Another woman walks free after killing her husband
Life Insurance Quotes - Get Life Insurance Now, Fast Efficient and Reliable. Protect your children's tomorrow by preparing for their interests today. Life Insurance Quotes Australia
AN Adelaide woman who snapped and killed her cheating husband by setting him on fire has walked from court with only a suspended sentence.
Rajini Narayan, 46, was found guilty of the manslaughter of 47-year-old Satish Narayan after being tried for his murder.
In the Supreme Court of South Australia today, Justice John Sulan sentenced her to six years in jail with a non-parole period of four years for the death of her husband in December 2008.
He suspended her sentence saying there was good reason to do so and that her husband’s conduct was a mitigating factor.
Mrs Narayan had told her trial she snapped, threw petrol and a lit candle onto her husband’s back after learning via his emails that he was having an affair.
She had intended just to burn the tip of his penis with a candle and a beaker of petrol to save their marriage.
But she snapped and threw the beaker and candle on him after he turned his back on her.
Fathers rights groups have condemned this judgment as yet another example of the double-standards in our laws, where women serve little if any jail time despite murdering their husbands or children in the most gruesome of circumstances.
Ash Patil, President of Fathers4Equality, says that women always tend to rely on stereotypes to get away with murder. “They always pull out the..he abused me argument, or I was depressed argument.”
Patil notes that these arguments are never accepted for men in this country, and they should never be accepted as defence for murder, regardless of whether the murderer is male or female.”
Patil slams this murder as a revenge murder, from a jealous wife who sought to hurt the man that was leaving her.
“We recently saw a man, Arthur Freeman, be put to jail effectively for life for murdering his daughter, Darcy Freeman, exacting revenge on his estranged wife. The question is however, why was this woman not treated the same?”
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
A man killed by a woman is just as dead as a woman killed by a man and the law makes no differentation on gender for its penalties.
Courts are supposed to be completely impartial on such matters but they are increasingly becoming the most noteably gender biased.
Feminism has invaded and is entrenche in every heterosexual instution now governing on gender by proxy to the point (a) we effectively the one law becomes two based on gender so that ‘women win’ and (b) males being relaegated into second class citizens as its consequences (c) an unatural suicide rate of males (d) and unprecedented deceitfulness and arrogance by females.
The male envy feminist never ever intended gender equality but gender supremecy at any cost.
Folk must stop making endless comparisons and start lobbying for the recovery of our democracy from the insurgent feminists and their sympathisers. Especially in Government and Government Institutions like courts and police etc.
It has been our politicans who have both promoted and allowed it. Take all of these Fathers 4 balancing articles to them and demand the return to gender impartial adminisraton by Government.
Robert K
Robert E Kennedy
[Reply]
I worry that Freeman wasn’t found guilty of insanity.
I just can’t accept that he could hurt his children unless if was pushed over the edge, as it seems he was mercilessly by his X lawyers and the court.
Obviously if he’d been female things mightn’t have worked out so bad for him.
[Reply]
More gender laced leniency,
Its getting absurd,.
http://www.news.com.au/national/mary-pyrczak-given-suspended-sentence-after-death-of-kateryna-pyrczak/story-fn8g495p-1226039625532
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
April 17th, 2011 at 5:09 pm
Here is yet another piece of disgusting decision making by yet another moron who believes women are not capable of cunning, deceit, viciousness, hate, deliberate neglect and murder.
This woman is called “Dr. Pyrczakâ€Â.
How the hell did this judge not see that being in the medical profession, she has a duty of care under the law to protect the welfare of people. One would have thought that she would have not done this to a dog, let alone a family member, but worse still, her own mother.
And you would have expected the judge to throw the book at her. Well, if she were a man, it would have been on the front pages of every news agency world-wide and he would have been sentenced to life in prison.
This judge says this about her:
“Justice Coghlan said Pyrczak’s crime was based upon the principle of negligence, which was at the lower end of the scale.â€Â
This is not just simple neglect and in my opinion the charge should have been ‘Negligent Homicide’ or ‘Murder’ and she should have been sent to prison for a very long time.
I also note that there was no mention in the article of her being barred from practicing as a Psychiatrist. So this killer, who is also sick in the head with a psychiatric illness, is going to continue to infect the minds of innocent people.
