Except that maybe her/his mom wasn’t a serial killer. That her/his mom was a victim of severe abuse and that maybe there’s something she can show her child... that maybe she can help her child not go that road. I think that’s what folks are sposed to do with their kids.

If the best you can do to combat an actual intellectual approach to a societal problem is call the adversary “a creep,” then I’m afraid that says more about you than it does about me.

When the “reply” button is too much to resist but you can’t be sure of the reasons why you’re really so angry.

The tapes were hidden in a recessed can-light and were recovered by Paul’s lawyer, who sat on them. They absolutely did NOT show she was the dominant of the pair. Those were the tapes that showed her eating his feces and licking his anus while he smiled into the camera while proclaiming, “It’s good to be the king.”

So what you are saying is that in any legal situation there are no “mitigating factors.”

Firebrand - I’m not sure you read all my comments. I would never have approved of no jail. She did 12 years.

An actual broken face from a beating with a flashlight? I’ll let you make the case here, on Jezebel, that that’s totally routine.

The video evidence shows her pleasing a man. If you don’t get the difference, let me introduce you to pornhub. There is NO evidence that she killed Mahaffy. None. Zero. That’s internet conspiracy from the same people who brought you the Jon Benet Ramsey conspiracies (literally. The same exact people - I know…

Cuz grooming aint a thing.

Actually... he did. He beat her with a fucking flashlight until her face was broken. But hey, maybe in your world that’s just a “suggestion.”

My entire theory rests on the premise that SOME women can be victims *and* perpetrators. A reality that is grounded in this radical new scientific thingy called “facts”. These things we type out on the keyboard — those are words. And they mean things.

Not only have I listened to the experts, in many cases I’ve spent time talking to them. It’s spiffy that you’d spend so many letters writing something that seems like words — without actually churning out anything actually meaningful.

I couldn’t agree more about the optics. Even if it’s totally justified that she SHOULD be able to be out there and roaming about the real world — she SHOULD be smart enough to know that that’s just not the world today.

Yes. Years and years ago, certain people were intent on telling me how she was certain to re-offend. Even then I stood up and said that if there was a lack of the abusive sadist, it was unlikely. I believe that today.

The accusation that I have “fetishized” Karla’s abuse indicates to me that you would somehow choose to minimize the effects of abuse. I do not. While you might find your fantasy “disturbing,” I’ve done counseling for victims of domestic violence and I find your blithe handwaving disturbing.

I wouldn’t hang out with her. But I know an abused woman when I see one.

Yes... in the same way that pedophiles look for a certain type of child — abusive men look for certain types of women to “groom.”

I do not disagree with this.

When cognitive dissonance forces you to reply.

12 years in prison. How much is enough for a woman who was raped, forced to eat her husbands feces and beaten with a flashlight so hard it broke her bones? 15 years? 18 years? What’s the penalty for that.