Fight back and be labelled an alcoholic

Wed, 2007-07-11 13:39

Michelle

Okay, [url=http://www.thestar.com/News/article/234762]check this out.[/url]

A woman gets into an argument with her violent boyfriend, who then injures her back by shoving her down on the couch. They make up, have a few drinks together, but then get into another argument.

She grabs her 18 month-old and runs for the van in order to get away from him. Her drunk boyfriend chases her, and tries to get into the back of the van, in pursuit. So she throws the van in reverse and pins him against the wall in order to stop him, and then she drives away.

Now, I can see that they dropped a bunch of charges, probably because they could understand her plight. But here's what I don't get:

quote:

During the six-month sentence, Toney is subject to a 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew. The judge also ordered her to take alcohol treatment, which court heard was at the root of the incident.

Now, call me a crazy feminist if you will, but I kind of thought that what was at the root of the incident wasn't the girlfriend's drinking, but the boyfriend's violence, and his threatening pursuit of her after he had already injured her once that night.

But apparently I'm wrong. So let this be a lesson to all you women out there who might be tempted to tie one on with a friend or boyfriend: if anyone tries to victimize you while you're drunk, you are to blame for getting drunk, and it's likely you're an alcoholic who needs therapy. Everyone got that?

Wed, 2007-07-11 14:18

#3

Bacchus

quote:

Toney pleaded guilty today to failing to stop at an accident causing bodily harm.
Normally such a crime warrants a jail sentence, McMahon said.
But the "exceptional circumstances of this case" — including the fact that she is a young single mother who has already served two weeks in pre-trial custody, and the difficulties of the Crown proving its case following the death of the victim due to unrelated causes — argued for a lesser sentence, McMahon said.
Elliott, who had a lengthy violent criminal record, never gave a taped statement to police.

How did he die? And apparently she took a plea deal. Had she gone to trial. I suspect she had a very good chance of being found innocent.

edited to add
Im not surprised they prosecuted since only her word supports the defense theory and crushing someone with a car smacks of vigilantism and attack rather more than defense since in theory once she was in the car and he was behind she could drive away from him. The authorities always prosecute anythign with a self defense theory

Drunk guys dont run very fast and if she uses alcohol as a defense for not knowing to just hit drive instead of crushing him, the alcohol counseling part makes more sense.

[ 11 July 2007: Message edited by: Bacchus ]

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:54

#4

Michelle

He didn't die, or at least it didn't say so in the article if he did. He had his leg amputated, though.

The guy was trying to get in the back door of her van, so she backed up to stop him. Sometimes in the heat of the moment it's hard to judge how much force you've used.

I think the extremely reduced charges and light sentence reflects the fact that she was acting in self-defence. What she did wrong was to drive away and not call for help afterwards.

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:56

#5

Bacchus

No it says in the article he died of unrelated causes but i wonder what those were.

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:57

#6

remind

The woman is always wrong don't know michelle? [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

[thread drift] Have a story about drinking and what the hospitals/Drs/RCMP think.

Back when my sig other and I were younger, we had a few drinks before we went out hiking along the bluffs in Nanaimo with another few couples. Along the way, you had to jump across a fault crevasse about a metre wide. Well, I slipped on my jump and went down the crevasse, at the bottom of which were broken bottles.

One bottle broken off at the neck was positioned with the jagged edge up and stuck into the dirt. So when I fell, I landed bum first on it and on it just missed having to have a colostomy. Took 177 stitches to close it up it even knicked the bone it went so deep.

Was bleeding profusely and they had to get me up and then we had too walk about a mile to the nearest rd. Hubby went running and got the car to pick me and drive me to the hospital. Speeding to the hospital of course the RCMP pulled us over, but then gave us an escort to the hospital.

When I got there, the freaking Dr asked me if sig other did this to me while we were drinking and fighting, cause he smelled alcohol on my breath. I could not believe it. They actually had the RCMP who gave us an escort to hold him while they questioned me. And they questioned me before they started giving me a blood transfusion and sewied me up.

Fuck I was mad, I said: "what you think he sliced me up with a grapefruit knife?", as the cut was perfectly round in the shape of the broken bottle.

I mean, I can understand them trying to be cautious just in case but really but how in the hell can someone slice you in a perfectly round circle?[/drift]

However, in this case of the thread they were drinking all night it sounds like. Though there is not enough info to make a clear perception if she did indeed have a problem. And the guy lost his leg so she must have backed into him with some force not just pinning him, and why didn't she just drive away?

