April 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Edmonton Journal,
April 4, 2008, B16

Wife sentenced for slicing man’s penis, butt

Convinced he was having an affair, Calgary woman attacked husband during sex

Daryl Slade
Calgary Herald

In the midst of lovemaking, Abigail London-Fife pulled out a knife she had hidden under the bed and slashed her husband’s penis and buttocks.

The woman suspected her husband of cheating, court heard Thursday, when she was handed a 12-month conditional jail sentence, with house arrest for the first six months.

Provincial court Judge Judith Shriar and Crown prosecutor Deven Singhal both said the woman should be treated in the same manner as a man who assaulted his wife.

“Regardless of what’s going on in the home and background, you do not take two knives to the bedroom and stab your husband in the penis and buttocks,” Shriar said.

London-Fife, 35, pleaded guilty Jan. 16 to assault causing bodily harm to Leonard Fife for the Aug. 24 assault.  She has had no contact with him since.

Singhal earlier told court London-Fife was angry over phone calls she intercepted that led her to believe her husband was having an affair.

She planned the attack by bringing the weapons to bed, and carried it out at the most opportune time, the prosecutor said.  “He was in a vulnerable position and she took advantage of it.”

The judge ordered her to take psychological counselling, and to continue domestic violence and anger-management courses.

She is also prohibited from owning or possessing any weapons for a year.

________________
Notes by Fathers for Life

The Edmonton journal took considerable liberties with what it purports is an article published in the Calgary Herald.  For example, the following information was deleted from the edited text of the article:

Singhal noted the victim sustained a 2.5-centimetre laceration to the shaft of his penis, a 15-centimetre laceration to his left buttock, a puncture wound inside his right thigh, a laceration to his scrotum, a 10-centimetre laceration to the back of his shoulder and 7.5-centimetre lacerations to both hands.

However serious the redactions by the Edmonton Journal are, the case of Abigail-the-penis-slasher deserves more attention than even the Calgary Herald gave it.

What would happen if a man would attack his wife in a similar manner?  Right, the man would get locked up, and the key would be thrown away.  However, the “punishment” handed down to Abigail London-Fife-the-penis-slasher proves that women can with impunity commit crimes of domestic violence. We can rest assured that if a man had committed a crime of comparable and equal severity, not only would he have served a long term of incarceration, the story would quite likely have made the frontpage.

For some crimes of equal severity committed by men or by women there are even laws, unlike in this case, that provide preferential treatment for women, such as the category of murder involving children of age 12 months or under.  It is called murder when a father kills his child, and it is called infanticide when a mother murders her child that truly or allegedly is an infant - supposedly less human than a child.  In fact, the category of crime “infanticide” has been applied in cases of the murders by mothers of their children when the victims were far older, as old as six years. When murdering a child, a woman almost always gets off free, with at most a conditional sentence (serving no time in prison, such as in the case of Abigail London-Fife-the-penis-slasher), while a man gets locked up for a lengthy time, which he should be, just as a woman should be.  After all, according to our most fundamental laws, men and women are equal in all regards.

However, there is always an excuse when a woman commits a crime. There is always someone - virtually always a man - or something (if everything else fails, even her inner demons or the devil will do) that compelled a woman to be a criminal or to have been violent, whereby she is then deemed to be suffering and not deserving of any punishment.

The excuse used - entirely illegally but nevertheless by a judge in a court of law - in the case of Abigail London-Fife-the-penis-slasher is that she is a woman and therefore dumb and ignorant of the law.

Isn’t it odd that the feminists refuse to raise a stink about that sort of demeaning and most vile discrimination against women?

In reality, of course, feminists welcome such discrimination.  Such discrimination perpetuates the lie that women cannot be violent and when evidence to the contrary presents itself, as it invariably will and shows women to be as often and as seriously violent as men are, the violence must be excused and thereby condoned.

The worst consequence of that will of course be that the victimization by women of all those who are less powerful or lower in social status (that is primarily children, men and the elderly) intensifies.  A “sentence” such as that with which Judge Judith Shriar rewarded Abigail London-Fife for slashing her husband’s penis and body is an incitement, not a deterrent, for all women to freely exercise their potential for violence against others.

The most remarkable aspect of the case of Abigail London-Fife-the-penis-slasher is what neither the original nor the edited version of the story mentions, the total absence of any injuries to the penis-slasher.  That says a lot about men’s potential for violence against women.  Virtually all men will protect and avoid hurting women, even when under a potentially deadly attack by a violent woman.

