GUILTY FL - Doug Benefield, 58, shot and killed by estranged wife, Manatee County, 27 Sept 2020

[Izzylizzy]

I get worse scratches and scrapes in the garden almost every week.

I found all the photos that AB and her defense claim came from DB.
Besides just seeing the dark circles around AB's eyes that show up in other photos of hers when she has no make-up on and the kind of scratches on her side could even come from one's own nails just scratching.
I've had that happen to me.

 

[Weki]

In order for a self-defense claim to be legitimate you would have to be in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. A battered woman would have to have the state of mind that her life is in danger or that she will be seriously physically injured unless she shoots and defends herself. Those questions by the prosecutor are appropriate imo. I think the state did a good job of not getting into the weeds with the defendant because there’s enough there that she may have been emotionally or psychologically in a controlling relationship. Just the fact that she was 24 and he had 30 years on her is enough for a controlling dynamic for me. And they don’t want to alienate any female jurors esp by pretending like that’s not a thing.

HOWEVER, emotional or psych abuse is not a justification for killing someone.

JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

Potentially an unpopular opinion but I think the prosecutor didn’t ask that because she was too busy trying to get across the whole “you weren’t ever physically harmed”, and “the Judge didn’t find that he physically hurt you, is that correct?” (Essentially)

Kinda disappointing, I’m not saying AB isn’t a victim, but I hope that prosecutor doesn’t treat abuse victims (who she actually believes) in the same way. There was a clear tone of abuse must be physical or else it’s not real, which is insulting to all those who’ve been just as harmed from mental and emotional abuse. JMOO though.

Each case is so different but one would think that prosecutors who are familiar with abuse victims do develop some kind of radar.
Yet:
Awhile back I had scanned a case of a young girl who was sex trafficked for years and eventually killed her abuser and was convicted of killing him and given years in prison.
I know there was a public uproar and don't know what happened.
Is it a crap shoot with what prosecutor prosecutes what case?

What I gather from this defense is that anything and everything AB did or didn't do is because she was abused therefore shouldn't be held responsible and convicted of killing her so-called abuser.

imo: There does come a point where certain self-described victims need to take some responsibility for perpetuating what they considered an abusive relationship which ends in death.
AB is one of them,

 

[Izzylizzy]

In order for a self-defense claim to be legitimate you would have to be in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. A battered woman would have to have the state of mind that her life is in danger or that she will be seriously physically injured unless she shoots and defends herself. Those questions by the prosecutor are appropriate imo. I think the state did a good job of not getting into the weeds with the defendant because there’s enough there that she may have been emotionally or psychologically in a controlling relationship. Just the fact that she was 24 and he had 30 years on her is enough for a controlling dynamic for me. And they don’t want to alienate any female jurors esp by pretending like that’s not a thing.

HOWEVER, emotional or psych abuse is not a justification for killing someone.

JMO

Meanwhile DB's cousin said AB seduced DB and then took him for all his money to fulfill her ballet company dream and the rest is history.
IMO:
In the beginning it's fair to say each one got what they wanted.

 

[Weki]

Yea this seems to be a story as old as time. Pretty young woman with a much older man. He wanted a pretty young thing to pump up his ego and she wanted financial security. As someone else said earlier today, it only makes sense that she lost interest if he didn’t hold up his end with the finances. He being a scammer type likely embellished and his mouth wrote checks his bank account couldn’t cash. At 24 with no job and material assets, a man with a nice house who talks a big game can fool you into thinking he’s rich. Once she saw the tense situation with the step-daughter and no real wealth, she lost interest.

JMO

 

[loreet]

All IMO
This case is painful for me to watch as a former victim of DV. AB really annoys me. I do not find her believable in her presentation as a timid mouse. Her behavior in court at the defense table does not seem genuine and her testimony seems rehearsed and phony to me. BUT I don’t know if I was on the jury that there has been enough hard evidence to convict her of murder either. The evidence could be interpreted both ways, either favorable to the prosecution or defense.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Yea this seems to be a story as old as time. Pretty young woman with a much older man. He wanted a pretty young thing to pump up his ego and she wanted financial security. As someone else said earlier today, it only makes sense that she lost interest if he didn’t hold up his end with the finances. He being a scammer type likely embellished and his mouth wrote checks his bank account couldn’t cash. At 24 with no job and material assets, a man with a nice house who talks a big game can fool you into thinking he’s rich. Once she saw the tense situation with the step-daughter and no real wealth, she lost interest.

JMO

The icing on the cake you just baked is the much younger woman making sure to have a child with the much older wealthy guy.
This works for many women as insurance for getting substantial child support payments and sometimes alimony for years if there's a divorce.

