Socialite Betty Broderick denied parole in murders

[kskiska]

CHINO, Calif. -- One-time San Diego socialite Betty Broderick on Thursday was denied parole for fatally shooting her ex-husband and his new wife more than 20 years ago, with a two-person panel saying she remains angry and unrepentant over her crime.

The decision came after a dramatic five-hour hearing in which Broderick's own four children were divided on whether she should win her freedom. Two believed she should remain behind bars.

Board of Prison Terms Commissioner Robert Doyle, who delivered the decision to Broderick, told her he had never seen an inmate who had made so little progress in acknowledging what she had done.

"Your heart is still bitter, and you are still angry," he said. "You show no significant progress in evolving. You are still back 20 years ago in that same mode. You've got to move on."

Broderick, 62, was convicted in 1991 of second-degree murder and sentenced to 32 years to life in prison for the slayings. Her story became the subject of a book and two TV movies. She has maintained she was driven to kill by a bitter divorce and custody battle.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012101586.html

[midnight]

1. "We just wonder why it took her so long." This from the first jury who could not convict her.

[madmax]

2. Put him through school so he didn't have to work

and study. He dumps her for a younger babe. I agree - what took her so long.

:popcorn:

[tonysam]

26. Yeah, ol' Dan deserved to get killed.

Some fucking feminist heroine, that killer Betty.

[CreekDog]

37. That's why she shot the innocent woman?

Oh yeah, justified. :eyes:

[tonysam]

40. Well, to Betty's supporters, the "bimbo" was even worse than Dan,

for she is the one who "stole" Betty's golden goose.

[sufrommich]

56. What other personal let downs do you consider

grounds for murder?

[Hepburn]

8. My thoughts exactly....

...Dan Broderick was an abusive POS.

JMHO

[edbermac]

11. He was? According to who? His killer?

And what did the victim's wife have to do with anything?

Gee, I wonder what took OJ and Robert Blake so long. :sarcasm:

[dustbunnie]

12. Murder is totally okay when it's a husband being offed by his ex-wife.

Hadn't you heard? But maybe we should extend the privileges to others who been done wrong too. Why should women get the only privileges. I'm thinking these people deserve to be blown away as well:

1. Anyone who renegs on a business partnership. You want to leave, the partner gets to blast you away. It hurts when people dissolve a business relationship and sometimes it costs money.
2. Any woman who dares to sue for divorce and takes the kids and the house. It hurts when women do that too.
3. The children of parents who leave, particularly if they remarry and share the wealth with the new family. It hurts when mommy or daddy leave.
4. Anyone who cuts a child out of their will. It hurts when the parents don't leave you all their money.
5. Anyone who is unfaithful. It hurts and it's written into every Abrahamic religion anyhoo.

Hell, why not just make murder legal. There are plenty of good reasons to kill someone.

[tonysam]

28. It's a "feminist" issue for a woman to knock off her shitty ex-husband

and his trophy wife, the latter for whom Betty had some endearing names.

The apologists for Betty Broderick make me sick.

[seabeyond]

35. apologist for murder disgusts me too. where did feminism come into the equation? nt

[tonysam]

39. I remember how this case was being used as a prime example

of how women who devote their entire lives to helping a husband succeed only to be dumped, and yes, Broderick was seen in many demented corners as a "heroine" and sympathetic for her cold-blooded acts.

No, NOW and prominent feminists didn't regard her as a heroine, but many, many women did, and yes, feminism did crop up in the arguments.

[boston bean]

43. It was not a defense of feminism, her defense was that of a battered woman.

I am not saying I agree with what she did, nor am I defending her.

But let's atleast try to remember the facts correctly, shall we? Before we go making broad brush statements defaming feminism.

[tonysam]

119. She wasn't battered. The idiot bore a grudge for something

like FIVE YEARS, and couldn't or wouldn't move on.

Twist my words, naturally. I never said she was a feminist. She was a cause celebre for many women who thought Dan deserved what he got.

[seabeyond]

49. oh bullshit. you yank out feminism as the bad in this scenerio and has nothing to do with it.

call it what it is. go after the people excusing murder. feminisim has nothing to do with it.

all three behaved stupidly. all three played games. action creates reaction.... and the end result was two dead and one in prison for life.

and the kids suffered then and probably continue to suffer cause a group of adults couldnt act like adults.