Posted in Child Murder, Feminist Jurisprudence, Feminism, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | 1 Comment »

December 23, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

The upgrading of the remaining web pages at Fathers for Life that had to be changed to the standard page design for the website is just about complete now.  It appears that only a single web page still needs to be updated.

During the process of doing that I came across a number of things that had escaped my attention.  One of those was the mysterious absence of a table of contents for web pages relating to the topic Shared Parenting (that has now been corrected; see http://fathersforlife.org/ToC_shared_parenting.htm)

Another one was that a number of links in the index of a web page that discusses the concept of “Fatherlessness, in the best interest of the child” were not changed when the file name of one of the web pages containing that discussion had been changed some time ago.

That web page seems to be an important read for anyone who believes that case law can be used to reverse the evolution of case law pertaining to the changing nature of the legal right to paternity that took place during the past 200 years or so.

If you think that today’s fathers have a right to their children, that “in the best interest of the child” children have rights to have fathers in their lives, and if you wish to find the answer to the question,

Does a child have the right to have its father in its life and to bond with him?,

you may wish to read the discussion pertaining to Fatherlessness, in the “best interest of the child”.

It would truly be appreciated if anyone who feels that the conclusions drawn in that discussion can be disproved were to post his response as a comment to this blog entry.

Thanks, and once more a Merry Christmas to all,

Walter

Posted in Men's Issues, Child Murder, Abortion, Shared Parenting, Family, The New World Order, Feminist Jurisprudence, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

October 29, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

This is a video you should watch:

Men Also Suffer from Domestic Violence Monday, 22 Oct 2007, FOX2 Detroit

The video is good and provides objective statistics, but it has a major flaw, just as does the following article.

Both, the video and the article equate DV with partner violence, although many feminists equate it solely to violence by men against women. We know that women are slightly more often violent than men are, but the video doesn’t stress that and the article to some extent denies it. Aside from that, and most importantly, the discussion of domestic violence also must address violence against children in families.  That has not yet received the required attention in the media.

Utahns hope to make domestic violence ‘intolerable’

Researchers voice concern over rise in assaults by females

By Rebecca Palmer
Deseret Morning News

Published: Sunday, Oct. 28, 2007 12:23 a.m. MDT

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695222626,00.html

Quoted from the article:

University of Utah scientist and social worker Moises Prospero says the issue of women acting as domestic violence perpetrators has thrown a curve-ball to advocates in the past five or 10 years.

There is no question that women are now acting violently at greater rates than they used to, but lead researchers are debating whether the women are defending themselves or picking the fights, Prospero said.

As yet, there is no consensus, but researchers are beginning to learn that women perpetrate psychological abuse at least as often as men do and are more likely to use weapons when committing acts of physical violence, Prospero said.

As yet, there is no consensus, but researchers are beginning to learn that women perpetrate psychological abuse at least as often as men do and are more likely to use weapons when committing acts of physical violence, Prospero said….

Yeah, sure. It’s a curve ball ever since anyone cared to look, which hasn’t been all that long, and no one in the mainstream media ever asked whether a man reacts in self-defence or picked a fight.

However, as usual, the article equates domestic violence to partner violence, and the largest single group of domestic violence victims, children, is being totally ignored. In that group of victims, biological mothers commit, or participate in, just about exactly 70 percent of serious (requiring medical attention) or fatal child child abuse. That doesn’t mean that biological fathers are the perpetrators of the other thirty percent. What it does mean is that biological fathers are a relatively small proportion of the remaining 30 percent of all perpetrators.

The problem with statistics relating to the perpetrators of violence against children is that, once the data collection has been massaged by feminists and feminist sympathizers (after which the general public then gets to see it), it is virtually impossible to sort out the biological fathers from “fathers”. “Fathers” could be any man in the life of a women, but it is known that by far most violence against children occurs in families from whom the biological fathers were expunged.

Other than that, the 30 percent of the remaining perpetrators of violence against children includes not only biological fathers but all other relatives, friends, acquaintances and anyone else in a woman’s life who is not the biological mother of an abused child. That is a fact that feminist sociologists, activists and statistitians (the boundaries between those categories of feminists are very blurry) love to obfuscate and to forget about.

At any rate, it appears that the truth about violent women (except for their violence against children) is slowly and increasingly being leaked and recognized. As of now that is not being reflected to any marked extent in the availability of funding for shelters for battered men and their children.

The fact of women being more likely to use weapons has been known and published for decades by responsible, creditable and objective social researchers. That’s nothing new, but poison, pillows, knives, guns, frying pans, baseball bats, boiling water or boiling food, etc., all make for great equalizers to compensate for women’s lower average strength. If you doubt that, just check the variety of “weapons” used by the women mentioned in the article.

