This will be misreported – or misunderstood

Sally Challen walks free: Abused wife who bludgeoned husband to death with hammer will not face jail

That’s not quite it, no.

A mother who bludgeoned her abusive husband to death in a hammer attack has revealed that she “still loves him” after walking free from court.

Georgina Challen, known as Sally, 65, said she killed 61-year-old Richard Challen in the kitchen of their Surrey home in August 2010 after decades of being coerced and humiliated by him. She had been in prison for almost a decade.

However, following a string of unprecedented legal wranglings at the country’s highest courts, Mrs Challen finally walked out of the Old Bailey as a free woman after Mr Justice Edis sentenced her to nine years and four months in jail – time she has already served in custody.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) today accepted her plea of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

The actual finding is a definite crime was committed – it wasn’t, for example, self defence. Further, she was guilty. And even that it was a pretty serious case of “manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility” as 9 years and 4 months for that is quite a lot, isn’t it?

One of the wilder demands in this and other such cases was that there was no crime at all. Yes, obviously, from the wilder shores of feminism but still.

7 comments on “This will be misreported – or misunderstood

  1. Going armed to someones house and battering them to death from behind when they are sat at a table is not manslaughter, its pre-meditated murder.

    You can bet such a defence won’t be available to any men who batter their controlling wives to death either. Classic pussy pass in action – ‘You have a vagina? Oh, terribly sorry, of course you can go free, what were we thinking????’

  2. Jim: “Going armed to someones house and battering them to death from behind when they are sat at a table is not manslaughter, its pre-meditated murder.”

    +1000

    You want free of an abusive relationship, you go to a divorce lawyer. Not B&Q.

  3. ‘after decades of being coerced and humiliated by him’

    Well, ol’ Richard ain’t around to refute that, is he?

    How convenient.

  4. B&Q is a lot cheaper

    Not when you’re pretty much guaranteed the house and half his pension.

  5. The fact the feminist felt they could use such a case as a test case shows how much control they think they have over justice system.
    Looks like the judge just couldn’t swallow acquittal so they fudged up the time served man slaughter compromise.
    It will now be selectively reported, note she’s an ‘abused wife’ in all the headlines, when I wouldn’t be surprised if a retrial has agreed with the original charge and verdict given all the facts

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.