Crime of Passion

A recent news story out of Australia concerns a woman who had come upon her husband and his lover, kissing by the side of the road. Christie Lee Kennedy, provoked by the scene, aimed her car toward the pair, putting the pedal to the metal. When she was nearly upon the couple, she jammed on her brakes, but too late to miss them, she hit them, causing the woman lover, Zowie Noring, to be thrown onto the street. The husband, David Larkin, also was thrown. Both Larkin and Noring suffered minor injuries. Noring suffered a further injury when Kennedy jumped out of her SUV, grabbed Noring by the hair, and then punched her in the face.

Kennedy was charged with two counts of malicious acts with intent to disable. During her trail, the jury did not convict her. Instead, Kennedy was given a light sentence on another count, reckless driving. This sentence was suspended by Judge Smith, and Kennedy walked away with a suspended license.

I found this story on LinkedIn, where a short version of the story had been posted. This short version was lacking many of the details of the event. Nonetheless, that lack didn’t stop people from commenting on the story.

My comment was that I think this is a story about passion, making this a crime committed in the heat of hurt. Anyone who comes upon their spouse getting physical with someone else will have a reaction. The laws of most Western countries take provocation seriously when charging someone with acts of violence. So too, do juries. A murder will be charged as voluntary manslaughter, because there is no premeditation. In this case, there was no death, and even the injuries were slight.

Other commentators on the thread were rather vicious in their reaction to my suggestion this was a crime of passion. I wondered about their being provoked by my suggestion. Since I am someone whose work entails research from different sources, I decided to find other accounts of this story. I know the devil will be in the details. The study of history and mythology is constantly surprising for that reason. And many people are rather ignorant of the details of  the history and the myths that have built our culture. Add into that the resentment that women are supposed to be equal, yet this woman, Kennedy, is getting away with a crime. A man wouldn’t get away with this crime!

Firstly, Kennedy did not get away with her crime. She was put through the legal process in the Australian justice system. If any commentator has a beef, that anger needs to go to the jury members who would not convict her. After all, Australia’s laws are much like the laws of the United States, and the laws of Britain, who gave both countries their laws, and attitudes towards the law. The jury system is about peers judging us. People, individuals, like any other individual, living in that community. That is who gave Kennedy her walking papers. Social media commentators need to look at the why of the juries reasoning. What was it about this situation that they came to the conclusion Kennedy was not an evil person that needed to be thrown in jail? The judge as well, came to the same conclusion.

My reaction to the story was that of a producer of films in search of a good story. The original posting on LinkedIn was like a writer’s pitch, which boils down to a plot and theme put into 25 words. This was a fascinating plot and theme, so I wanted more info on it.

Why is it so fascinating? For one, our modern context on the treatment of people is disturbing. Many moderns are in the habit of sleeping around, married or unmarried. That means too many people take a cavalier attitude towards the feelings of others. Yes, infidelity has been with us since marriage was invented, thousands of years back. The various reactions to infidelity haven’t changed much. The liars, and that is what a cheater is, usually get away with their lies, however, sometimes they get found out. If the cheated on spouse is a woman with two small children, she is apt to be hurt, threatened, and angry. She has every right to those feelings.

To those who have never experienced a cheating spouse, you are in the minority. It is estimated that 63% of all couples cheat on their spouse. Not all of these cheaters are found out, especially those involved in a quick, brief affair. The habitual cheaters are easy to spot since the lies they tell to cover their tracks, begin to build up. Such was the case of  Ms. Kennedy, and her husband, David Larkin. Kennedy became suspicious of Larkin. So she found out his whereabouts from her phone’s locator app, and drove to the location. Larkin, and his paramour, were getting heavy with the kissing alongside the road when Kennedy spotted them.

Kennedy had, shall we say, an irrational, yet reasonable, reaction. She was provoked. However, let’s ask a question here about the adulterer and his lover.

Why is it Larkin and Noring failed to notice a car bearing down on them? Were they not aware of it because they were so passionate with one another?  Because this wasn’t a small car, but an SUV coming towards them. This betrays their involvement with one another, that the world, outside of their physical pleasure, was not noticeable to them. That nothing mattered to them, but their momentary pleasure.

Larkin’s wife, and the mother of his children, did not matter to him. Nor to Noring. Such details as the man’s family never factor into the thoughts of the other woman. Indeed, such women are predators, willing to help a man breakup his marriage so that they can have him for themselves. Never mind how this messes with a child’s psyche when daddy walks off. Never mind about the wife betrayed. Life is all about her wants and needs. No one else need apply.

Before you start in on me about women leaving their husbands, thanks to the modernist mentality of everyone can play this game of breaking the heart of the spouse and children, save your breath. I am well aware of the new data that shows more women now initiate divorce. Nevertheless, we do not address that scenario here. Except to say, people who take their marriage vows seriously do not engage in those activities, male or female. Larkin did not take his vows seriously. He broke his wife’s heart, and jeopardized the emotional health of his children.

Just a reminder, that once upon a time, adultery was considered an offense, and in some places, unlawful. Adultery was the only grounds for divorce. With no fault divorce, any party in a marriage may initiate a divorce because they feel like it. See what I mean when I state that moderns take the feelings of others lightly?

Back to the event.