[tonysam]

114. You're twisting my words, naturally.

She WAS made out to be a heroine for those women who were dumped, who gave "the best years of their lives" for these guys, only to be left holding the bag. A pseudo-feminist heroine, not that she WAS in ANY way a role model for women.

Yes, there was a LOT of analysis out there about Betty and her motives, including from feminists.

I've been around a long time, and I KNOW a lot about this case.

[sufrommich]

57. No, no it's not a "feminist issue". I'm a feminist and

think Betty Broderick is a narcissistic, spoiled ,childish murderer.

[tonysam]

123. No, it isn't, but it was made into one

with the abuse excuse horseshit.

Betty was the abusive one in that relationship and ultimately committed the ultimate abusive act.

[Matariki]

38. great post. n/t

[Hepburn]

13. To friends of mine who practiced law in SB County.

Their personal knowledge of him was that he was an absive prick who screwed around on his wife and treated women like shit.

The general opinion of him after his murder when I attended a bar class in SD was exactly what the jury said: What took her so long.

[dustbunnie]

14. She stayed with him throughout, even though she was familiar with his bullshit.

She liked the money and the prestige as much as he did and didn't want her lifestyle taken away. This is who you pity? She was as narcissistic and horrible as he was. You only have to watch the court proceedings to know there was something seriously wrong with this woman; that her incredible rage and biliousness had little to do with him as a person and losing the love of her life, and everything to do with her "life" being upset and the money given to another.

[msanthrope]

16. Anybody ever read up on the obscene phone messages she left for her children to hear?

Her 'ex' had custody of the 4 kids.

She would leave scores and scores of obcene phone messages on the house phone, terrorizing her kids...and she refused to stop.

Read some actual quotes/testimony..it's chilling...

http://cmm.lefora.com/2009/02/15/dan-and-linda-kolkena-broderick-betty-broderick-an/

[dustbunnie]

18. Yes, she was a sick lady. Grasping, selfish and sociopathic.

All these people on this thread defending murder because this woman worked while her husband studied. How much did she bring in to qualify taking a life?

The return on her investment was $16,000.00 a month in the divorce settlement. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

[tonysam]

31. Yep. I've read all about this case. It's a fascinating one.

More interesting are the people who try and defend the actions of Betty. It's no more defensible than some guy killing his wife for the insurance money.

[shrike]

118. And that Dan let one phone call go on and on so he could tape it

and was listening, silently, the other end, while the child wept and pleaded for her to stop.

In the end, the Brodericks "deserved each other," as biographer Della Trumbo said.

[tonysam]

29. She liked it as much as Linda Kolkena, who looked a lot like Betty

when Betty was younger.

Betty thought she was entitled to the perks of Dan's career as an ambulance chaser--one of the best in the entire country, by the way--and she was pissed off when somebody else took her "entitlement" away.

Never mind her insane actions robbed her of the golden goose--permanently.

[dustbunnie]

50. Yes, she's the perfect example of the "scorpion and the frog."

I agree she deserves to rot in jail for the rest of her life and it amazes me that people defend murderers like this. She was far from a poor victim and as you say, she enjoyed the proceeds from her husband's chosen career when his heartlessness suited her.

And as you said, many people hyped her as a feminist heroine when she was anything but. Quite the opposite.

Mostly the reason I respond to these threads because it amazes me that people defend these so-called passion murders when women do it. There seem to be far more men guilty of this crime and as long as women defend it when we do it, then we can't complain when such crimes continue to be committed against us. It astounds me that women don't see the connection.

[tonysam]

32. Yeah, poor Betty. She could have just gone on with her life.

She was a spoiled brat.

[Arkansas Granny]

20. Does that mean that murder is an acceptable solution to an abusive POS?

What about the other woman that she also killed? Justifiable?

[tonysam]

33. Linda took away Betty's meal ticket. She also deserved it

in the eyes of Betty's supporters and maybe more so because she went after a married man, a man who was somebody else's property. Moreover, she was a "bimbo" according to her killer who didn't have any real job skills at the time she worked for her husband.