How strange though he died from something else, prior to the trial.

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:58

#7

Sineed

I thought she was treated fairly, really; crushing someone with a car to the extent that he loses a leg could have gotten her some jail time. Instead, they took mitigating circumstances into account.

And the counselling for alcohol abuse is right on. Here she is, the sole support of an 18-month-old, and she's going on all-night drinking binges? Even if there wasn't a baby involved, binge drinking of that magnitude is problematic behaviour that needs addressing and is an entirely separate issue from the abusive boyfriend.

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:59

#8

Michelle

Oh, I see now. I totally missed that before! I wondered why police had never had a statement from him.

Maybe the unrelated cause was smacking around someone else who decided to finish what he started.

Wed, 2007-07-11 15:59

#9

Bacchus

I think its even earlier than prior to the trial, since it says he never made a statement to police which sort of implies his death was pretty soon after the incident. Its easy to see it was not connected to the incident tho, cuz then the charges would have be upgraded to negligence causing death or manslaughter

[ 11 July 2007: Message edited by: Bacchus ]

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:06

#10

Michelle

I didn't see where it said she went on binges in the plural. It said that night she went on a binge. And what's a binge, anyhow? Getting drunk?

How many of us have never gotten drunk? Even (gasp!) after having become a parent? My ex and I got drunk one New Year's Eve when our son was a toddler (once he was sleeping, of course) and we stayed home because we didn't have a sitter. Happily, he didn't beat me up, so I escaped both injury and a label.

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:15

#11

Stephen Gordon

I dunno. If you're still drinking at 7:00 am the next morning, and then taking your toddler out for a drive, then maybe you have issues...

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:23

#12

remind

quote:

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
[b]I dunno. If you're still drinking at 7:00 am the next morning, and then taking your toddler out for a drive, then maybe you have issues...[/b]

She wasn't just taking her toddler out for a drive Stehphen, she was trying to get away from him.

--------------
How does it smack of vigilantism and an attack bacchus? If he is trying to get into the van from the back doors?

ETA: staying up all night drinking is not indicative of a drinking problem, I am sure most of us have done so several times in our younger years. Unless of course your very religious or other.

[ 11 July 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:25

#13

Sineed

Binge drinking is having five or more drinks on one occasion. (Sometimes they define it differently for men and for women, but that's hair-splitting in my mind.) The article said she hooked up with her boyfriend for all-night binge drinking, so I'm thinking she's not a teetotaller the rest of the time. Your tolerance for alcohol goes up when you drink all the time (except when your liver starts to go), so a person who can drink all night is an experienced drinker.

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:27

#14

Stephen Gordon

That's not *entirely* clear from the Star article, but it's certainly a reasonable interpretation of what happened.

Wed, 2007-07-11 16:45

#15

remind

quote:

Originally posted by Sineed:
[b]...so a person who can drink all night is an experienced drinker.[/b]

uh, what the hell is an experienced drinker?

And again, being able to stay up and drink all night does not mean you are a heavy drinker.

Wed, 2007-07-11 17:12

#16

Bacchus

vigilantism is usually any 'over the top' self defense or an attack on a suspected criminal.

Shoot a trespasser and it will be quoted as 'vigilante justice' or taking the law into your own hands

Wed, 2007-07-11 17:13

#17

Bacchus

Being able to stay up all night, drink heavily in a described 'binge' and then get into a car, load up a baby and drive away would seem to indicate a 'experienced' drinker.

Plus if there wasnt evidence of drinking in more than this one case, there would not have been alcohol counseling mandated.

Having said that, Michelle is right-it does not states she did 'binges' on a regular basis and even a daily alcoholic doesnt necessarily go on 'binges'. I was an alcoholic and never really 'binged'.

[ 11 July 2007: Message edited by: Bacchus ]

Wed, 2007-07-11 17:27

#18

Sineed

Where you call drinking problematic is not just looking at the total amount of booze consumed. You also take into account the impact on the person's life, ie, "use despite persistent or recurrent problems (e.g., health or social problems)," or "continued substance use despite persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance." (from [url=http://www.camh.net/Publications/Resources_for_Professionals/Alcohol_and... of Addiction and Implications for Counselling in Alcohol & Drug Problems: A Practical Guide For Counsellors.[/url]

So...there's inviting the boyfriend over on New Year's Eve and drinking too much after the baby is in bed. And then there's inviting the boyfriend over for an all-night drinking binge with baby nearby, and getting into a fight with said boyfriend, and crushing his legs with the car.

quote:

I was an alcoholic and never really 'binged'.