 

[Izzylizzy]

All IMO
This case is painful for me to watch as a former victim of DV. AB really annoys me. I do not find her believable in her presentation as a timid mouse. Her behavior in court at the defense table does not seem genuine and her testimony seems rehearsed and phony to me. BUT I don’t know if I was on the jury that there has been enough hard evidence to convict her of murder either. The evidence could be interpreted both ways, either favorable to the prosecution or defense

My hope is that one of the main things the jury discusses is if DB was coming after her to kill her how did she have enough time to run from the front door that he was blocking, get to her room and retrieve her gun from a storage bin before he entered the room?
To me this makes no sense.
One possibility I see as having happened is that he did follow her but not at a speed indicating that he was in a fit of rage.
He followed her and when he entered the bedroom saw her pointing the gun at him and he did a stupid ninja-like dance kind of indicating that he didn't take her seriously.
She also didn't have any bruises that showed someone hit her face with force or even hit her at all.
She couldn't even remember how he hit her.
If I was on her jury I would have so many questions for discussion.

 

[Weki]

The icing on the cake you just baked is the much younger woman making sure to have a child with the much older wealthy guy.
This works for many women as insurance for getting substantial child support payments and sometimes alimony for years if there's a divorce.

Yeah I think we forget that she was 24-25 around this time period. She was being impetuous and making dumb decisions. Clearly she’s not someone built for hard work. She wanted the “soft life” as the kids say. She was living some fantasy with him for a short while until real life came knocking in the form of a grieving 15 yo, a needy and phony 54 yo, and a budget.

No private planes and jobs at the White House to look forward to. Doug was her plan b and he turned out to be a phony. She was having a tantrum. She already had someone else lined up. He was just a nuisance.

JMO

 

[Dotta]

My prediction is
that the defendant will be acquitted
or the trial will end with the hung Jury.

There is reasonable doubt IMO.

The victim was a man with evident and serious anger issues
(which was proved during the trial).

Self defence seems plausible.

Well, time will tell.

But it is My Opinion.

 

[Wishbone]

The icing on the cake you just baked is the much younger woman making sure to have a child with the much older wealthy guy.
This works for many women as insurance for getting substantial child support payments and sometimes alimony for years if there's a divorce.

The timeline for these two is unclear to me, but I'm guessing they only lived together for about a year,give or take. When she moved to her mother's it doesn't seem like they lived together again, but I could be wrong. It seems they did things together as a family off and on and then she got a boyfriend and he filed for divorce but they ended up seeing each other once again. I would guess DB supported her and the child until she killed him. Then the social security kicks in and also possibly his naval retirement. Her wanting a baby right away insured she would receive at a minimum child support and possibly spousal support. The reason for the rush to have a baby seems pretty cut and dry to me. DB was taken for a ride and was the willing obsessed financially secure older man with a young wife and he became the victim rather than AB.JMOO

 

[Sustained]

The timeline for these two is unclear to me, but I'm guessing they only lived together for about a year,give or take. When she moved to her mother's it doesn't seem like they lived together again, but I could be wrong. It seems they did things together as a family off and on and then she got a boyfriend and he filed for divorce but they ended up seeing each other once again. I would guess DB supported her and the child until she killed him. Then the social security kicks in and also possibly his naval retirement. Her wanting a baby right away insured she would receive at a minimum child support and possibly spousal support. The reason for the rush to have a baby seems pretty cut and dry to me. DB was taken for a ride and was the willing obsessed financially secure older man with a young wife and he became the victim rather than AB.JMOO

If she gets acquitted, don't be surprised if she hunts down another older man with cash. Lot of that going around these days.

 

[Dotta]

If she gets acquitted, don't be surprised if she hunts down another older man with cash. Lot of that going around these days.

Hmmm...

If she was a hunter
(cough, cough)
then...
he seemed to be a very willing prey.

IMO

PS
"Fatal Attraction"
is more appropriate term than "Black Swan".
I say it as a fan of ballet and Piotr Czajkowski (Tchaikovsky/Swan Lake)

JMO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

I missed the ex-wife abuse.
I did hear that AB had read some texts.
Did she snoop like in DB's saved texts and find them?
I'm so confused.

Yes, me too izzylizzy…… I was wondering the same. And specifically relating to those text messages (between the now slain husband and his now deceased ex wife) introduced into evidence. (Thank you weki for having explained that yesterday too! Still so convoluted and questionable IMO.)

But the key was how did AB find those? Snooping into DB phone and past history? Seems the prosecution might have missed an opportunity there to further question the defendant’s activity. And also the timeline after DB was shot and 911 called and AB mother quick entry into the picture IIRC - needs to be further impugned IMO. MOO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Highly recommended.
I like it that Peter addresses points in AB's testimony and the different ways jurors can interpret it.

My favorites is when a fan of his commented why would she go back after she accused DB of abusing their daughter.
Peter said that is exactly what jurors will be asking.

IMO: That makes AB an enabler of a sexual predator leaving her daughter as the victim.
That holds true whether DB did abuse their daughter or not.