As to the fact that the article mentions “reports” and “charges” has little relationship as to who actually started a given fracas. All we know for sure is that on average men are more likely than women to be charged, and that men are less likely to report being attacked or to lay charges.

Police reports are not reliable sources of domestic violence data. They reflect the bias of gender politics, especially that which is inherent in the police forces. The police operate under a very strong anti-male bias.

No self-respecting social researcher bases his studies of DV on police reports.

–Walter
http://fathersforlife.org

You may wish to look through the Table of Contents — Domestic Violence

Posted in Men's Issues, Child Murder, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

August 30, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

Chicago Sun-Times

Deadly fight over girl
CRYSTAL LAKE | Mom apparently kills 7-year-old, walks in front of train

August 30, 2007
BY DAN ROZEK AND LISA DONOVAN Staff Reporters/drozek@suntimes.com ldonovan@suntimes.com

A young Crystal Lake mother apparently suffocated her 7-year-old daughter, then killed herself by stepping in front of a speeding Metra train, McHenry County authorities said Wednesday.

The deaths happened Tuesday in the midst of a legal fight 28-year-old Magdalene Kamysz was waging over the daughter police suspect she killed….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Child Murder, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

August 2, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

This story did not make it to the front page, and the following article is the only indication in the media that the murder-suicide even happened.

Breaking News

The Post Chronicle
http://www.postchronicle.com
Published: Aug 1, 2007

Mother Kills Children In Murder-Suicide

An Ohio woman going through a divorce shot her son and daughter in the heart and then turned the gun on herself, a coroner said Wednesday.

Mary Ann Wittich of Cincinnati drugged Jacob, 10, and Sydney, 7, on Monday night, Dr. O’dell Owens, the Hamilton County coroner, told the Cincinnati Enquirer. On Tuesday morning, she shot her daughter first after drawing an “X” over her heart and then her son. (Source)

If a man would have done that, it would have made the front page, but then the man would most likely no longer be around to testify or to be brought to trial, except for his trial by media.

The next story received more attention and coverage in several prominent daylies, 283 news articles in all. One has to wonder why.

Texas Mom Kills Family, Self, Police Say

By JEFF CARLTON
The Associated Press
Wednesday, August 1, 2007; 12:11 AM

FLOWER MOUND, Texas — A stay-at-home mother in an affluent Dallas suburb fatally shot her husband and two children as they slept before killing herself, police said.

Detectives were reviewing a suicide note left in the house, where Andrea Roberts killed her husband, Michael Lewis Roberts, and children, Micayla, 11, and Dylan, 7, police said. Each had a single gunshot wound to the head…. (Full Story)

Posted in Child Murder, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

November 7, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Rick wrote (in commenting about baby farmers):

This is the home page of where I got the information http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/contents.html
the baby farmers http://uk.geocities.com/becky62655@btinternet.com/babyfarm.html

cheers rick

There was a similar case in Nova Scotia, Canada.

In that case it has been estimated that between 400 to 600 children deemed not placeable for adoption were killed and buried in butter boxes, incinerated or buried at sea.

Details of that story. (Make sure you follow the links identified at that web page.)

It is truly odd that in spite of much evidence to the contrary — evidence that was never hidden and that got much publicity in the media at the time — the myth of female innocence is being maintained with a passion, and numerous sociologists the world over assert that the typical mass murderer is male and Caucasian.

As Hitler said, the purpose of propaganda is not to present the truth with academic fairness.  The purpose of propaganda is to propagate the “truth” it sets out to promote and argue for.

Hitler also said that one should never underestimate the enormous capacity of the masses to forget.

Nevertheless, the pages at the links you provided tell that during the Victorian Age society took a dim view of women who were habitual baby killers and was likely to have them hanged.  Even that is not the truth, not all of the truth and perhaps something other than all of the truth.

Consider this:
(From http://www.fathersforlife.org/fv/infanticide.htm)
Infanticide, a euphemism for the murder of children.

In 1922, in England, the crime of murder was reduced to manslaughter, for murderers of victims that had not yet reached more than the age of one to two days. It is intriguing to consider the reasons given in arguments for leniency toward women who kill their children: Hormonal imbalance due to breast feeding; Failure to recover from the effects of giving birth to “such children”.

