Yesterday Anthony Williams, a 70 yr old from Wales, received five years for manslaughter for killing his wife Ruth five days into the first lockdown.

5 YEARS FOR A LIFE.

I have been waiting for sentencing remarks as these explain how the judge came to his decision.

THREAD

As of this morning these remarks have not been published which, in a case of this significance, is astonishing as there will be many who want to understand how the judge came to the sentence of 5 years for a crime that was originally charged as murder.

And, as a chilling aside, there will be many abusers who will look to that sentence to see how they could get away with murdering their wife and only serving a nominal sentence.

Is this macabre?
Only if you don’t understand how too many abusers think.

How too many will fantasise about, literally, getting away with murder.
#coercivecontrol
#domestichomicide

The published media articles raise many red flags and many MANY questions, none of which explain how a sentence of FIVE YEARS could be given to a man who claimed ‘diminished responsibility’ for strangling 67 yr old Ruth Williams, his wife of nearly 50 yrs, on March 28 last year.

Psychologist Dr Alison Witts told the trial Williams's anxiety and depressive illness were 'heightened' by tough coronavirus measures imposed days earlier and substantially impaired his ability to exercise self-control.

Dr Witts said Williams's job had been 'one of his main coping mechanisms' for his 'neurotic disposition', but when he retired he 'lost all structure and sense of purpose'.

BUT another psychologist, Dr Damian Gamble, said there was NO documented history of suffering a depressive illness and 'no psychiatric defences' available to him, saying he believed Williams 'knew what he was doing at the time'.

So why was one expert opinion disregarded?

Judge Thomas said: "The overwhelming greatest tragedy here is a lady of 67 who had so much to live for, had her life ended by an act of great violence at the hands, literally, of a man she loved for very nearly 50 years."

How did the judge come to this conclusion?

During the trial, the couple's daughter Emma Williams described her father as a “gentle giant” who had previously not so much as raised his voice to her mum.

This is a huge red flag in light of a murder charge. More on this later.

HE BARELY LEFT Ruth’s side and the pair were described as a “typical couple in their late 60s” before the fatal attack.

This raises so many red flags

What does that mean? The man is the boss?

The trial had heard that Williams had been struggling to sleep and was worried about the lockdown, which had been imposed days earlier, and also feared Covid-19.

This could indicate he was losing control

The daughter said her father had shown signs of strange behaviour from January 2020, including claiming he was going to lose the couple's home and becoming "obsessed" with turning off lights and heating to save money.

did this raise concerns of a controlling nature?

The couple had savings of around £148,000, and £18,000 in their current account in the days before lockdown was announced.

Ms Williams said her father was watching news reports on the global pandemic "all the time" and believed "no-one's ever leaving the house again".

In his police interview, Williams said he worried the couple would run out of cash because banks were shut, about being unable to buy new shoes and hire someone to fix tiles on his roof if they came loose.

This could also be a sign of a
controlling nature losing control

Williams agreed with detectives that he was responsible for the killing of his wife of 46 years, telling them he "snapped" while in bed.

HE SNAPPED WHILE IN BED

This is a HUGE red flag. Did he want sex? Did she say no? Is there more than he has admitted?

The attack began in the bedroom.

IT BEGAN IN THE BEDROOM

This is the biggest red flag.
Was this explored by the prosecution?

Attacks in the bedroom should ALWAYS be explored for sexual coercion etc. and humiliated fury.

He said he chased his wife downstairs and again grabbed her by her throat as she tried to unlock the front door to escape, saying he found himself 'throttling her to death'.
Mrs Williams was found slumped in the couple's porch with a pair of keys in her hand.

Ruth was taken to hospital where she was pronounced dead, having suffered haemorrhaging in her eyes, face and mouth which were consistent with strangulation, as well as five neck fractures.

The couple's daughter told the court her parents spent '90% of their time together', were 'not argumentative people', and she had never heard either of them even 'raise their voice' to each other.

They spent 90% of their time together post retirement. No social life?

Ms Williams said: 'My dad's a gentle giant. He wouldn't hurt a fly.'

He obviously did. He killed her mother.

Why, in the face of obvious violence, is it consistently being explained away as something else?

How much weight was given to daughter’s testimony?
Was she asked about domestic abuse?
Did she understand #coercivecontrol ?
Did she have a good relationship with her parents?
What was her relationship like with both her parents?

Was any of this explored by the prosecution?

It’s not that unusual for children growing up with abuse or children who suspect domestic abuse in their families to stay quiet. There is a huge shame and stigma attached. Still.

It is also not unusual for a child to not want to lose the remaining parent when they have recently lost one, even when that parent was lost at the hands of the other. Family loyalties are complex and I’m not saying this is the case here, but was it explored by prosecution?

Main Source:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/cwmbran-ruth-anthony-williams-murder-19863813

But also various media reports online.

R.I.P. Ruth Williams

Additional source: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/murder-cwmbran-anthony-williams-ruth-19802219