Bren, feminism & the PC thought police did this. The only way to protect the innocent father & children from the terrorist who tortured them was to lock her up in a secure facility. But protecting children from maternal abuse & men from female DV is not PC.

Suseonline, Mothers do this all the time. Call it what it is a victim of domestic terrorism suffering from "battered partner syndrome" protecting his children from a terrorist in the only way he was allowed to.

ttbn, too true.

david f, the nanny state has been failing for half a century & will never work. Maybe a "Return to Order" is in order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNubASFUr1s

Rhian, have you ever been a DV victim? it is called "battered spouse syndrome" for a reason.

My plan involved killing the abuser of my children first, while they were in school, then myself so that my children could be adopted by my married, childless sister. it was the only option available to protect my children from their torturer, they still suffer from her abuse to this very day.

Runner,

Never missing a opportunity to backhand the opposition, the Hindu practice of Sati was outlawed by Queen Victoria in 1861 and more recently by the Indian Government. Apart from a few recorded exceptions it just doesn't happen anymore.

Groups like Heaven's Gate, The Order of the Solar Temple, the Jews of Masada, The Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God and The People’s Temple at Jonestown demonstrate that religious belief is a common factor behind ritual mass suicide.

It also convinces some to strap bombs to themselves.

"Suseonline, Mothers do this all the time. Call it what it is a victim of domestic terrorism suffering from "battered partner syndrome" protecting his children from a terrorist in the only way he was allowed to."

What are you on about Imacentristmoderate? You are certainly no moderate.

Hunt was never 'allowed to' kill his children. There is no suggestion his brain damaged wife was a terrorist, she was just sick. If he went to his GP or the police and said he felt like doing something violent to a disabled woman if he wasn't given more help or time out, they would have done something for him.

Instead, he chose to murder a defenseless disabled woman and his children. A coward of the highest degree.

Someone who states on this forum that he had planned to kill someone else should not be allowed to post on this forum....

Wobbles

u r obviously very naïve if you think the burning of wives in India/Pakistan still does not happen. You really think a Hindu Government follows the rule of law in the outback regions. Next you will be telling me that Hindu men are not sexist.

Suseonline, "There is settled science, proving his brain damaged wife was a domestic, feminazi terrorist, she was very sick & deliberately NOT treated. If he went to his GP or the police and said he felt like doing something to protect his children if he wasn't given more help or time out, they would have done nothing for him.

Instead, he chose to protect his children from a violent woman. A brave man of the highest degree.

Someone who states on this forum that he had planned to kill someone else should not be allowed to post on this forum...." thank you for proving my point

1, i did not say he was allowed to kill his children, i stated the bleeding obvious "he was allowed or given NO other option or choice for protecting his children" a well documented scientifically proven fact. the Matriarchal nanny state gave him no other choice.

2, it does not matter what her excuses for her abominable behaviour were, what matters is YOUR matriarchal nanny state refused to protect an innocent man & his children from a domestic terrorist.

3, We know from both Rotherham & this case that police & GPs are not allowed to protect children from either islamic or feminist terrorism because that is not politically correct.

4, instead he courageously saved his children from a lifetime of verbal, emotional, financial abuse & psychological torture. he should be posthumously given a medal.

5, "Someone who states on this forum that he had planned to kill someone else should not be allowed to post on this forum...." here we see an admission of guilt from the real murderer. A man is not even allowed to talk about his problems under any circumstances, in any forum or any setting, public, private, whatever. Thank you again Suse, for proving, beyond reasonable doubt, that he was given no other choice.

hmmm, no body has the courage to answer openly or honestly? i must be right then?