Yeah, the alcoholics in my family weren't bingers either; they would just drink steadily all day.

[ 11 July 2007: Message edited by: Sineed ]

Thu, 2007-07-12 10:58

#19

Polly B

It doesn't actually say that she was leaving because she was afraid. According to her: They were drinking for hours, then they had a fight and she was hurt. They made up after that, and drank some more. Then - and it doesn't say why - she decided to take her son in the van. If she was frightened by him, and being chased out to the van, surely that would have been clear in her statement?

She says that after she decided to leave, this creep frightened her by demanding to know where she was heading and by trying to get in the back of the van. So she ran over him.

But, she made the decision to drive after hours and hours of drinking, and to take her son with her, before she claims she was frightened.

We are probably only getting part of the truth here, but if that is the case, the Judge is certainly justified in expecting her to take a good hard look at her drinking.

Thu, 2007-07-12 11:00

#20

trippie

A few things here....

YOu don't know anything about the guy other then what the paper told you...

she was drinking all night long... maybe she got the story wrong?

This is not some Quentin Tarantino movie were you exact some form of violent revenge aginst the person coming after you...

She crushed the guy against the wall with her van.

Befor you come to her defence you have to know how she is...

From this story it's obvious that she was far more violent toward the guy then the guy was toward her...

Being drunk is not an excuse other wise al the drunk drivers that kill people would be innocent. How many people think that drunk drivers that cause death are innocent..

They did not say how the guy died . Maybe he killed himself from the drepression of having one leg amputated...

Here are the facts of the case as we know them..

The guy was sleeping , she woke him up and afight insued...

they made up and drunk until early morning... more fighting insued she left and he went after her... he tried to get into the van and she crushed him against a wall with her vehicle... and as of today the guy is dead...

Here are the things we don't know..

The women..
The man..
The relationship between the two...

there is to much conjecture here about the innocence of the women... maybe she was badgering him all night long and he finaly couldn't take it anymore?

maybe she was having an afair with his best body and threw it in his face after a night of drinking?

What makes you think that the woman was an angel and the man the devil?

never assume...

And remember, the woman pinned the guy against a wall with her van... that is an execptional form of violence.....and should be properly delt with...

the message should never be....

" When someone attacks you, you should attack them with even more violence."

one more thing..

I have afriend the works at a local woman sheltter... shes sick of the seeing the same woman coming in time and time again.. She says the have plenty of opertunity to leave but always go back... At what point does a person have to take responcibility..??

Thu, 2007-07-12 11:05

#21

Polly B

quote:

Originally posted by trippie:
[b]there is to much conjecture here...[/b]

Yep. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

(edited to add the rolley-eye thing)

[ 12 July 2007: Message edited by: Polly Brandybuck ]

Thu, 2007-07-12 11:33

#22

Scout

quote:

I have afriend the works at a local woman sheltter... shes sick of the seeing the same woman coming in time and time again.. She says the have plenty of opertunity to leave but always go back... At what point does a person have to take responcibility..??

This is not relevant to the thread and violates the rules of this forum.

Thu, 2007-07-12 12:08

#23

Polly B

To be fair to Trippie - he (she?) tried to start this topic in a different forum and was told to come here.

Thu, 2007-07-12 14:30

#24

Scout

To be fair? The comment violates babble policy not the FF. Period. Do you really think there is a place on a progressive forum where we can blame women for being beaten because they don't leave their abuser? Because they don't take responsibility for being beaten? I don't. And I think don't trying to pass off a portion of the comment to someone who supposedly works with these women makes it any better either.

Thu, 2007-07-12 14:51

#25

Michelle

Scout is right. trippie, if you can't discuss this from a feminist point of view (and that means NOT blaming abuse victims for their victimization) then stay out of this forum. And if you want to post blame-the-victim crap about abuse victims, then find another board altogether.

In answer to the remark about this being in the feminist forum - I started the thread here, because this is a story about a woman who was being abused by her boyfriend (trippie seems to have missed the part about how the boyfriend injured her back earlier in the evening by throwing her on the couch during a fight, and the part where she's running away from the guy and he's trying to get into the van she's trying to use to run away from him) who badly injured him in the process.

