argument with "his wife" about discipline. And indeed he was "stoic" after he did so. wtf?????

 

 

 

Quote:
Peter James Wilson, 29, was arrested Sunday evening in Hoodsport, Wash. on the Olympic Peninsula after police arrived at a two-storey rented vacation cabin to discover the little girl dead. Her throat had been slashed.

Police say a "stoic" Wilson was sitting on a swing in the gazebo next to the cabin when emergency crews arrived shortly after 6 p.m.

According to a statement released by the Mason County Sheriff's Office, Wilson later told a detective he killed his stepdaughter with a knife he found on the kitchen counter after fighting with his wife about disciplining the children.

The statement alleges Wilson told his wife "not to worry" and that he would "take care of things" before leading Clare to the lower floor of the cabin.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Stepfather+charged+after+Abbotsford+girl+found+dead+with+throat/3214638/story.html#ixzz0sHXdUytD

Bacchus

Afghan women jailed for 'bad character'

 

Surprisingly uplifting to read tho

kropotkin1951

Quote:

Meanwhile, prosecutors are considering whether to pursue the death penalty.

Sergi said an accused's criminal history and the details of the alleged crime are key factors that must be weighed in a capital case.

Sergi was uncertain how a mental illness defence might affect the death-penalty decision.

Both Wilson and his wife told police he suffers from bipolar disorder for which he takes medication.

 

 

If he had been high on any drugs other than pharmaceuticals that would be the story.  

Pages