Kennedy was provoked. Everyone in that courtroom in Brisbane got that. For they not only heard testimony, they saw the video from the CCTV cameras. The jury, judge, and anyone in that courtroom, saw the kissing, the car speeding toward the adulterers, as well as the braking before hitting Larkin and Noring. If there had been a death, Kennedy would have been charged with voluntary manslaughter, not murder. Kennedy’s reaction of hitting her brakes, in my mind, as well as the jurors and judge, shows that her rational mind regained control, albeit, she did let loose her anger on the woman involved in this tryst, not on her husband. That is a healthy reaction, emotionally, the desire to destroy the woman that would destroy her family.

The commentators on LinkedIn seem to lack the capacity to understand Kennedy’s reaction. Perhaps because they are so blinded by their desire for her to be treated like a man would be treated, if he were the perp? Is it a resentment of women? Or a dislike of a woman that would be aggressive in such a situation? If a man hits the other man who is sleeping with his wife, would those commentators think him manly for protecting his marriage? Or would they want to throw the book at him?

The commentators didn’t seem to understand that there was no murder here. Violence, yes, but everyone is alive and well. There is also the inconvenient truth that no one read beyond the original posting. They did not research the event with any depth. In short, they were not curious as to the how’s and why’s. There was no empathy for Kennedy, which one can have and still be adamant that she keep her hurt to herself, and take her punishment. No, many of the commenters had zero empathy, and a barely any knowledge of what went on in the courtroom. Commenters, far away from this event, and the country it took place in, thought they could second guess the jury that was in the courtroom. How’s that for wizardry?

Not just once, but twice, jurors acquitted Kennedy on two counts of malicious acts with intent to disable. The jury was then asked to convict Kennedy on two lessers charges of assault with intent to harm. They could not reach a consensus. Judge Smith ordered a retrial, but Kennedy pleaded guilty to a lesser charge; dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. She was given a 9 months sentence, which Judge Smith immediately suspended. Instead, her license was suspended, and she is ordered to pay Noring and Larkin $5,000 each for their injuries.

The masses, with their teeth gnashing, are second guessing the judge. They want Kennedy behind bars. Judge Smith, in his wisdom, which comes from experience, chose to suspend the sentence for a reason. He knew he was the decision maker in the middle of this tragedy, so he looked at the bigger picture. Justice would not be served if two young children’s mother served 9 months in prison because their father cheated on their mother.

My view of this mess is to take into consideration the historical record of men, women, marriage and cheating. In the grand scheme of things, women have finally been given political rights some 150 years after the men had been given those rights. In the not too distant past, women could not even answer for themselves. And yet they could be burned at the stake, decapitated, or hung if found guilty by a jury of men. Indeed, women have murdered, and have caused harm to their spouses, but usually with the aide of a male partner of some sort. Women were good at poisoning because that did not take upper body strength. Women were the usual suspects in poisonings, along with its old standby, conjuring evil spirits. Nonetheless, for the most part, it was men who inflicted bodily harm and death on women.

Not much has changed in that regard. Statistically, more women attempt suicide than men, but more men are successful at it. Statistically, more men murder their wives, than wives murder their husbands. More men beat their wives, than wives beat their husbands. Even during a crime of passion, mostly, it’s the men chancing upon the spouse in the act of infidelity, that kill, either the spouse, the lover, or both.

As an aside, I never could understand cheaters having sex in their home. That is like asking to be caught. And in the open air, along a roadside?

Men are also capable of killing a spouse because of an emotional hurt. Usually the murder/suicides happen because the husband cannot bear to lose his wife and family, so he kills them all. Thus they are together forever. A crime of passion to be sure, these tragic events. It proves how dangerous love is.

Twenty percent of all murder victims are killed by an intimate partner. Research shows that most of these killings are men killing women. That means that most murdered wives, ex-wives, and girlfriends, are killed by the men they love or loved. Ergo, it is a bit difficult for me to get into a rage when a woman hurts two people who have hurt her. I do get a bit disgusted with this generally lackadaisical attitude towards infidelity. Sometimes it makes sense to look the other way, but when one is a parent of small children, the other person having an affair is threatening to the well being of all members of the family. There is no such thing as a good divorce.

Infidelity comes under the heading of original sin, because cheaters are liars. We are not born in original sin, but are born with the ability to lie. Everyone lies about something during their sojourn on Earth. It leads us into troubles like nothing else. David Larkin lied to his wife. He got found out. He paid the price. That does not excuse his lying. Zowie Noring was also a liar. She was acquainted with Kennedy. Didn’t matter. Noring chose to have an affair with Kennedy’s husband. She has no excuses for her behavior. I can understand why Kennedy punched her face. It was a cathartic moment.

Neither Larkin or Noring apologized for their behavior. Neither showed remorse for their disloyalty as a husband and a friend.

As for Kennedy, she was not going to stand by and watch her marriage, and her family destroyed by the adulterer and his “fat moll,” as Kennedy called Noring.

If Kennedy had waited, life would have destroyed the affair of its own accord. The horrible good news is that Kennedy found out she was married to a jerk. Ditto her “friend” was a jerk, aka, a stupid girl.  History if full of such people. And stories such as these.

An excellent movie to view along this vein is Witness for the Prosecution, which is an example of a crime of passion. The story line is how a lying, cheating husband, gets away with murder by using his wife as an alibi. I won’t spoil it for you by telling you the ending, except to say a crime of passion takes place.

A humorous look at  a premeditated murder done like a crime of passion, is the movie,  Divorce, Italian Style.

For further info on the Kennedy case, follow these links: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11936087/Brisbane-mum-Christie-Lee-Kennedy-avoids-jail-time-hitting-husband-mistress-car.html

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-03/qld-christine-kennedy-car-crash-sentence-charge-court/102180530

https://inqld.com.au/tag/christie-lee-kennedy/