By all means, please show me where I said that. I said if everything the JURY found to be the case is true, then yes, it is her fault. "Innocent until proven guilty" is all fine and good. This case, however, has already been settled and closed. I come from a long line of women in abusive relationships, thank you very much. I'm a southern woman, after all. So fuck no. If the woman was genuinely abused then by all means, hang the guy up by his nutsack for all I care. I wasn't on the jury. Neither were you. I wasn't in the courtroom. Neither were you. Cast stones and make blind judgments about me all you wish, but the fact remains that the jury who was present and heard all testimony from BOTH sides saw enough evidence to side with the man. Do I believe women are abused and that the males who abuse them should be properly punished? Abso-fucking-lutely. Do I believe some females play the vagina card and try to manipulate others to get what they want, thinking being a female automatically means they gain sympathy and win whatever they're going after, playing the victim in a relationship with a man? Again, abso-fucking-lutely. As the article states, she had plenty of time and opportunities to leave her husband if she was indeed being abused. In this instance, given what the full article reveals and how the JURY found the case, then yes, I'm inclined to believe that the ex-wife purported to be a victim of abuse to get money. Why? Because believe it or not, in this fucked up world we live in, that is just as likely a scenario as the ex-husband abusing her sexually. Also, again given my history, as pissed off as I get about women being abused, I also get pissed off about females claiming to be abused and making that shit up.
