Woman shoots her abusive boyfriend dead - shop employee grabs the gun before she can kill herself

[Mac Mickmanus]

55 minutes ago, bradiston said:

And we only have the Lao lady's testimony to go on. She deserves a medal. She saved the woman's life.

I don't not believe that story at all .

Think about it .

A murder has just happened , a person shots another person multiple times .

  And then a Woman walks up and takes the shooters gun away from them before she can shoot herself .

  Like, thats just not going to happen 

[Bruno123]

19 minutes ago, bradiston said:

The likelihood is WHAT?

Do you need me to repeat it? A blockage in your brain?

 

They were not living together. She went to his place and attacked him. That is the reality. The story that she cooked up has no basis for her going to where this 'dangerous and abusive' person would be. It's clearly utter nonsense that only a fool would believe.

 

That was pre-meditated murder. 'If she cannot have him, no one can'. 

 

[Jai Dee]

An off-topic post about acid throwing and associated replies have been removed.

[bradiston]

2 minutes ago, Bruno123 said:

Do you need me to repeat it? A blockage in your brain?

 

They were not living together. She went to his place and attacked him. That is the reality. The story that she cooked up has no basis for her going to where this 'dangerous and abusive' person would be. It's clearly utter nonsense that only a fool would believe.

 

That was pre-meditated murder. 'If she cannot have him, no one can'. 

 

Don't patronise me. You said:

 

"The likelihood is that she was the aggressor, hence she being the one that went to his place to attack him."

 

Explain the first part of your statement. The aggressor in relation to what?

 

 

 

[Bruno123]

13 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Don't patronise me. You said:

 

"The likelihood is that she was the aggressor, hence she being the one that went to his place to attack him."

 

Explain the first part of your statement. The aggressor in relation to what?

 

 

 

 

Third time....the reality is that she went to his place. That shows that she is the aggressor. He did not go to her.

The rest is just a story for which there is no evidence. If she was abused, then why did he chuck her out? Why would it not be that she left of her own accord.

He clearly had enough of her but she could not get enough of him.

 

[greenmonkey]

hmmnn i think people here are too quick to commend the lady for her actions,and also too quick to label the ex-boyfriend a wife beater. i don't agree with any form of violence against women or anyone else for that matter. But i think there is more to this story... she admits that the guy asked her to leave the house and live somewhere else... and she went to this guys place of work with a weapon and shot him 4 times. How do we not know that this guy is perfectly innocent and had had enough of this lady's <deleted> and threw her out!? All's I am saying is maybe people should not be too quick to judge...

[Bruno123]

2 hours ago, bradiston said:

I don't think you understand what being a victim of domestic abuse entails. Were mostly blokes on this forum. We don't experience the world as women. And we only have the Lao lady's testimony to go on. She deserves a medal. She saved the woman's life.

 

I remember getting called a "mangina", on this very forum, a word I find so offensive as to warrant at least a cap in the head, when I suggested the Thai woman who got badly bashed up and robbed on the New York subway late at night was not responsible for her beating up by dint of her attire and the fact she was out on her own late at night. You might think otherwise, but until women are free to dress how they like, when they like and where they like, without being blamed for any ensuing violence against them, well, what price "civilisation"? Men are the problem, not women.

 

What a load.... I mean really.

It's a kind of sickness. Blaming men for everything.

 

A woman goes to a man's place of work, probably not having seen him for goodness knows how long, shoots him multiple times in order to kill him and then claims he once held her by her throat in the past when they were living together.

I don't understand how someone can not only defend such sick and twisted behaviour, but go on to bad mouth a dead man to accuse him of abuse, when the actual evidence shows that she is the one who can kill and maim.

What is wrong with you? Have you lost all sense of reality and decency? 

 

[bradiston]

1 minute ago, Bruno123 said:

 

What a load.... I mean really.

It's a kind of sickness. Blaming men for everything.

 

A woman goes to a man's place of work, probably not having seen him for goodness knows how long, shoots him multiple times in order to kill him and then claims he once held her by her throat in the past when they were living together.

I don't understand how someone can not only defend such sick and twisted behaviour, but go on to bad mouth a dead man to accuse him of abuse, when the actual evidence shows that she is the one who can kill and maim.

What is wrong with you? Have you lost all sense of reality and decency? 

 

That's called gaslighting.

[Bruno123]

1 minute ago, bradiston said:

That's called gaslighting.