Says a lot about Psychiatry and Psychology, which is something I have always suspected!
[Reply]
Yet another fine example of our justice system just rolls in with Keli Lane getting 18 years (13 years non parole).
Sure thats a long time in jail for her to think about hard done by she is, but I for the life of me cannot see how her case is LESS serious than Arthur Freeman’s.
Keli Lane appears to have murdered her child in pre-meditated cold blood (same as Freeman with the threats to his wife about never seeing the kids again).
Whats worse is she even tried to lie about her guilt saying the baby was with her boyfriend and even posted a bogus reward.
Why does she get a lesser sentence than Arthur Freeman???!!!
Both were AWFUL crimes but I cant help but think that Keli Lanes was worse…pre-meditated, no admission of guilt.
The only difference is the drama behind Freemans, his ex wife, custody battles, feminist agendas, a big horrible hairy monster male doing the crime etc.
It’s a shame I’ll have to live in such a pit as I dont think anything will change in my lifetime (and I’m not old by any stretch of the imagination).
[Reply]
Lizzie Reply:
April 16th, 2011 at 9:36 pm
I completely agree, why did Lane get only 13 years. Like Freeman she did not show any remorse. Unlike Freeman thought she refuses to admit to her guilt. She should be getting life as well. It seems that women can kill their husbands, kill their children and lie and get away with it. What is happening in this world where the courts are punishing only one sex. Neither Freeman or Lane deserve any mercy and the sympathetic comments made by the Judge in the Lane case are just plain misguided!
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
April 16th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
Lizzie,
Thank you for expressing your disapproval of what is very obvious discrimination against men here in Australian Law.
Unfortunately though, there are not enough women around like you who are prepared to make a public stand and shine a light on this double standard.
Indeed neither of those murderers should be given an early release, because they have committed the ultimate crime against humanity. But it is made worse by some idiot judge making stupid statements and keeping the discrimination against men alive, by discounting the crime and subsequently the sentence of Keli Lane and pretty much all other women who come before them.
Where will it all end?
[Reply]
And what about the recent story from New York where a mother drove into the river drowning herself and 3 of her 4 children. Apparently there was NO history of abuse there, only the fact that the husband was unfaithful. And for that she killed 3 of their children pfffft. As bad or worse than the crime Mr Freeman committed. Perhaps while the likes of ali and leeanne are out celebrating they can celebrate that.
[Reply]
Ali Reply:
April 14th, 2011 at 5:47 am
Of course not. Told you, people aren’t interested in the truth.
[Reply]
Ali, what is that post of yours supposed to mean or represent, when it sounds like gobbledegook?
How can any normal thinking and healthy human being, agree that any ‘murder’, is okay.
This woman is a murderer and is also a vicious killer. She murdered an innocent man, in the most horrible of fashions, then lied about it afterward. You and the rest of the seething harridans in this country, think she has gotten away with this murder, but the truth is, she will face God one day and on that day she and all the other murderous women will have to aswer for their crimes and their punishment will be a whole lot worse.
The same will apply to all those in this country who have aided and abetted these women.
And when I say this man was innocent, I meant he was not trying to kill her and she had to kill to remain alive. Adultery is adultery, he will have to answer for that too. But she has no right to murder, just because he was committing adultery.
The laws, those who enforce the laws, and those who sit in judgement of the laws, all encourage women to commit all forms of crimes, from petty to heinous, by making sure they are rarely punished.
I am ashamed to call myself an Australian!
[Reply]
simo Reply:
April 13th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
agreed.
[Reply]
LeeAnneR Reply:
April 13th, 2011 at 7:29 pm
This woman is not a murderer or a vicious killer, and her husband is not an ‘innocent man’. She is a woman who was beaten within an inch of her life very regularly, was belittled and demoralised. She is actually a kind, intelligent and articulate women. Her only mistake was staying married to a disgustingly vial and voilent man – but then getting away might have cost her her life anyway.
You have never met this woman,let alone have any understanding of what she was put through. Relying on media reports as an excuse to lashing out in such a abhorent way is disgraceful and you should be ashamed of yourself.
