Tuesday, December 21, 2010

A fine for beating someone until their skull cracked?

You read that right.

Twenty-three year old devout Christian (not sure what her religion has to do with this but its in there) Debora Sugiaman was fined $3000 for bashing her former boyfriend's head until she heard his head crack.

I know you sensible people out there are wondering, "How in the hell did that happen?" Well it would seem that the prosecution, defense, and presiding Justice Richard Refshauge agreed that a conviction and a fine were enough of a punishment for her actions. The Justice also said that the circumstances were exceptional. How exceptional were they?

Let's see:
The dalliance went further than Sugiaman wanted, to the point where the committed Christian felt the man had violated her trust and transgressed her strong morals.
Who knew that a woman's trust being violated and morals being transgressed were justification for attempted murder?
Six months after the man ended their brief affair and took up with one of Sugiaman's friends, the woman's mounting guilt and pain turned to deep rage when her friend revealed the man had only seen Sugiaman as his ''f--- buddy''.

She decided to teach him a lesson by making him feel physical pain because he seemed incapable of understanding her emotional hurt.

After returning home from a class on May 4, she strengthened her resolve with alcohol and then drove to the man's house armed with a meat tenderiser, having arranged for his new girlfriend to be there too.
Can someone tell me what the difference between this and any scenario where a guy gets his feelings hurt by a woman and he lashes out at her physically? Yeah I'm going there and saying I have a hard time believing that if this were the other way around that guy would have just been fined because of the exceptional circumstances.

That's just brutal and for this woman to get off what some would call a Pussy Pass just makes me feel bad for that guy. He must be really forgiving to put up with such a "punishment".

Tip of the Fro to Sonja for pointing this out.


elementary_watson said...

This is absurd. I guess this woman also got a Christian bonus (which I do not think a man would have gotten), but if a "devout Christian" can reconcile her beliefs in the teachings of that guy from Nazareth with cracking her ex's head with a meat tenderizer because of her hurt feelings and morals, and the law admits this as extenuating circumstances ...

Sorry, there is no way to end this sentence; the part after the "but if" should be impossible in a somewhat enlightened culture in the 21st century.

Clarence Woodworth said...

Did you notice something?

She was cheating on her long distance boyfriend. So, she attacks a man for mutual enjoyable sex, and cheats on another, and the whole thing is all about HER feelings?


Dave said...

Here's another recent example: A woman who stabbed her ex because he wouldn't give her a hug, severing tendons in his hand, being given a slap on the wrist.

Danny said...

I have an ending for you.

but if a "devout Christian" can reconcile her beliefs in the teachings of that guy from Nazareth with cracking her ex's head with a meat tenderizer because of her hurt feelings and morals, and the law admits this as extenuating circumstances ...
then there is something wrong with who she interprets those teachings (or maybe with the teachings themselves) and there's something wrong with law that excuses it.

Danny said...

I know right?

Anon said...


What can we do? Why the hell was religion pulled in? Dude like, the man had to be hospitalised that's fo sho. Meat tenderizer? on the head? 3k fine? really? my god. Doesn't feel that safe to live in ACT anymore. Fact that she was cheating as well? EGADs.

Anonymous said...

Where in the world did you get this information? You're hurting people's feelings because you INTERPRET SH*T INTO BULLSH*T. You've never even met the person yet you extract ideas from a piece in the newspaper, convincing others by sharing your opinions. I'm telling you, it's a coward behaviour to post it on the internet. I suggest you to erase this post. It's not a nice thing to do.

Danny said...

I got it from the link that I put up in the post. If you are so informed and more importantly if you have some other information then by means share it.

Anon said...

If Danny is a coward for posting news and sharing it together with his opinion then so are you. And I am, I am not denying that hence the Anon title.

How he interpret this news is up to him. Freedom to talk. This is how we share and talk. You are free to disagree or agree with him, but telling him to delete his opinion is just absurd, you might as well tell Tony and Julia to stfu and stop fighting each other then because they are turning "shit into bullshit" so you say.

That women is convicted, SHE IS guilty. And what, a crack skull for a broken heart where both party were willing to have an affair just sounded psychotic to me.

Maybe that is why the fine was a mere 3 000 + a conviction without any social work or good behaviour bond - she is a woman (bias, she is a 'devout' christian, and she had disorders (according to the newspaper). And maybe they are trying to her outta the country asap so no harm could be made to anyone else.

Kenny said...

here is the link to the edited court sentence http://www.courts.act.gov.au/supreme/sentences/sugiaman.htm