I have no problem with discussing whether or not she went too far in her actions - I don't believe in crippling people either, nor in not calling help after incapacitating someone, even an attacker.

What you don't get to do is spew sexist garbage about abuse victims, and I don't give a damn whether you had ten shelter workers tell you this shit. It's not happening here.

[ 12 July 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

Thu, 2007-07-12 15:24

#26

Polly B

Oh, I agree with not being allowed to blame the victim...anywhere on the forum. Sorry if that came across wrong. I thought the objection to Trippie was for everything he said.

What I was wondering about is this. Trippie started a thread somewhere else, saying how unfair etc it was that this woman only got curfew when she had run over someone on purpose. It's his point of view. He was told there was already a thread here. But here, he's not allowed to say what he thinks - that the woman should have gone to jail for running over someone.

Becuz here we are accepting it as a given that she is telling the truth and that she is blameless because she was running in fear from an abusive man. It's support for the woman and that's a good thing.

While I think what Trippie posted was a crock, I also think that if he wanted to discuss this (if he could do it reasonably) from the point of view that this was a woman who walked from a nasty crime, then he shouldn't have been directed here to do so! Or it should have come with a warning, ie "Trippie there is already a thread over here for this topic, but if you are going to bring this opinion to it we will shut you down" or something like that.

Thu, 2007-07-12 15:28

#27

Will S

quote:

Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]Scout is right. trippie, if you can't discuss this from a feminist point of view (and that means NOT blaming abuse victims for their victimization) then stay out of this forum. And if you want to post blame-the-victim crap about abuse victims, then find another board altogether. [/b]

Can I ask a question that relates to this but not directly to the thread topic? I had posted a question about the terms of reference in the introductions forum but it hasn't generated any responses yet and this kind of relates to what is/is not acceptable.

[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=36&t=000740]My question[/url]

I can tell that trippie's comments are clearly out of line for this forum, but I had questions about what types of statements and posting actions were or weren't acceptable. Things that might be more subtle than the statements made above but still objectionable. Is there any kind of write-up about terms of use that's lurking on here, or is it plainly visible and I'm just completely missing it. I do like participating in these forums but I want to avoid posting something that might be unintentionally offensive to the group it's here to primarily serve. Thanks. [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

Thu, 2007-07-12 16:25

#28

Michelle

trippie's comments are clearly out of line for babble, period. Nowhere on babble, whether the feminist forum or not, is it acceptable to blame abuse victims for the abuse because they haven't left their abusers. Nowhere is it okay on babble to suggest that maybe a woman deserved to be hit or chased or threatened by her boyfriend because she said something insulting.

[ 12 July 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

Thu, 2007-07-12 17:22

#29

FraserValleyMan

quote:

Originally posted by remind:
[b]And again, being able to stay up and drink all night does not mean you are a heavy drinker.[/b]

Good to know. What does?

Thu, 2007-07-12 18:11

#30

500_Apples

Both the man and the woman sound like monsters, but ultimately, the woman is coming off as a bigger psycho. The man involved was a violent person and needed help. The woman used potentially lethal force. I think there's a difference between using your hands and using a firearm. She used her van. That's what I often think whenever I see people in gigantic cars. They want the freedom to be able to run people over, and crush people.

Interesting how some would criticize a woman of means for leaving aside her 18 month old baby for a while for a night of getting drunk with a violent person. I wonder how some feel about a man who knows he responds to a woman violently, but simply continues on... directly to alcohol. I've never felt like hitting a woman. But if I did, I would avoid certain problems. I would not go get drunk with her for many hours, without first properly reflecting on why it is I risk turning into a savage near her, and rectifying the problem.

They may both be sociopaths, but the boyfriend involved is no longer a threat to society. Miss Destruction Derby, however, is still out there.

***

I think a person has an alcohol problem when alcohol causes them to behave in dangerous ways. Somebody who gets eight pints every saturday and is harmless does not have an alcohol problem. Somebody who turns into a machine of destruction even partially due to alcohol, does.

[ 12 July 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

Thu, 2007-07-12 18:37

#31

Polly B

quote:

Originally posted by FraserValleyMan:
[b]
Good to know. What does?[/b]

I think having another drink or two, at 6:am, when you know that you are going to be driving with your child within a few hours.

