Here's what we know so far:
- The 52 year old man with no criminal history had been in custody for 44 days before he was bailed; and
- His wife, who said she feared for her life, was later murdered after his release.
His lawyer is correct in that:
- The 52 year old man hasn't been found guilty of murder (yet), so should be presumed innocent (so the headline that reads "DV Killer Lawyer" is technically overstepping and would be open to a libel lawsuit should the man be found innocent; and
- The man has no criminal history and had been held for 44 days before being bailed.
Now, I'm not stating one way or another who did what, but to hold a person for 44 days before granting them bail is a sure-fire way to get someone pretty angry.
Imagine how you feel if someone just came along one day out of the blue, put you in a holding cell and told you that you couldn't even apply for bail for a month and a half. Would your employer be happy to hold your job for you? Would you even have a job? Who would feed you pets, pay your bills, clean out your fridge, etc? Remember, this isn't a man who went overseas for six weeks who could plan for this, this was a person who should be considered to be innocent until proven guilty.
Like I said, I may consider the outcome from this situation appalling (assuming he's guilty), but to assume we should just keep all men accused of domestic violence, INCLUDING THOSE WHO HAVE NO CRIMINAL HISTORY, is completely doing away with the system of innocent until proven guilty for men (but leaving it in place for women).
A bit like how the justice system has let a female socialite and daughter of a politician out of jail after serving only 2 years for her part in a murder, when her accomplice, a man, was sentenced to 11 years jail.