General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]Xyzse
(8,217 posts)She pushed past her abuser went to the car, didn't have the keys and got something to defend herself with.
It is also being disputed as to her being able to leave through the way she went. So she went back.
I don't know if I believe her or not. Heat of the moment, she may have believed she could not get out. If she wasn't able to push the door or lock or anything of that sort. Not that it excuses it.
It can also be read that this was her method to get away as well, not that I can condone firing warning shots. That was just dumb. For reckless endangerment, I'd book her. However, arming herself was a preventative measure and a means to stand her ground.
I have no idea what he said or his gestures during the time she had it on though. I don't know if he was acting as if to lunge at her or anything, or verbally threatening her during that time. Things like "You won't shoot me" while coming closer. He did say "If I can't have you, nobody going to have you."
Supposedly she did not aim for him, so that was not deadly force directed on the guy.
Either case, there are many holes in her story, much like I considered there having holes in Zim's. The feeling of inequity comes from the difference in treatment. With him, they pushed away the circumstances before the altercation, with her they seem to have foregoed the threats her husband was making.
I am actually curious what the children had said.