I am truly baffled by this? One Victorian man got 11 years for his first murder (Time served), after release 10 years for his second murder and then after his third murder after his second release, supposed "Life".
My question is the number of murderers who get out at around 12 years on average but now a woman who has a good defence is held on for over 15 years? Is this true and surely the best defence would be to appeal this on the basis of other murderers getting 12 years average. Can someone assist me here? I just do not understand or is there something that the author does not say or does not know?

Ms Evans,

Amazingly you chose Robyn Dale Buller as the feature character for your argument. I don't know what you base your statements on regarding Buller, as you provide no references. However an online article in The Age (20.12.2002), titled "Murder she wrote, after consulting the internet", paints an entirely different picture of the character you attempt to present to readers of your article. Buller was convicted twice (at her trial and her retrial)

A few excerpts from The Age article:

"She used the internet to bone up on murder before cold-bloodedly shooting her sleeping husband in the back of the head with a high-powered rifle."

"Buller maintains she was trying to kill only herself when she shot her husband at point-blank range with the .357 calibre Magnum rifle."

"She claimed she once spent a terrifying night outside cowering against her dogs after her husband brought a stranger home from the pub to rape her.
Buller said she had not mentioned these details at her 2001 trial for fear of tainting his memory.
But in her recent trial, Buller had no qualms about painting a picture of her abusive marriage."

"But two West Australian Supreme Court juries have now convicted her of wilful murder after hearing she used the internet both before and after the killing to find out how to commit a murder and cover up the crime."

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/12/20/1040174378605.html