[Hepburn]

42. Do you know ANYTHING about this case?

Obviously not ~~ Linda Kolena Broderick ~~ "the other woman" was Dan's 2nd wife who helped him terrorize Betty.

When you get a clue as to the facts...come back and we will discuss then. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed mind.

[dugaresa]

46. i have a question for you since you are more familiar with this case

before things started going south in the mariage, did Betty or he even try to reconcile? Was there marriage counseling?

[Arkansas Granny]

47. I'm not familiar with this case other than what I've read, so I'm not sure what "facts" you

refer to that I need to get a clue about. She did not act in self defense. She broke into the house and shot them while they slept. She has admitted it.

I'm just amazed that people can find justification for murder here. Does this mean that it would have been OK for me to just shoot my husband instead of divorcing him? He was, after all, verbally abusive and really hurt my feelings. And his 2nd wife, should I have just shot her also for saying mean things to my children?

You might argue that she was mentally unstable or even deranged when she killed her ex-husband and his wife, but she still murdered two people and that is a crime that has consequences.

[sufrommich]

58. She did not terrorize Betty Broderick. God, I can't

believe there is anybody willing to defend this psychotic murderer because her jerk of a husband left her for another women. Maybe we should legalize murdering exes if they were jerks and adulterers,huh?

[tonysam]

117. More apologists for a murderer.

Read the post at the very bottom, from the CNN link. Betty entered the house, violating a restraining order, and shot both of them dead while they were sleeping. She had bought the gun a month earlier, and practiced shooting it.

Yeah, what a victim Betty was.

[tonysam]

27. He was a piece of shit, but Betty was no saint, either.

She hounded Dan and his new bride forever.

[AndyA]

3. Murder is never an acceptable action, but this woman was very much abused by her former husband.

He was a powerful attorney, and used every trick in the book to harm this woman. And the legal circle he was a part of protected his interests, while allowing him to take advantage of his ex-wife.

She seemed to have committed her life to her husband, and he threw it all away as if it meant nothing to him, and she was never able to get past that. Sad. There were no winners in this, especially the kids who've had to grow up without parents.

[calico1]

93. She reminds me of a lot of women I have known

in my life. Give up their own life and identities and totally dedicate themselves to their husband. When the husband leaves they have no idea what to do because they have never planned for or thought of or are prepared for that possibility.

My mom always used to tell me to always have a "plan B" just in case. Too many women don't. I think Betty Broderick is an extreme case of what can happen when they just can't figure out how to move on,.

[Canuckistanian]

4. She must be pretty bad if her own children think she should stay in jail

And when she's released, she should probably go into a mental institution.

[dustbunnie]

6. Agreed. Even in the American Justice episode devoted to her, she comes off as wackadoodle.

Totally eaten up by bitterness and bile. And amazingly not able to understand that murder laws apply to her too, no matter how badly the husband humiliated her. People say he had it coming, but from the way she behaved and the things she said afterward, there was obviously a side to her that only a few saw up close and personal. I would have run away from her too.

[HelenWheels]

10. Money and the kids

Of course the kids would back daddy. He held the purse strings.

[Canuckistanian]

54. Well, not for long. n/t

[tabasco]

186. And mommy was a psycho.

Might have had something to do with it.

[seabeyond]

5. all three of the adults were fucked up, playing games. this is the result. nt

[devilgrrl]

53. You got it!

I so don't care about any of them...

[dugaresa]

7. over time I have changed my mind about Betty, when I was younger I thought she was nuts

and justly deserved prison.

Now as an older married woman, I think that the poor woman should never have been put in prison, but in a mental home for a few years to help her get better.

Why? Because that poor woman worked hard to help create Dan Broderick and gave him a great family and he rewarded her by dumping her for a trophy. If anyone was a narcissist it was Dan. Betty was just the devoted servant/wife who got a royal screwing.

I would say the same if a man had done the same for his wife.

Murder is wrong, and she served time but what Dan did to her was wrong and sometimes there are crimes that people commit that carry no punishment and the unfairness of those situations can send people over the edge. Dan helped create his situation and he drowned in his own blood. Perhaps as he was dying he may have had a fleeting thought about, what he helped create.