Yes, it's exactly what you are doing here. Ignoring the plain fact that she bought a gun in advance, travelled to his place of work(because of course they weren't together) and shot him four times. Those are facts.

The rest you and her have just created out of thin air. We know that she murdered him. We have no evidence of abuse from his side. Yet you write as if it's a fait accompli. You and the murderer are 'gaslighting'

[Bruno123]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

This story is about a Woman who murdered a Man , and there was absolutely no immediate reason for her to kill him .

  You seem to be defending a murderer on the basis of her gender . 

Even IF , IF he was abusive , that doesn't give her the right to murder him

 

Not wanting to put too fine a point on it, but I think all is not okay with bradiston. I will say no more other than to put her on ignore.

[aussienam]

9 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Buying a gun, travelling to find a person and then shooting them dead , is NOT self defence .

   Seems like she murdered him , this isn't a case of self defence, its murder 

On face value - yes, and probably warrants a charge of murder based on the proofs of the offence being established . But not so clear cut.  This is why these matters need to be nutted out in a court where all evidence is laid out. 

Example: There could be an argument that she used it for self defence on the back of a history of violence, threats and fears for her safety and her life. Argument by a defence lawyer along those lines as well as she pre-empted future violence so she intervened in advance to stop it.  Maybe she had reported it to police before, or had no faith in the police, or she thought there was a lack of evidence to stop him.  We could also argue impaired state of mind to downplay intent. 

There are cases like this where murder charges have been dropped or reduced to manslaughter. Other charges like possessing unregistered firearm (is that required here), carrying firearm in a public place without a permit, etc., may hold up. 

I recall a case in Australia whereby a police officer learnt of a relative allegedly sexually abusing his child. The officer traveled to the person's address and shot him dead. He was charged with murder and it went to trial with a full jury. He was acquitted of murder with self defence (of other) claim upheld. 

She may also truly be guilty without a valid defence. Murder cases usually entail a very detailed analysis of cause.  Hoping there are good detectives on the case.

Each case is unique.  Years of being involved with court matters has taught me that. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by aussienam

[BangkokReady]

3 hours ago, bradiston said:

He beats her up regularly, then dares her to do something about it. She does. He gets what he deserves. She gets off, or lightly. Her defense? She was seriously abused over time, and provoked. You don't bash up women and walk. End of.

You have no idea if this is true.  She could be a complete psycho who instigated every fight because she got off on it, or she might even have been the one who was abusive.  He kicked her out in the end, which is not typical of an abusive man at all.  Normally they're very possessive.  Also she kept in contact with him and things got to the point where he said "come and get me", which makes it sound like she could easily have been the one threatening him.

 

It's totally possible that she was the abusive one who killed her ex in a "if she can't have him no one can" response.

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, aussienam said:

On face value - yes, and probably warrants a charge of murder based on the proofs of the offence being established . But not so clear cut.  This is why these matters need to be nitted out in a court where all evidence is laid out. 

Example: There could be an argument that she used it for self defence on the back of a history of violence, threats and fears for her safety and her life. Argument by a defence lawyer along those lines as well as she pre-empted future violence so she intervened in advance to stop it.  Maybe she had reported it to police before, or had no faith in the police, or she thought there was a lack of evidence to stop him.  We could also argue impaired state of mind to downplay intent. 

There are cases like this where murder charges have been dropped or reduced to manslaughter. Other charges like possessing unregistered firearm (is that required here), carrying firearm in a public place without a permit, etc., may hold up. 

I recall a case in Australia whereby a police officer learnt of a relative allegedly sexually abusing his child. The officer traveled to the person's address and shot him dead. He was charged with murder and it went to trial with a full jury. He was acquitted of murder with self defence (of other) claim upheld.  Each case is unique.  Years of being involved with court matters has taught me that. 

Yes, there is quite probably more to this story than has being reported .

The current facts we have is that : He told her to leave his property , she went out and got a gun returned to find him and shot him dead .

   To claim self defence , she would have to show that her life was in imminent danger and she had to kill someone to protect herself from being injured/killed .

   This isnt a case of self defence . 

Had the guy gone looking for her and was about to attack her , then there would be a claim of self defence , but she went looking for him 

[Gottfrid]

3 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

Are you suggesting that murder can be justified?

Yes!

[Gottfrid]

9 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Women always say those things. 'she said' is no excuse for murder. 

Never said that "she said" was and excuse for murder, did I?