This has colored my perception of this woman, and I think I best stay out of this discussion, here.

Thu, 2007-07-12 18:45

#32

Michelle

I have no problem with someone saying they think she should have been convicted. All I'm objecting to is sexist comments about abuse victims deserving what they get if they stay, and the suggestion that if the woman said something nasty to the guy then she deserved to be injured by him. That's all.

Personally, I think that, while the woman might have freaked out at the thought of her violent boyfriend getting into the van to harm her and backed up in self-defence, her claim to self-defence ended when she a) drove away drunk from the scene, and b) didn't call for help for the guy even though she could see he was clearly lying on the ground, helpless. That's a hit and run, definitely.

But to me, the drunk driving part is understandable - if she was running away from an abusive boyfriend, then obviously she's not going to stop and wait for a few hours until she sobers up. And the backing up part is understandable too - she was trying to stop him and misjudged the force she used.

But driving away after the guy was lying on the ground injured, and not calling for help? Not okay. I could see her trying to get away in case he recovered and was enraged (maybe she didn't realize how hard she hit him). But she could still have called for help from the nearest payphone or something.

Then again, I don't know her mental state, and I have no idea how traumatized she might have been from what happened. She did return to the scene three hours later. I've never been though something like that, so I don't know how dazed and/or freaked out I would be in her shoes.

Thu, 2007-07-12 19:00

#33

500_Apples

You sure are forgiving Michelle.

quote:

Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]
But to me, the drunk driving part is understandable - if she was running away from an abusive boyfriend, then obviously she's not going to stop and wait for a few hours until she sobers up. And the backing up part is understandable too - she was trying to stop him and misjudged the force she used.
.[/b]

I think it's also possible she knew exactly how much force she was using.

quote:

Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]
Then again, I don't know her mental state, and I have no idea how traumatized she might have been from what happened. She did return to the scene three hours later.
[/b]

Possibly to finish the kill. She realized what she did was illegal, and she wanted to try and prevent damages.

Thu, 2007-07-12 20:05

#34

Seeker of Wisdom

I'm not sure we have enough information to judge - the boyfriend didn't get a chance to explain his side before he died of "unrelated causes". Feminists or not, one can't assume the male is always the aggressor at fault without hearing both sides.

Maybe she left him injured to take her child to a safer place before returning because she felt her child was threatened. Maybe it was the last of a series of escalating incidents. Not enough data.

Either way I feel for the toddler (18 month old is bigger than a baby) being dragged around through all this. The curfew should benefit the child. Maybe some parenting support would have been a good idea too.

Fri, 2007-07-13 00:57

#35

trippie

hey hold on here... Im not blaming any victom...

In this instance Im saying the man was far more of a victom then the women... she used a motor vehicle to harm him...

before my original posting I looked on babble for a place to post news about crimes and judgements and what not... I was thinking about this forum but I did not think of it as a feminism issue. I thought of it as a miscarrage of justice.. so I posted in the news section....

Let me expand this topic a bit...

i had the same agruement with freinds of mine about Karla Hamolka ( spelling?).. right off the bat they sided wiht her, no question asked.. thats not right...

You all missed my point about my freind working at the woman shelter... I never said all woman going there end up back with the abusive boyfriend or husband... but there are a good number that always go back....

Why????

I have another personal experience with this..

A few years ago one of my co-workers came into work all bet up... the whole deal .. she had a black eye and you could see were the guys fist displaced her nose...

you think I stood by that shit??

Next day she showed up for work I went out to her car and asked how she was doing while the guy was in it.. she didn't like that ... Then I went to Hiatus House and asked them to help me out.. they gave me liturature and a circle of violence graph... I put these things up at work and every time she came around I pointed it out...

I heard a thousand reasons why she had to stay wiht this guy... I also found out that it was going on for years... it was all bullshit.... and I did not let her weezle her way out of it... I stood up to her and let her know that every lame ass excuse was just that...and its good to say that shortly after this episode she left the guy and today she owners her own business and married a cop or Fireman or someone like that..Good for her.. she was alway nice...

but heres one thing to remember ,there always one thing women don't add into the equetion.... the need of a mans masculinity.. anger and violence is a very strong showing of this... its enchanting.....