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
April 13th, 2011 at 8:36 pm
So LeeAnneR,
Did you rely on media reports when you judged Arthur Freeman as a murderous evil man who should be condemned to life in prison, or did you know him personally too?
I take it you knew this woman personally and can vouch for her privately?
I agree with the your complaint about relying on the media. The media are the worlds greatest lairs this side of the govt.
But at the end of the day, your view and attitude is the same as all the feminists in this country who believe it is okay for a woman to kill a man or her children. In fact, you lot believe it is your right to kill a man.
You have the opportunity to leave anytime you want from an abusive marriage, because the full force of the law is on your side in this country. You have no excuse to use that lie to prove that she was innocent.
HOwever, the thing that amazes me the most, is that the allegations of abuse and DV rarely come out until after the man is dead, and there is no opportunity for him to defend himself.
Yes there are men who abuse, bash and murder women. When they are caught they are dealt with severely.
Problem is, there are very many women doing the same thing, but when they are caught, they are rarely punished. Why?
Because they start crying and say they were abused for decades, then immediately they are forgiven.
Unbelievable if you ask me!
If you women want us men to believe your stories, then stop lying about being abused, and allow men to prove that you are liars.
The problem in this country, is that women lie all the time and men have no remedy under law to prove their innocence.
And madam, you should be ashamed of yourself for using your own false platform of lies and deceit to lash out at men.
[Reply]
zac Reply:
April 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
Wrong Leanne! This judge has taken a shine to the defendant and misled the jury…When someone consciously pours petrol into a container to then throw it onto a potential victim its not to cook the end of his knob..it was to do serious damage.
The prosecutors may have asked a forensic scientist and a pathologist what quantity of petrol was used and what potential damage would be done..ie death. The defendant’s family comes from a region of the world where there are multiple acid attacks on people for petty reasons. Should our society accept similar behaviour also?
When are courts going to treat female defendants of heinous acts like people and not princesses?
[Reply]
zac Reply:
April 14th, 2011 at 11:58 am
And Leanne, Here is a man who was burnt to ( within an inch of ) death.
Lizzie Reply:
April 16th, 2011 at 9:38 pm
If we allowed everyone to take the law into their own hands what a crazy world we would live in. Regardless of the circumstances this woman should have been punished for what she did. She had every opportunity to go the Police for help if she was being abused by her husband but she chose not to, she chose to become a murderer.
[Reply]
Ali Reply:
April 17th, 2011 at 12:20 am
I heard she did go to the police and others for help early on. And she wouldn’t be the only one. There’s not much a person, system, organisation or the law can do against a person who is intent on oppressing another. That’s why she stayed, and remained incredibly loyal (see Stockholm Syndrome). It wasn’t a revenge for abuse. She accepted the abuse.
I know some who left but didn’t see an end to the threats or violence. Fortunately, they haven’t killed, either spontaneously, accidentally or pre-meditated. I know two who died, AFTER they left, with the help of authorities. A friend of mine was hunted down after she left, but the ex stabbed her friend who protected her. It’s a ticking time-bomb.
Rajini’s punishment (6 years, suspended) reflects the judge’s conclusion that two people may commit violence, but the punishment must reflect the reality that the intent may be quite different. But you do need a judge with brain cells to discern.
[Reply]
There is also little difference between Darcy Freeman and Satish Narayan. Darcy Freeman died as an innocent pawn in her parent’s bitter custody war, Satish Narayan may have died for the ‘crime’ of having an extra- marital affair….of which there is no sentence of death pending in this country.
Why haven’t the investigators and prosecutors of this latest outrageous ‘murder’ been successful in having the PREMEDITATED ACT punished…regardless of genders?
As it is written in some criminal codes, “There is no greater honour bestowed on an investigator than that of being charged with the responsibility of investigating a death of another human being.”
This is a shocking failure that should be appealed.
[Reply]
What’s the difference between Arthur Freeman and this woman? One was the perpetrator and the other victim. Not that I expect perpetrators to agree – it would defeat their case for double standards.