Hover, there is a limit for everyone. I guess this guy just went over that level and got some back. But, on the other hand, I always know that you are in the protect the male race and condemn women brigade.

[Bruno123]

I know for sure that more than a few men here have been victim to psychopathic women. Women who have no sense of reality and care only about what they want.

Men in general learn to tolerate the unstable and provocative behaviour as they are told not to react to it when growing up.

The gaslighting rants are a grim reminder of this fact. No rational thinking; just an unpleasant rant based on negative emotions. 

Chin up as they say; don't let them get you down. 

Sometimes you just need to exclude them from your life. Sadly, this man came up against a callous murderer who clearly didn't love him in the first place. You don't hurt the ones you love. She was obviously full of hate.

Here we can just put them on Ignore. Done.

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by Bruno123

[Mac Mickmanus]

6 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Never said that "she said" was and excuse for murder, did I?

Hover, there is a limit for everyone. I guess this guy just went over that level and got some back. But, on the other hand, I always know that you are in the protect the male race and condemn women brigade.

Eh, in what way did the dead guy go "over the limit" ?

Explain what the guy did to deserve being killed ?

[Jai Dee]

A couple of baiting troll posts and replies have been removed.

[Mac Mickmanus]

17 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Yes!

Is if justified for Males to kill Females by shooting them dead (if the female had previously hit the Male)

   If there roles had been reversed in this story and the Woman was dead , would the killing  be justified ?

[metisdead]

An offensive Thai bashing post has been reported and removed.

[thailand49]

4 hours ago, bradiston said:

He beats her up regularly, then dares her to do something about it. She does. He gets what he deserves. She gets off, or lightly. Her defense? She was seriously abused over time, and provoked. You don't bash up women and walk. End of.

He just made merit too Why? guess his merit didn't go well maybe too often.  

If true Temp insanity or admitting the act should get her s Royal Pardon. ????

[Gottfrid]

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Is if justified for Males to kill Females by shooting them dead (if the female had previously hit the Male)

   If there roles had been reversed in this story and the Woman was dead , would the killing  be justified ?

Yes, if the man was abused

[Gottfrid]

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Eh, in what way did the dead guy go "over the limit" ?

Explain what the guy did to deserve being killed ?

just presumed to be an -a-ho

[Mac Mickmanus]

Just now, Gottfrid said:

Yes, if the man was abused

OK, so if one person hits another person , that should give them the right to go and get a weapon and kill the person ?

   That is a hard-line opinion . 

[peter zwart]

Another disappointed gold digger?

[2009]

13 hours ago, ChrisY1 said:

I probably shouldn't say well done girl.....but there are some real mean Thai men out there who likely deserve some payback.

Personal self defence is fine!

This was not self defense. It was premeditated murder,lol.

[2009]

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Is if justified for Males to kill Females by shooting them dead (if the female had previously hit the Male)

   If there roles had been reversed in this story and the Woman was dead , would the killing  be justified ?

Absolutely not.

 

But the herd don't use logic.

[2009]

4 hours ago, Bruno123 said:

 

What a load.... I mean really.

It's a kind of sickness. Blaming men for everything.

 

A woman goes to a man's place of work, probably not having seen him for goodness knows how long, shoots him multiple times in order to kill him and then claims he once held her by her throat in the past when they were living together.

I don't understand how someone can not only defend such sick and twisted behaviour, but go on to bad mouth a dead man to accuse him of abuse, when the actual evidence shows that she is the one who can kill and maim.

What is wrong with you? Have you lost all sense of reality and decency? 

 

This is the world we live in.

 

Men are always to blame. And apparently cannot be victims 

Edited August 9, 2022 by 2009

[spidermike007]

8 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Never understood this line of thinking.

If somebody beat me up, I'd report them to the police and never see them again. Lots of posters on this forum appear to hate other men.

Not sure of the veracity of your statement. Lots of people appear to hate abusive men, might have been more accurate. Reporting abuse of this sort is not taken seriously, from what I hear. So, that option is off the table. 

 

The wiser course of action is to never see them again. Change your number. Move. Extricate the parasite from your life. But, don't kill them. That is not rational. During the abuse? Sure. Much later? That is pre-meditated murder. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by spidermike007

[Stargeezr]

Well one thing for sure the guy will not abuse her or anyone else again.

  This is one Thai woman who had made a decision and her ex boyfriend

 died.  Basically end of a sad story.