[msanthrope]

15. Wow. Reading your post, Linda Kolkena doesn't even rate personhood.....

She's a mere 'trophy.'

Wow.

[dugaresa]

17. Linda was a trophy wife

i don't have a lot of respect for people who chase after married people. Don't care the circumstances, if the married person decides to end the marriage first then go right ahead, but I find cheaters vile.

No one deserves to be murdered but some folks just set the stage for disaster.

You think Linda didn't see the psychological damage being done to Betty? Would you keep chasing after a man who was married and had four kids with a wife who had supported him through medical and law school? Would you keep working with him and continuing a relationship when you saw that it was destroying his wife? What kind of woman does that?

Anyone with common sense would have seen that situation was going to get out of control. Dan Broderick played a game with his wife and Linda Kolkena and he probably laughed at it. All three of them helped create that maelstrom but when I read about that marriage I get the feeling that Betty gave her heart and soul to it. Dan used her and Betty thought she was doing it for both of them but when things got good he dumped her for a much younger woman and that is really cruel. To top it off, he could have tried to make things work with his wife but it seems like he just used Betty like a dishrag.

I think his treatment of her is what made Betty crazy.

[dustbunnie]

19. We really need to start executing people who hurt the feelings of others.

It's mean and cruel to hurt others. Mean people deserve to be killed.

[dugaresa]

21. no, but being mean has consequences

[dustbunnie]

22. Yes, in this case it should have been punitive. As in the $16,000 a month --

the husband was ordered to pay. The house she was given, etc. That's how it normally works when people are mean, hurtful and unfaithful.

Tell me, are you okay with husbands killing wives who leave them? What about bosses who fire their employees? Do they get death in your world too? Sounds like Betty Broderick was an evil, horrible monster way before the husband left her. Maybe he should have killed her first, for being a "bitch." According to you, these personality defects are deserving of extreme consequences.

[dugaresa]

30. you make it sound like money makes the hurt go away

crazy as it sounds, Betty loved Dan. Loved him a lot. Loved him so much that it made her crazy.

I don't think murder is right but I have a different perspective on this case now that I am older.

Sadly there is no logic in the human comedy most of the time. We all know murder is wrong but the old adage, "you reap what you sow" is true. In the majority of cases the consequences of mean spiritedness are not severe but while I don't condone murder or anything along those lines, some circumstances might make me understand why someone took the path they did.

[dustbunnie]

36. This story has nothing whatsoever to do with love.

Living your life through someone else is not "love." It's pathetic in many ways. Betty Broderick was fine with her husband's narcissism and heartlessness when it suited her and brought in the money, but not so much when she was deprived of her "position" in society. I'm always amazed at people who pity others who cause so much devastation because they've lost their societal "position."

Money doesn't make hurt go away, but people are hurt every single day of their lives. Murder is no solution and thankfully we don't ask older people who only see their own relationships and vulnerabilities to make the laws that govern everyone else.

[Matariki]

41. And you make it sound like murder makes the hurt go away.

And there's no way for you to know what her actual feelings were.

Love, real love, doesn't murder.

[dugaresa]

44. actually i don't

i just think she was obsessively in love with her husband and very protective of her family the entire situation got worse because of both her and Dan's reactions. Apparently at the first trial her attorney had proof that Dan was looking for a hit man to off Betty which is part of the reason it resulted in a hung jury.

it is a fascinating case in "coulda shoulda woulda".

in fact there was an divorce attorney that worked for Betty early on that basically said he felt this case would end in murder. i just wonder what if anything could have prevented it because you would hope that something "good" in terms of handling cases like this would result.

i also want to say that by "understanding" why she did what she did, does not mean i condone it. she was an attractive woman who was driven and intelligent she could have thrived on her own. Personally I am a big fan of "the best revenge is living well"

[TorchTheWitch]

139. she got a boyfriend 2 weeks after he finally left her

who remained her boyfriend possibly even to this day - Bradley T. Wright, 36 yr. old. Betty got her own boytoy TWO WEEKS after Dan left her who possibly still remains her boyfriend and was sleeping in Betty's bed when she got up and went to Dan and Linda's house to kill them.