But Its still an excuse... one that i will not accept ..and at some point the pitty runs out.. and thats were my friend working at the woman shelter comes into play... It a sad reality....

but now Im completely off topic....

So let me get back on...

I think the guy was far more of a victom here and I think she should have gotten more then what she did...I know you all don't want to hear this point of view but I think its a legit opinion.

also i would have rather kept this topic around the sentencing part then turning it into a womans issue...it always gets to personal....

Fri, 2007-07-13 03:19

#36

Michelle

You know, I told you yesterday to stay out of this thread and this forum, and you still spout sexist drivel in here where you blame the victim. (No, I'm not talking about the woman in this case, I'm talking about your hypotheticals about abused women.) Apparently there's just one way to keep you out of the feminism forum.

[ 13 July 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

Fri, 2007-07-13 04:40

#37

Maysie

Delurking to address trippie’s point about why women don’t leave, on the rare off chance that he’s sincere, and for any lurkers who are genuinely confused about why women stay with abusers.

I’ve worked in various aspects of the anti-violence against women field for close to ten years (both front-line and administrative) and when I wasn’t working professionally in the VAW field, I’ve been immersed in educating myself and truly trying to “get it”.

Women remain with abusers for many reasons. I’ll list the reasons in a moment, but the reasons do not include being “stupid”, “making excuses”, and the implication that if the abuse has been going on for so long, that she somehow “deserves” it since there have been many opportunities to leave and she hasn’t taken them. trippie hasn’t said anything as offensive as: these hypothetical women who don’t leave deserve it, but I know some think this, yes even progressives.

Why do women remain with abusers?

Because they’ve been told if they leave he will kill them or their children or both.
Because they don’t feel and believe that they deserve to not be abused.
Because they think that this guy is the best they can get.
Because they don’t value themselves, due to years of abuse.
Because their immigration status is tied to their husbands as their sponsors. This is a huge emerging issue that the VAW field has had to tackle across Canada for the past 10-15 years in larger centres, and it’s trickling out to smaller cities and suburbs. The previous philosophy was to eventually have the woman in a place where she can leave him. Now, some women are using shelters, bringing their children with them, to get a few nights of peace and safety. I fully support women utilizing shelters for whatever their needs are.
Because they have no money.
Because, as part of the abuse cycle, they have become isolated from their friends and support group, and nobody is giving them a reality check that their life can be different.
Because maybe she has to come to a shelter 5 times, 10 times, 100 times before she is able to leave him. Able meaning financially, emotionally and all the rest.

There are many many many more reasons, all of which, from a feminist perspective, do not blame the victim, but seek to find the reasons why women return to abusive situations, and to work with them compassionately. Sometimes it takes just one person, once, telling her she has other choices. Sometimes it takes much longer. And let's be clear, some women don't get out, and are killed by their abusers.

Abused women are not "victims", meaning, being victims of violence is not their entire identity. To reduce them to this is a great insult and disservice to helping women escape. They don't deserve to be blamed for their abuse. I certainly don't imagine I know what their lives are like, and what choices they should make.

trippie, if your hypothetical friend really does work in a women’s shelter, I suggest that she’s burnt out and needs to find another line of work.

Fri, 2007-07-13 13:49

#38

Boze

For what it's worth I don't think Trippie was insincere.

Great post, bigcitygal.

Fri, 2007-07-13 13:53

#39

Scout

Well Boze it's worth nothing. I certainly think trippie was being sincere too, unfortunately you can be sincere and clueless at the same time. Much like yourself.

Sat, 2007-07-14 18:54

#40

Boze

I haven't even said anything on this subject except to state one opinion, which you agreed with.

Sat, 2007-07-14 19:49

#41

remind

Apparently, she was correct too!

Tue, 2007-07-17 14:01

#42

nutboy

this woman DROVE while drunk. Anyone who does that has a problem

Tue, 2007-07-17 14:49

#43

Makwa

quote:

Originally posted by nutboy:
[b]this woman DROVE while drunk. [/b]

That has not been established nor alluded to by police. You have nothing but your own knee jerk assumptions going for you, so I can't imagine what you have to contribute to this discussion.

Tue, 2007-07-17 16:21

#44

nutboy

re-read your OWN post. It states that she "drove away" after the drinking session

Tue, 2007-07-17 16:31

#45

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

quote:

Drunk guys dont run very fast

Obviously you have never been chased by a very angry drunk guy. Try this: find a drunk guy, not falling down drunk just good and inebriated, in a bar, and toss his own drink in his face. Let me know has fast he runs.