In her book “When Shew Was Bad”, Patricia Pearson says this:

In England, support for hormones as the cause of all maternal aggression against infants is enshrined in the law. In 1922, parliament introduced the Infanticide Act, which reduced the crime automatically from murder to manslaughter on the basis of insanity if a mother “had not fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to such child, but by reason thereof the balance of her mind was then disturbed.” The point of the Infanticide Act was not that British doctors had suddenly discovered a link between postpartum hormones and violent behavior. To this day that link hasn’t been categorically established. The point was to rid the courts of the necessity of imposing murder sentences, since juries had been refusing to convict women when the penalty was execution. For instance, following five thousand coroner’s inquests into child deaths held annually in Britain in the mid-nineteenth century, only thirty-nine convictions for child murder resulted, and none of those women were executed.  Similarly, in Canada, when a mandatory death penalty applied to the murder of children, “courts regularly returned ‘not guilty’ verdicts in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.” [p. 80]

It appears that at about the same time as women were given the right to vote, they were also given the benefit of being not accountable for their actions by reason of insanity due to hormonal imbalance.That was just a first step. The age of the children who became victims of child murder within the definition of “infanticide” was extended to one year, from the previously “acceptable” one to two days. Patricia Pearson says:

In 1938, Britain revised its infanticide statute, extending the age of victims from “newly born” to “under the age of 12 months.” To justify this extension, the revised statute cited “the effect of lactation” on a woman’s mind.  It was decided, in effect, that breastfeeding could drive women mad.  The experts who proposed the revision to the courts privately believed that social and psychological factors were more critical than biology.  Studies consistently show, for example, that preexisting histories of depression and life stress are a common denominator in women with postpartum mental disorders.  But psychiatrist J. H. Morton defended the diagnosis of “lactational insanity” as being acceptable to conservative judges and barristers.  It was never proposed that the Infanticide Act forgive mothers for killing older children, spouses or others, even while said to be suffering from the same insanity. [p. 80]

_____________

In Canada there have lately been a few cases where the infanticide excuse was extended to women in instances of child murders involving victims as old as five years. (Men, of course, are by law not capable of committing infanticide.  The infanticide excuse applies only when women murder children.)

For women there are excuses galore, and if those are insufficient by chance, we can always invent new ones.

For men there is never an excuse, and if women truly wish to be equal, then there should not be excuses for women either.

By the way, one of the pages you identified is also the one that shows the link to a page with information on the German female war criminals that were sentenced to death in the post-war trials and then subsequently executed (by hanging).

The hanging of those female war criminals was far from being a normal occurrence.  It was far more the norm to hear or read sentiments like this one:

27  Justice Jackson [he had presided over the Nuremberg war trials] declared: “As far as I’m concerned, I would like to make it quite clear, and I believe that at any rate it will be accepted, that the United States aren’t interested in letting their representatives travel for 3,500 miles to indict office employees, stenographers and house keepers.  Those aren’t the kind of crimes that we want to prosecute, even if they knew something; because they aren’t the kind of criminals who endanger world-peace.” IMT (1947 - 1949, volume VIII, p. 494).  Shortly after the end of the war, in the first Euthanasia process, Mar. 25, 1946, the female institution doctor and the institution nurse were sentenced to death.  LG Berlin, 25.03.4611 KS 8/46.  In the second process on Dec 21, 1946, the chief nurse was sentenced to prison and the station nurse  and nurse found not guilty.  LG Frankfurt am Main, 21.12.46.  In the subsequent trials the female and male doctors were sentenced to prison, the registered nurses and the nursing aides as a rule found not guilty.

– A Wife at His Side - Wives in the SS Clan-Community,
by Gudrun Schwarz, Ph.D.,  p. 178
– Translated by Walter H. Schneider,
German title:  Eine Frau an seiner Seite. Ehefrauen in der SS-Sippengemeinschaft

Although Justice Jackson was right about his opinion regarding female innocence as to war crimes being quite acceptable, his fundamental premise of female innocence was and remains quite wrong.  The quarter million German women that married SS officers weren’t just office employees, stenographers and house keepers.  Many of them were ruthless sadistic torturers and killers, even those who did not marry SS officers.  However, long before the female liberation of the 1960s got on the road, Justice Jackson  and other people like him promoted the whole-sale exoneration of evil women, regardless of ethnic origin, race, colour or creed.

Justice Jackson and his camp followers must surely have gotten something out of that.  At the very least, putting women on pedestals elevates them to facilitate easy and effortless brownnosing.

Posted in Child Murder | Print | No Comments »

November 6, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Too bad, but this piece of anti-male propaganda published in The [UK] Observer is all too common, however, it is easily debunked.