Yes^^….. on the points in that last grouping of the post - AB an enabler?

Or…… alternatively, someone is not telling the truth? And if the jury arrives at that conclusion, are they not able to discount all of that individual’s testimony? IANAL but thought maybe there might even eventually be an instruction to jurors on that point? MOO

 

[arielilane]

DV is both physical and emotional abuse.

Imo, if the defendant appears to be a DV victim, it is not good for the state.

Defendant’s testimony was painful to watch. Shame on the state for the aggressiveness. Not a good look for the state and it may backfire. If there’s anyone on the jury that can relate to DV then the state lost their case due to lack of evidence. Curious why the state brought this to trial when the evidence not strong. They had nothing so attacked the defendant?

An acquittal, moo.

There is no reason to kill someone, ever. I do not advocate or promote violence. The defendant was wrong to shoot DB and it appeared to be overkill.

DV is horrible for victims and it’s a difficult situation to get yourself out of - it can sometimes take years to remove yourself from dysfunctional home life. One can’t imagine unless it's experienced first hand. jmo

All only an opinion, as always.

 

[arielilane]

Day 4 of Trial:

• Ashley Benefield took the stand on Day 4 to share her side of the story.
• She claims she shot Doug Benefield because she feared for her life.

Day 3 of Trial:​

• Prosecutors rested their case against Ashley Benefield for the murder of her husband, Douglas Benefield.

Former ballerina accused of murdering her husband testifies in court

A Manatee County woman who was once a ballerina is now on trial for the September 2020 murder of her husband.

www.abcactionnews.com

Posted at 10:14 AM, Jul 25, 2024 and last updated 9:05 PM, Jul 26, 2024

 

[Wishbone]

AB just could have left the house after the first shoulder bump..or the second..or the box into waist.

imo
A lot from the trial about AB sounds like she enjoyed antagonizing him.

I don't believe any of that even happened. Just more of her lies to try to give a reason for being afraid and killing him.JMOO

 

[bobbymkii]

I couldn't believe my eyes when O'Donnell asked AB to step down from the witness box and physically demonstrate how DB was standing when she was in the middle of a massive (real or fake) meltdown. That was such a risky move directly in front of a jury potentially sympathetic to the defendant.

That would have been much more appropriate if the background to the case was a road range incident or a bar fight between strangers that got out of hand. But in a case involving two people involved in an intimate relationship? It was only ever going to be a farcical spectacle IMO.

I would be keen to know what others think about this. Also, I think I might be the first person in this thread to call either of the State's attorneys by their names? And I had to google it!

JMO

 

[scapa]

In order for a self-defense claim to be legitimate you would have to be in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. A battered woman would have to have the state of mind that her life is in danger or that she will be seriously physically injured unless she shoots and defends herself. Those questions by the prosecutor are appropriate imo. I think the state did a good job of not getting into the weeds with the defendant because there’s enough there that she may have been emotionally or psychologically in a controlling relationship. Just the fact that she was 24 and he had 30 years on her is enough for a controlling dynamic for me. And they don’t want to alienate any female jurors esp by pretending like that’s not a thing.

HOWEVER, emotional or psych abuse is not a justification for killing someone.

JMO

Thanks for this detailed explanation.

I wonder whether there's also an expectation to make a case for significant duration of abusive treatment in an affirmative defense of coercive control / pysch / other abuse (though note that I don't think AB is making such a case). Enduring years and years of such treatment >>> to breaking point might make more sense to a jury than what seemed to be an on/off relationship where parties barely cohabited for a year or so.

I also wonder about the strategy of AB's team to make causal connections between maltreatment and outright abuse of animals and a threat to life for AB. It seems clear that DB had real anger issues, abused family pets and ought to have been brought to justice for that alone. He may also have harassed and even stalked AB. This is certainly dangerous and perhaps criminal behaviour. Does it amount to a preponderance of evidence for a battered woman / DV defense? All kinds of precedents for Yea and Nay here, but I'm thinking specifically of the Suzanne Morphew trial in which evidence of long-term coercive control and instances of physical abuse committed (and admitted to) by her accused husband were ruled out by the judge. Again, not taking a position here but wondering how the jury might look at the allegations within the timeframe of the AB/ DB relationship.

I'm gliding over the alleged events of the day of the shooting because, honestly, I find them difficult to organize into any coherent sequence -- especially with oddball details like DB's alleged assaults via moving boxes, Enter the Dragon fighting posture, etc. This sounds as fanciful to me as the remote poisoning scenarios, albeit a bit more inventive than the expected (and unproven) allegations of various assaults on the 11-month old.

This was clearly a toxic, risky and doomed relationship between two people who should never have been together (or, arguably, with anyone at all). Was it a justified shooting, and should AB get off?

No, and no, IMO -- but a jury might not agree.