Betty was asked why Brad often slept over. Betty replied "It was like having a dog, but he was house trained."
http://cmm.lefora.com/2009/02/15/dan-and-linda-kolkena-broderick-betty-broderick-an/


She both physically and mentally abused her children all through her marriage with Dan.

Kim Broderick: "Lee and I often confronted mom about the relationship . Once, after Lee walked in on them in the shower, I asked mom how she could be mad that Dad had Linda when she had Brad. Mom said "How can you equate the two? Brad doesn't support me!" "I'm not the kind of person to be with someone and not be married. Brad is six years my junior. I never brought Brad anywhere as my date because he was too young. I didn't want to be the other half of the midlife joke."

[a la izquierda]

165. oh bloody hell. my dad messed around on my mom...

nearly their entire marriage of 10 years. my mother was so hurt that, 20+ years later, my parents *still* can't be in the same room without wanting to kill each other. my dad never hit my mom, but god in heaven, he didn't hide his cheating. the whole flippin' town knew-and my mother was ridiculed. that is mental abuse, don't you know?

my mom didn't get squat for money from him, but she sure as hell didn't kill him either.

the mental abuse my sisters and i experienced as a result of such a hateful divorce truly messed us up. but we didn't kill anybody either.

[tonysam]

172. That's the bottom line. People need to deal with betrayal and try to get past it.

Murder, however, is NEVER the solution.

[a la izquierda]

183. my dad remarried and mom came out of the closet...

why they still hate each other is beyond my comprehension. but they'd never physically hurt one another (and never did during their marriage).

[AngryAmish]

185. OJ loved Nicole so much it made him crazy

puke

You sicken me.

[tonysam]

25. So Dan and Linda deserved what they got.

God is that sick.

[slackmaster]

125. There are lawful ways of pursuing retribution for those kinds of consequences

Murder isn't one of them.

[saracat]

135. Murder is not one of them, but Dan blocked access to her funds so

she had no avenue of redress. Some folks have no idea how the legal system can be stacked against them, particularly when one is going up against mega bucks. A family member was involved in a high profile divorce, where the husband lied on the stand, submitted bounced checks as proof of payment, and the public defender assigned to represent the wife renegotiated the payments so she got no alimony without consulting her client.She informed her that she wasn't really representing her, she represented the state of California.The judge did find the husband guilty of 14 counts of contempt .But as he left the court I asked him if he intended to pay anything, and he laughed and said "hell , no!". He had a fancy lawyer, the wife had nothing but three children left to raise and she never did get anything, though she had been awarded half in the original divorce decree.He made it impossible to collect.

It doesn't matter if the spouse is male or female, sometimes there isn't any redress and the court if often with the spouse that has the money, and if they don't want to pay it, often, they don't.Just saying, it isn't that easy.

[cali]

199. what a vacuous stupid utterance.

fuck betty brodrick and any other piece of shit who murders in cold blood. rot in prison, betty.

[tonysam]

24. So fucking what? Betty had no right to kill them.

Let's quit trying to make this woman into some kind of feminist heroine. People have been executed for far less than what she did.

[dugaresa]

34. no one has a "right" to kill anyone

however you would think that given the fact that Betty drove a car through his front door that her "smart" lawyer ex-husband would think that she was capable of killing him.

You would also think that the woman he was running around with and later married would have run for the hills because the whole situation was a disaster.

I really don't think this was about the money, it was about Betty loving her husband so much that it made her crazy. This isn't some "feminist" issue either. It is about loving someone so much that you literally give up yourself. Betty apparently couldn't picture her life without Dan in it.

If she had been "normal" she would have gotten herself the best divorce attorney in CA, gotten twice as much in support and gotten a young gigolo to flaunt about. That woman literally loved her husband to death and she killed the woman who she felt in her clouded state of mind ruined her life too.

[dustbunnie]

48. She was no Anna Karenina, and this is no tragic comedy.

I love a good salacious beach read as much as the next person, and understand the appeal of Days of Our Lives, but I think you're romanticizing a woman who is nothing more than a run of the mill, scheming, narcissistic sociopath. Dozens of these women come to my gym every day. I listen to the stories of their empty, money-grubbing lives and they look upon their husbands as commodities and objects as much as their husbands look upon them in the same way. Most of them are divorced and they all sound like Betty Boop there. Filled with bile and rage, and it has nothing to do with love. It's all about obsession... owning their husbands and their wealth.

