FULL TEXT: Wilmington, Del., June 16 – John P. Barbieri, 30, flinching at every stroke of the cat o’ tails, received 20 lashes on his bare back today in Delaware’s first public flogging in three years.
Barbieri, sentenced to the flogging after he pleaded guilty
to beating Mrs. Belle Davis, 59, last April 18, made no outcry during the 45
seconds it took to carry out the sentence.
He walked from a small shed after the flogging to the prison
infirmary where he a patient “for a day or two” while his bruises are treated.
Then he will begin a six-months jail sentence.
There was no blood drawn during the lashing by Warden Elwood
Wilson, who delegated himself to the unpleasant duty of inflicting the lashes.
Mr. Wilson, who explained to reporters that “you can cut a
man in two with this whip” said the flogging was made as “humane as possible by
starting at the shoulders, working down to the waist and then up again” to
avoid tearing at any particular.
Only 20 persons, including an official party of six, were
present as he was shackled to angle irons in a small shed and the sentence of
the court read to him.
Wilson then stepped forward and administered the lashes …
straight-armed, without bending the elbow, with a whip of nine half-inch flat
leather straps attached to half a broom handle.
Barbieri sagged several times as the lashing continued. Then
he was led to the workhouse.
Some welts and bruises were apparent as he was led away.
Those present included the Rev. F. Raymond Baker, pastor of
Second Baptist Church of Wilmington. He made no comment.
[“Wife-Beater Gets 20 Lashes In Delaware Under Old Law –
Nine-Thonged Whip Used by Warden To Flog Bare-Backed Prisoner,” The Pittsburgh
Press (Pa.), Jun. 16, 1952, p. 7]
***
►• You have been told that before the rise of feminism in the 1960s that domestic violence against women was tolerated by society as acceptable behavior and was not taken seriously by police and the courts.
►19th Century Intolerance Towards Domestic Violence
► Treatment of Domestic Violence Against Women Before 1960 – this post collects cases classified by the form of punishment or sentencing (whether judicial or through community action)
No, the claim that laws created by males were for the benefit of males is false. Yes, the "Rule of Thumb" myth has been proven to be a marxist-feminist hoax, taking an ancient English common historical notation published in the 18th century and extrapolating it into unsupported claims that 18th and 20th century United States communities, courts and legislatures (laws on the books) were in agreement with the18th century historical notation (Blackstone).
***
►• You have been told that before the rise of feminism in the 1960s that domestic violence against women was tolerated by society as acceptable behavior and was not taken seriously by police and the courts.
You have been lied to. The people who told you these
lies were paid to tell them you. In most cases you paid your own money (taxes
and tuition fees) to be lied to.
Here is one of countless pieces of evidence that demonstrate
the truth.
►•►• To see more eloquent, vivid
evidence proving the lie and giving you the truth, see:
►19th Century Intolerance Towards Domestic Violence
► Treatment of Domestic Violence Against Women Before 1960 – this post collects cases classified by the form of punishment or sentencing (whether judicial or through community action)
No, the claim that laws created by males were for the benefit of males is false. Yes, the "Rule of Thumb" myth has been proven to be a marxist-feminist hoax, taking an ancient English common historical notation published in the 18th century and extrapolating it into unsupported claims that 18th and 20th century United States communities, courts and legislatures (laws on the books) were in agreement with the18th century historical notation (Blackstone).
***
“[O]nly since the 1970s has the criminal justice system
begun to treat domestic violence as a serious crime, not as a private family
matter.”
From the entry: “Domestic Violence” on encyclopedia.com
This claim has been proven to be false.
***
No comments:
Post a Comment