Tue, 2007-07-17 16:34

#46

Makwa

quote:

Originally posted by nutboy:
[b]re-read your OWN post. It states that she "drove away" after the drinking session[/b]

Is one necessarily 'drunk' at some unspecified legth of time following the consumption of an unspecified amount of alcohol?

Tue, 2007-07-17 22:26

#47

spillunk

I agree with Makwa and also take issue with the assumption that the woman made the wrong decision, even if she was over the alcohol limit, though there is no indication that she was.

There are worse things in this world than not following DUI laws to the letter under exceptional circumstances, like, for example, escaping from a violent person with your child.

Fri, 2007-07-20 19:14

#48

Trudeau

Hi folks, if I may join in...I need your individual and collective help...
Speaking of violence towards women...

In Ottawa last December a beautiful 27-year old aboriginal women, 7 months pregnant was taken to Gatineau Park, stabbed 12 times, left naked and freezing throughout the long cold night and was found at dawn by someone walking their dog.
She was conscious still - so imagine what that long bitter night felt like as she had to lay motionless with her clothing spread out everywhere, close, but yet too far for her, in her condition to access.

Police were called but she died an hour later, leaving three children behind.

The sad irony was that she and her family had moved from Winnipeg where her aunt was murdered back in 1992 in a similar violent fashion and no killer was ever found.

The cycle repeating itself...

In any case, unlike the two previous murders of young, white, middle-class women that had occurred in which there was a tremendous outcry, huge rewards posted, daily pronouncements, volunteers, weekly updates and appeals to the public, fast toxicology reports completed and a very shaken up, concerned citizenry pushing for action, there has been so little it is absolutely paltry.

The writing style and inferences were markedly different between the coverage of the first two who were referred to in such a positive light versus this poor women in which it was alluded she was in "an area known to be frequented by prostitutes, though we do not know if she was one"...the covererage, what little there was of it was stomach turning and her family had to bear that instead, while being painfully aware of the "rays of light" the other two girls were.

Christmas got in the way and anyone who had a fickle or terribly short memory quickly lost interest and the case was buried.

I tried to write letters to the Editor to ask where was the coverage, public updates, investigative reporting and enforcement accountability and on Day 90, finally managed to push the

Months then went by again with no references to her at all. Her 3 children were in Children Aid's care, and watched in on-going pain as no one seemed to care about this tragedy.

She was murdered in December, but her toxicology results have still not come back and this is July!

Even the neighbours on the street nearest the park seem to have decided she wasn't like them so is not worth worrying about and that it could not possibly happen in their safe, middle-class existence so have not bothered to work up a sweat about it.

The contrast between this poorly-resourced case and the forever fuss about the other two is appalling.

A few good people have started a we Help Catch Her Killer.

It would be wonderful if all those people reading this would come up with an idea on what "great good" they could do to pressure the Mayor of Gatineau, the Gatineau Police and in Gatineau. Quebec (which is just across the Ottawa River from the city of Ottawa) and Larry O'Brien, Ottawa's Mayor (where Kelly was living prior to her death) to get off their buts and care!

One voice raised in Letters To The Editor of the Ottawa Citizen or the Ottawa Sun can also make these same sloths uncomfortable while also serving to educate the general publc and lay wide open the racism, disinterest and inaction when someone is from a visible minority.

I am whiter than white, with all the privleges that seems to entail these days and I am heartsick about this systemic racism that is so evident in this case.

One more "Stolen Sister" as aboriginal groups refer to them, lying dead who doesn't seem to matter to too many. The message this sends is chilling.

Can you please help out and send those emails or Letters to The Editor?

Also call up some reporters or contacts you may have and encourage them to get on deck too and help create the pressure so badly needed.

It is hard to think of all those women alledgedly dying at the hands of Robert Picton and so many aboriginal people trying to tell the police for 3 long years to investigate the Pig Farm with no success. They weren't paid attention to.

We have all those young Aboriginal women lying dead and being constantly unearthed outside Edmonton and no big hue and cry by the general public there either, it seems.

And Kelly. Poor Kelly. One officer with no resources on this case and even less interest, as it goes no where. Absolutely shameful.

Please help!

For "if one thread is broken, we are all undone".

Fri, 2007-07-20 19:24

#49