From the info, it sounds like her husband wanted to get away from her years before, but seemed to fear her craziness. So what are people to do. Live with obsessive crackpots so they don't get murdered?

[slackmaster]

127. He should have killed her down when she did that

It would have been justifiable.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199

[cali]

108. Linda was a person. She was the victim of a disgusting murderer

And yeah, Betty is sick. She's been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder- something that doesn't just appear in adulthood.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

88. +1

[slackmaster]

121. Nothing Dan did to her qualifies as justification for use of deadly force in California

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199

[HelenWheels]

9. They had it coming

to quote the song from "Chicago".

[tonysam]

23. Good riddance. She can rot there.

If her husband was a bastard for dumping her for a younger woman, that didn't give her the right to kill both of them in their bedroom.

[Dreamer Tatum]

45. So some people here have a lot in common with Roeder supporters

Roeder supporters: "Tiller needed killin'."

Some people in this thread: "Broderick had it comin'."

Interesting.

[devilgrrl]

51. This is one of the few criminal cases were I have no sympathy for anyone involved.

Betty Broderick, her ex, his trophy wife or their kids.

Sorry for the cold-heartedness but all parties strike me as a bunch of shallow assholes.

[MoonRiver]

55. I have sympathy for the kids!

What did they do to deserve this?

[devilgrrl]

61. Had assholes for parents.

:popcorn:

[MoonRiver]

124. O.K. I'll bite

Is that their fault????????

[MoonRiver]

130. Is that their fault?

[devilgrrl]

138. Of course it isn't

but that doesn't mean that I have to feel bad for them. If anything they're better off without their toxic parents around.

[kiva]

52. She committed the ultimate selfish act.

Kids, want your dad around? Too bad, he made mom angry so you don't get to have a father. New wife's friends and family love her and want to see her? Sorry, she did mean things to Betty so she had to die.

This murder wasn't about survival or about protecting anyone - it was about a woman who chose murder. For those who have some sympathy for her, do you also sympathize with men who kill women who dare to leave them? After all, those men are also hurt and humiliated.

[sufrommich]

59. Crazy, isn't it? nt

[tonysam]

67. I was reading a comment from one blogger about this case,

and the person was right that it is an INSULT to ALL women who have been abused, but who decided to take their children and move on with their lives.

Betty Broderick never did it, couldn't get over the fact that the gravy train had ended for her, not realizing she was going to be very well off before she decided to throw it all away.

[saracat]

136. I find the term gravy train used to describe family assets that a spouse made possible

insulting. Funny how that term isn't used to describe Dan's use of family funds.His gravy train was made possible by the efforts of his wife.

[saracat]

60. Dan Broderick made Betty Broderick what she was. he drove her off the cliff of her sanity

destroyed her dignity and humanity and thenn he paid the ultimate price for it. His second wife was a willing participant in the destruction of Betty's stability. She knew the risk she was taking in pursuing a married man and didn't care.
Betty worked her entire life to create the life that Dan took away from her. She not only raised the children, cleaned the house made the meals, but worked continuously to put Dan through school for not one but 3 degrees! He was both a lawyer and an MD. She was never allowed to quit working. His gaol had to be met and when it was, he dumped her, locked her out of the house and took the children. And then he made fun of her, brought in the new chickie and said Betty was "old and fat" he laughed at her for wasting her youth and labor on him and replaced her with a younger blonde look alike. He denied her access to funds to even defend herself, and made it clear that all the judges were in his pocket.Yes, she snapped. I would have too! He made it very clear that he considered nothing hers" and he and he only would make all decisions as to what she might be given and it was only at his dicretion. And that IS a feminist issue.

This jackass of a prision commissioner says"you are still bitter. You are still angry"? No kidding. He reminds me of the idiots that are attempting to paint Elizabeth Edwards as a B**+ch for getting angry and being less than civil about Hunter!
What he and some others don't seem to get is Dan destroyed Betty and took her life away just as much as she ended his and the mistresses.

