HONOUR KILLINGS IN THE SUBURBS

Julie Is Brutally Bashed Then Strangled. Her Husband James Ramage, Only Gets Convicted Of Manslaughter

 

In a moment of dark comedy, might we attribute the following words to James Ramage? I'm pleased women in Australia don't have any basic human rights, or I might have had to spend as long in jail as she did in our marriage.

And an epitaph for the woman he killed? I spent 23 years in a violent marriage. Finally I tried to leave in a safe and civilised manner. He's won again! And the legal system says I deserved to be punished for defying my husband.

Provocation is used today in our supposedly civilised society to reduce the offence of murder to that of manslaughter.

What sort of message is this sending out to the world about our legal system and its bias against women?

Men are now justified when they "lose control" and kill - because our Supreme Court says that an ordinary man who is insulted could be expected to behave in that way.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION LETTER TO REGISTER YOUR DISGUST WITH OUR PATRIARCHIAL SYSTEM.

Name and Address

…………………………………..

…………………………………..

…………………………………..

Email………………………………….

Hon. Rob Hulls MLA,
Attorney General,
Level 1,
55 St Andrews Place,
Melbourne,
Victoria 3002
Australia

November 2004

Dear Mr Hulls

THE USE OF PROVOCATION AS A DEFENSE TO MURDER

HONOUR KILLING IN OUR SUBURBS
R v Dincer (1982), R v Crowe (1988), R v Keogh (1989) and R v Ramage (2004)

I understand that The Law Reform Commission has completed its report on "Defences to Homicide" and you are now to consider its findings and recommendations.

The law of provocation has become a means by which some violent men explain away the act of killing an estranged female partner or a partner threatening to leave a relationship. Studies show that it is not the "alleged" words of the dead woman but her decision to leave the relationship that motivates a man to kill her.

Prohibiting allegedly insulting words from the defence will not address the fundamental question of a woman's right to leave a relationship. If the law of provocation is to continue it must be reformed in such a way as to ensure that its application does not contravene the human rights of the murdered person.

The only way to do this is to STOP provocation being used as a defence for what are nothing more than honour killings. At the present time it favours men who are using it as an excuse for "losing it" and killing their partners.

If we are to stop women being killed we need to send a clear message that "honour killings" are not acceptable to society and that "domestic killings" are just as serious as any other homicides.

You have expressed a genuine interest in law reform that addresses the gender bias of the law. I believe that reform should start with the law of provocation. I look forward to your reply in due course.

Yours truly,

………………………………….. (Signed)