They always pull the “abuse” argument? Hmm, I wonder why…
Yes, women can be abusive too, but in this case, she wasn’t. You only have to know her to know that. Anyway, there was no way justice couldn’t have been done – she had a lot of prayers! Hate her as much as you want – she is a protected species by God, who saw the cruelty/torture she went through and know that she didn’t mean to do what she did. Woohoo – He has set her free. I don’t care if you are a man or a woman – you should be happy for her family.
[Reply]
AL4K Reply:
April 13th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Ali,
You really need to get out of your little self-righteous box, stop looking at life through a straw, and begin to acknowledge that there ARE two types murder, – one male, one female.
Ash Patil has a valid point that, females do use the “They always pull out the..he abused me argument, or I was depressed argument.â€Â
And the legal system goes along with this mitigation. It is as though females are operate with determinism, and have no sense of accountability or responsibility for their actions. OR, courts do have a soft spot for females.
Since you appear an expert on justice matters, could you kindly explain what sentence the mother in the link must receive, and substantiate your conclusion.
Thank you in advance.
AL4K
[Reply]
AL4K Reply:
April 13th, 2011 at 11:58 am
Ali,
Here is the link for your perusal.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/11/3187889.htm
AL4K
[Reply]
Ali Reply:
April 14th, 2011 at 2:28 am
Huh? Why the diversion? When did I say I was an expert on justice matters? Warning bell #1 – the mindfvck.
Anyway, what has that murder of the baby have to do with Rajini? If that mother deserves punishment (and I don’t know the case), she should get what she deserves. Was that baby oppressing and cruelly torturing her mother? Is that a well-documented syndrome that has an effect on mothers whose minds are rendered irrational after years of oppression? Are you asking just because they are both women? Wow – this site IS really just about men vs women.
So if a man murders, he gets punished JUST because he is a man and if a woman murders, she gets away just because she is a woman? Look at the facts, you say – yes, I thought we did, but got shot down by being told we were loo king at life through a straw, never mind the facts. I thought people were interested in the truth, not propaganda.
Who the hell cares? She knows the truth. Nobody else needs to. They wouldn’t believe it anyway, it wouldn’t serve their interests. With that, I bow out. No point. Off to celebrate for her, not because she is a woman, but a human being.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
April 14th, 2011 at 12:49 am
From what I have heard,
Arthur Freeman was the victim of violence from his ex and her family plus the target of the ex’s controlling violence to the extent he could not produce a defence against their derogatory family alienation the Family Court wished to believe despite a lack of physical evidence other than the ex’s family statements against him.
I’ve been there and our children were punished by the Court (Mushin J) because I could not prove beyond doubt the mother and her supporters were lying to the Court, hence my children did not see me for about 6-7 yrs, now one 1 lives with me fill time because he got tired of his mother’s and sister’s abuse.
The saddest thing I see here is that case law has reinforced a woman can commit murder in a way a man would but the man would not only be prosecuted for, but persecuted for claiming mental impairment like Freeman has.
For this woman to obtain a candle and a beaker of petrol is intent to do more than burn the end of his penis, only the candle would be required to do what she claims. Clearly her intent was to do more than hurt him.
Here the jury has diminished the crime from intent to murder to intent of cause grievous bodily harm with the claim of manslaughter and the judge diminished it again to a suspended sentence?
If she had intended to just burn the tip of his penis why would she need more than a candle?
From this case law: woman can commit murder if a man is unfaithful or she, in her mental dysfunctional thinking (Post Natal Depression thinking), thinks he has done what she has done. That is, been unfaithful to their family relationship (about 60% of woman are unfaithful to their partners and only about 40% of men are unfaithful to their partner).
Hence the need for no fault divorce and the Family Court aiding and abetting woman with their false allegations and fabricated evidence in the Court.
As has been proven by the USA studies, more woman commit family violence pursuant to the AG’s new reinforced definitions of family violence than any man.
Take it from 1 who has been subject to a woman guilty of being unfaithful to our family and punishing our children and me for her wrongs to our family, it was she who did physical and emotional abuse and other abuse, at her leisure, that Bryant CJ and Mushin J refused to believe and concealed, was committed by her.
Again it is the judges that need to be dealt with for their abuse of power to provide a benefit of protection to a criminal rather than the law needs to be changed.
Why do you think the AG will not allow an investigation of judicial misbehaviour?
[Reply]