Betty was not right to kill them.No one, even Dan and Linda ,deserved to die.But in civilized countries such as France, they have such a thing as a crime of passion, and I would think this qualies.

[sufrommich]

62. Why do you suppose 2 of her kids think she should

stay in jail? Let me tell you something,plenty of people have been through messy, gut wrenching divorces,including myself,only a psychopath thinks killing the person who "done her wrong" is a solution to their problem. Most of us get over it and move on. Judging from the judge's comments Betty's too narcissistic to come to terms with that.

[saracat]

66. Because her children were taken away from her and influenced by money

and other considerations. And BTW, I don't think she should be let out into society either. She is not stable. This was no ordinary divorce and there is no where that I justify murder.

[tonysam]

68. They were his kids, too, and her selfish acts robbed the kids of

both parents.

[saracat]

75. His selfish acts contributed to robbing those kids of their parents.

His wife had a mental problem and he placed himself and everyone else in harms way to get his jollies.Sorry, he doesn't get off with no blame here. It doesn't exonerate Betty but Dan isn't blameless.

[sufrommich]

79. He is blameless in his murder.

Your argument seems to be "he asked for it".

[saracat]

83. No. My argument is he deliberately exacerbated a dangerous situation

Sort of that case where the mom drowned her kids in the bathtub. The husband knew she was sick and yet piled responsibilities on nher, including home schooling.Dan made a bad situation much worse.

[calico1]

122. That's how I feel as well..

He knew she was getting angrier, more unstable, acting craszy, etc. yet he kept goading her, taunting her.

You just don't keep taunting an unbalanced person.

But hey, you can't post that here because you get accused of being pro murder and a fan of Betty Broderick.

There are a LOT of couples who split up that do shit like this every day. Taunt each other. Try to pit the children against the other parent. And countless other things.

This was just an extreme case that unfortunately ended in tragedy.

[saracat]

137. Yup. And some think that because Dan and Linda were murdered that makes them saints. No one comes

off well in this scenario.The fact that Betty is a murderer doesn't make Dan less abusive or Linda less of a goldidgger. Conversely the fact that Dan was abusive and Linda was a goldigger didn't give Betty the right to kill them.

I think the legal system in California failed everyone in this matter. And Dan was part of that system. A fair an equitable dispersement of asserts should have been ordered, Dan should not have been given the control to disperse funds at whim, Betty needed help, and Dan and Linda needed protection.The courts could have averted a tragedy.

[cali]

152. it makes them victims. period.

and how the fuck do you know that linda was a golddigger? betty is the one who abused her own children.

Your posts in this thread are beyond sick and sickening.

[dustbunnie]

153. Couldn't agree more! Some people have no shame whatsoever.

[cali]

155. anyone who attacks victims in this way is

beyond reason, beyond hope. As a former victim advocate, some of the posts in this thread are not only sick but alarming.

[dustbunnie]

157. I still occasionally work with victims and that's why it disturbs and disheartens me so much too.

Do people not realize that when you excuse it for the one gender, you okay it for the other? Are people so blind?

On top of that, the lust for blood is just surreal! People really are twisted.

[saracat]

201. Yeah, she just fell in "love' with her wealthy married boss so it was acceptable

to have a clandestine and then open affair with him?It was acceptable to move in with a married man? And certainly the fact that her family, for whose actions she isn't responsible, attempted to sue to claim the Broderick estate and take it away from the children trying to prove Linda did not predecease Dan indicates the type of upbringing she may have had.

[tonysam]

174. She got more than her share.

You need to quit reading the nonsense her defense keeps putting out there.

[dustbunnie]

63. You get the prize for the most pathetic response on this thread.

No one will ever accuse you of being a feminist and I guess we have women like you to thank for the way we're continuously treated like lesser beings, since as you clearly state, we ARE lesser beings, hot house flowers with only the minimum handle on our sanity when rejected by a wayward husband.

You also have the facts wrong. Betty Booper stopped working after her kid was born. She had ample opportunity to leave her verbally abusive husband at any time, and she was awarded a very decent settlement to get as far away from him as possible.

Also, that horrid crime of passion law in "civilized" countries such as France and the United States was thrown into the poubelle back in the 1970s. It was often used as a good excuse for a husband to off his wife. I hear these honor type killings are still popular in other countries. Not any I'd like to live in though.

