scapa
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,509
- Reaction score
- 13,428
BBM
When it comes to abuse, have you ever heard someone say: "It’s really not that bad," "He’s never actually hit me," "It's a small thing not a big deal," It was just a brush against my nose," "It only happens when he’s drinking"?
Minimizing domestic abuse by the victim or worse by the abuser and others is dangerous.
Suzzane suffered abuse and it would be in injustice to her to minimize it. Its also an injustice to every other woman reading on this forum who is suffering abuse...
* BM pushed SM into a closest, held gun to is head, yelling "is this what you want?"
* Arguing with her about what she can and can't wear.
* BM texting several suicidal messages. (Guilting her.) He even said “I was trying to hurt her, make her feel bad”.
* On their vacation to Mexico BM "chased her" trying to take her phone in order to look at it/go through things.
* SM texts sister: BM abusive physically and emotionally. (Long text).
* She said marriage with Barry was troubled, she was afraid for her safety.
* She was afraid to be alone with him.
*She texts that BM is unstable
* BM throwing her into a closet door.
* BM pinning her to the bed.
* And when she needed money she went to him. He was her ATM. He controlled her flow of money.
Etc. Etc. Etc.....
Excellent summary, and I agree that the "clip against the nose" as reported by BM is likely to have been diminished by several degrees in the telling. I think also this this case is less in "smoking gun" than "evidence map" or "weighted blanket" territory, where the balance of evidence is spread more thinly but evenly, adding up to the same downward pressure on the ol' scales of justice.
Sure, we lack a definitive crime scene, murder weapon or body, but there are so many points that combine to tell the story of a dissolving marriage, a controlling, aggressive and unstable spouse in BM, a sequence of motivations including financial pressures and possible instability, an affair that offers a plausible stepping stone out for SM, and the loss of face and resources for BM -- let alone his stated belief in the "forever marriage" sanctioned by God (not alleging that he actually believed this in itself).
Does a jury want that smoking gun? Of course. Can they be led through a more nuanced and complex account of lies, oddities, timeline variances, text and other messaging, concerns expressed to witnesses, evidence of possible materials used in the crime and even the quasi-confessional moments from Barry? I expect they can -- just need the right kind of storyteller and a durable means of connecting those dots, those weighted points. IMO.