Focus: Murder in the family

Sunday November 5, 2006
The Observer
In the week when one father murdered his four children, and another was jailed for life, Lorna Martin investigates the motives and twisted minds of the men Americans call ‘family annihilators’. Are they driven by hatred, revenge or mad, possessive love?
(Full Story)

Unfortunately, when it comes to murder, things are not any easier to assess or predict or to project from a single week’s worth of data than it is to state with certainty that a week of mild winter weather is a harbinger of centuries of global warming.

Without spending too much time on a piece of anti-male propaganda like “Fathers who kill their children” that the observer bestowed on its readership, let me go back to a generic piece of debunking that I did once before in similar circumstances. After all, the truth is the truth and never changes, while propaganda changes with the directions of political winds.

Check: Predominantly women, not men, kill children (2002 06 15)

Posted in Child Murder | Print | No Comments »

October 9, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

CBC News, Wednesday, October 4, 2006

The social services system in Newfoundland and Labrador failed a 13-month-old boy, who drowned along with his mother in a 2003 murder-suicide, a review has found.

Zachary Turner died when Shirley Turner, 42, clutched him to her body and jumped into Conception Bay, several kilometres outside of St. John’s.

“Nowhere did I find any ongoing assessment of the safety needs of the children,” coroner Peter Markesteyn, referring both to Zachary and Turner’s daughter from another relationship, wrote in a three-volume report released Wednesday.

Turner, a general practitioner, fled to Newfoundland after her estranged lover Andrew Bagby, 28, was shot to death in a Pennsylvania parking lot on Nov. 5, 2001. [full story]

Mother arrested in death of her 2 children

SECTIONS FROM CORONER’S REPORT ( You can read it on our website)

Neville, The Child and Youth Advocate for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, said two things were evident from reading the report. “One: Zachary Turner’s death was preventable. And two: Zachary was in his mother’s care when he should not have been.”

Markesteyn found that officials, who were working on the presumption of Turner’s innocence, were more concerned about the welfare of the woman than for her infant.

Turner frequently asked for, and received, help from social workers, with dozens of visits made on her behalf.

Neville said she found it difficult that no one was putting Zachary’s interests first.

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/CBC_No_need_for_Zachary_Turner_to_die_04OCT06.htm

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/Newspaper_Articles_2006.htm

_____________________________________

CBC News, Wednesday, October 4, 2006

A 31-year-old mother has been arrested after her two children were found dead in an apartment in Barrie, Ont., early Wednesday morning.

The two girls, aged one and three, were found in a highrise apartment on Coulter Street located between Sunnidale Park and Bayfield Mall in the west end of the city. Barrie is about 80 kilometres north of Toronto.

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/CBC_Mother_arrested_death_2_children_04OCT06.htm

_________________________
Alberta baby-killing verdict discussions echo national infanticide debate

Canadian Press, By: LISA ARROWSMITH, September 27, 2006

WETASKIWIN, Alta. (CP) - It’s a small farming community whose high number of auto dealerships has given it a reputation as a good place for a deal on a car.

But the morning after a young local woman was convicted of murdering her newborn baby, debate on the leafy streets of Wetaskiwin, Alta., was over much higher stakes than Ford Vs. Chevy.

“Ten years is not sufficient,” said an adamant Gail Doolittle, referring to the sentence handed out to Katrina Effert, 20.

“That’s the justice system. We need to give them a chance,” she sneered as she loaded her two-year-old daughter Heather into a car seat at a local grocery store.

http://www.canadiancrc.com/Infanticide.htm

http://www.canadiancrc.com/CP_Alberta_baby-killer_verdict_national_infanticide_debate_27SEP06.htm

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/Edmonton_Journal_Verdict_shocks_experts_28SEP06.htm

_________________________
When is a law not a law?

When do-gooder politicians fail to proclaim it

TORONTO SUN, By LINDA WILLIAMSON, October 1, 2006

Sometimes the good guys win, and it’s great news.

The bad news is, sometimes just winning isn’t enough.

Let’s start with the good news first. After a last-ditch effort by a grieving mother and her legion of supporters, the Ontario legislature last week passed a private member’s bill that we can all hope will help save young lives.

Bill 89, known as “Kevin and Jared’s Law” and spearheaded by Conservative MPP Cam Jackson, was passed — against all odds — after Julie Craven, mother of 8-year-old murder victim Jared Osidacz, essentially shamed our legislators into it.

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/Toronto_Sun_When_is_a_law_not_a_law_01OCT06.htm

Posted in Child Murder, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »