A rare honour killing: Pak woman guns down husband for sexually abusing daughter-in-law

[El Sidd]

Right .
Male dominance is not always beneficial .
Half of our population is female and females should be held equal and given equal jobs and opportunities as men .
I'm glad situation is improving and women are much participating than past .

Trust me even if the existing laws are allowed to be implemented which provide 45 percent equality, most of the frustrations will be answered.

Not every solution or change should be radical in nature.

 

[abdulbarijan]

How many times have we accepted the word of criminals before confirmation from the families of the victims or police?

Ummm ... One atleast, if this story counts in your book. Like I said before, did the law enforcement agencies establish what the CRIMINAL said was true ? Nope. They just established that the crime (murder) happened and the perpetrator was the mother-in-law. Till further investigation occurs, where her version of the story is put through the test (corroboration, medical tests of the victim), and an investigation is conducted, no possibility is off the table. Is that too hard to comprehend?

Continuation: What was the wife going to do?

Get a divorce because her husband favored his daughter in law over her? And actual took advantage of his position while his son was on duty?

On one side she'd have been a divorcee. Stigma.

On the other she killed her husband. Stigma's on both sides which do you prefer?

Anyways, all of what the wife says can easily be collaborated or disproved by the daughter in law her husband.

Lets say this is true. How much shame should be with the soldier that he pimped out his wife? To the point where the mother had to grow balls to take care of a situation he should have day 1.

"What could she have done?" There is this thing called 'filing a report' and you do it in the case where an individual is victimizing you or someone you know. This report is filed to these formal bodies we like to term 'law enforcement agencies', who literally have the job to protect the victims once they are made aware of the case. The system to protect the victim, do it in a fashion where everything is kept under wraps etc. was there but wasn't utilized. Instead, a murder was committed which is now being justified by a story which isn't even established as 'truthful' as yet.

And we have members on here glorifying the action of taking the law in to ones own hands, with which I simply disagree, and I would like to think most level headed members would too, when they start thinking with their brains rather than their emotions.

 

[SMC]

So as usual, a woman commits a crime and claims the man was doing something bad, in order to get away from the crime or get a reduced sentence, and the public buys it wholesale. There's a reason why women get significantly reduced sentencing for committing similar crimes, even in western countries. The lawyer for the woman can just claim abuse or violence at the hands of men, and without her story being verified she gets a sentence that's less than half of a man. Dear god, and women are apparently oppressed and whatnot?

How many times have we accepted the word of criminals before confirmation from the families of the victims or police?

All the time. It's why women get significantly less sentences than men for the same crime, even in western countries. Even without their story being verified, it seems to make a difference to the judge and jury which give them significantly reduced sentences.

Continuation: What was the wife going to do?

Get a divorce because her husband favored his daughter in law over her? And actual took advantage of his position while his son was on duty?

On one side she'd have been a divorcee. Stigma.

On the other she killed her husband. Stigma's on both sides which do you prefer?

Anyways, all of what the wife says can easily be collaborated or disproved by the daughter in law her husband.

Lets say this is true. How much shame should be with the soldier that he pimped out his wife? To the point where the mother had to grow balls to take care of a situation he should have day 1.

For all we know, her entire story is BS. She made up a fantastic story to hide the fact that she killed her husband. Not saying that's what happened, but that's as much a possibility.

 

[Divergent]

Ohhh well, I'm beginning to question that now

Cmon, don't hide behind/sugar coat the situation by saying you were "taking the article" at face value, let's call it what it is, your taking the criminal's narrative at face value.

How many times have we accepted the word of criminals before confirmation from the families of the victims or police?

Continuation: What was the wife going to do?

Get a divorce because her husband favored his daughter in law over her? And actual took advantage of his position while his son was on duty?

On one side she'd have been a divorcee. Stigma.

On the other she killed her husband. Stigma's on both sides which do you prefer?

Anyways, all of what the wife says can easily be collaborated or disproved by the daughter in law her husband.

Lets say this is true. How much shame should be with the soldier that he pimped out his wife? To the point where the mother had to grow balls to take care of a situation he should have day 1.

Agreed. As far as I'm concerned comments made were regarding to what the article is about and correctly so. Everything else is guess work. We can only go off by what was stated and until and unless there's something proved indifferently this is murder due to a man committing a crime with his daughter in law. That's that.

 

[abdulbarijan]

Agreed. As far as I'm concerned comments made were regarding to what the article is about and correctly so. Everything else is guess work. We can only go off by what was stated and until and unless there's something proved indifferently this is murder due to a man committing a crime with his daughter in law. That's that.

So, in your opinion, in the absence of information, the narrative of murderer should be taken as truthful and shouldn't be questioned?

 

[Divergent]

So, in the absence of information, the narrative of murderer should be taken as truthful and shouldn't be questioned?

No. Due to the information not being there or because you believe differently doesn't make it correct. What you suggest is mere hypothesis and conspiracy - what is stated is a self-confession and with all due respect if someone wants to kill their Husband, they wouldn't wait till a daughter in law comes, they'd do it a long time ago or use a different excuse. No one would drag their daughter in law and son through the dirt with such an accusation it's vile

 

[Super Falcon]

This is right woman did

 

[abdulbarijan]

No. Due to the information not being there or because you believe differently doesn't make it correct. What you suggest is mere hypothesis and conspiracy - what is stated is a self-confession and with all due respect if someone wants to kill their Husband, they wouldn't wait till a daughter in law comes, they'd do it a long time ago or use a different excuse. No one would drag their daughter in law and son through the dirt with such an accusation it's vile

The "no one would xyz" arguments don't exactly work for me. The idea of believing the information that we have available ..... is acceptable ..... as long as it is being provided by a neutral body.
A criminal, talking about her own case, in which she makes herself look like a heroic figure who happens to rescue her daughter in law .... doesn't exactly qualify to be that 'neutral body' does it? Hold your horses before everything is established is what I'm simply asking for.