I can’t be the only one not buying Justin’s BS story. He is the classic DV perp - deny, blame, twist the narrative, turn himself into the victim. But maybe his narrative is smart - mother-blaming WORKS. Kallista’s choices have not prioritised her child’s welfare, we can all see that, but because she is a mother she will be judged more harshly than the actual murderer of her child. She will be unsympathetic to a jury (and there are more men than women on this jury). And if you don’t think this narrative can turn a jury, I refer you to the story of Ebony, a little child who starved to death in the care of her parents. The father, a known perpetrator of domestic violence, found guilty of manslaughter. The mother, his life long victim, guilty of murder. For the same crime. The argument? The mother was more responsible for Ebony’s care. No one was talking about coercive control then, sadly. This is a very different crime but it highlights the often higher standard that mothers are judged against.
Starve death: mother jailed for life