[seabeyond]

71. yet your version of feminism is scorn towards women that take care of all at home

" I listen to the stories of their empty, money-grubbing lives and they look upon their husbands as commodities and objects as much as their husbands look upon them in the same way. Most of them are divorced and they all sound like Betty Boop there. Filled with bile and rage, and it has nothing to do with love. It's all about obsession... owning their husbands and their wealth."

big thumbs up to your definition of feminism. sounds like a huge ass chip on your shoulders.

[dustbunnie]

76. You're the one with the chip on your shoulder who is overly defensive over comments

that have nothing to do with you, are made about people way outside your financial world, and shouldn't concern you. Maybe you should look within yourself as you obviously have issues with the place you've chosen in the world. Otherwise you wouldn't be so sensitive.

You have no idea about the women who come to my place of business, or of how disgusting the world view many of them hold is. These are republicans of the highest order for whom money is everything. I think, since I talk to them every day and they confide in me, that I have a better understanding of who they are than you do.

But you go ahead and internalize everything I've said. I suggest instead, finding something to nourish your soul like getting a job or volunteering somewhere. You'd be less likely to take everything so personally.

[seabeyond]

81. ah. damn if you arent absolutely, to a tee, without fault, consistent in telling me who i am

and what financial position am i in? do tell.

firstly

secondly..... my post to you has nothing to do with me. no internalizing or anything else. the pure ugliness and venom in your post about women is what i was addressing.

[dustbunnie]

Of course it has to do with you. You take every single thing personally.

Since you're the one who felt the need to respond to me, why don't YOU tell me what financial position the women I was referring to are in.

Since you're the one making all kinds of assumptions as you always do. You want to assume that I have ugliness and venom about women because that's YOU making your usual judgments about other people based on YOUR agenda. You don't have a clue who I am but it's fairly obvious that I'm a hell of a lot happier and freer than you are. I don't spend my days attacking people on internet forums, accusing them of precisely what I"m guilty of.

Considering how much you value equality between the sexes, supposedly, I would think you'd be the first to denounce Betty Broderick. But you'd rather attack me. Big surprise there. :eyes: How childish.

[seabeyond]

89. one only has to read your words to hear the ugly.... nt

[dustbunnie]

96. Oh brother. Once again projecting onto others.

You hate people telling you "who you are." Here's a clue. Stop telling other people who they are.

[seabeyond]

103. copy/paste. that is not projection, that is highlighting. nt

[dustbunnie]

109. Of course, when it's you judging other people, that's highlighting.

When other people point out your ignoble traits that's a no-no. You're always good for a laugh Seabeyond.

[seabeyond]

111. do i need to talk really really slow? i pasted your words.... they are what YOU said. simple

or not

[dustbunnie]

126. You don't need to talk slow, but you sure talk a lot.

Here's something else I've said. I pity you.

Now, how about you have the last word, since you're prepared to sit up all night doing this (which is why I suggest a better outlet) then leave me alone. Does that sound like a plan?

[Kalyke]

161. I'll answer you...

She is not taking it personally. I took your words the same way she did - that women who stay at home are pathetic (paraphrased and in summation).

I make more money than my husband, so I could not have taken your comments "personally," but I still think referring to women who sacrifice their paid livelihoods to make a home for their spouse and children, "Betty Boopers," is incredibly insensitive and childish.

I don't condone murder either, but I can certainly understand why a mentally unstable woman would go off the deep end after losing what she considered the best part of her life, whether that was for love or money or some combination.

[dustbunnie]

164. I was specifically talking about people who come to my place of business.

And I specifically said that.

It's a gym and so there's lots of room for conversations. The people I'm referring to have more money than they know what to do with, and it plays the most important role in relationships. Here is the way it's done.

1. Arguments are settled only when there has been the purchase of a $10,000 watch or $5,000 dress. Wives often joke about how they got this or that out of a husband.
2. Many husbands have never been loved but the level of disdain or respect is meted out based on financial/business clout and ability to provide luxury.
3. Many wives have never been loved but are selected based on family wealth, social positioning/pedigree, ability to schmooze, and childbearing potential. Some are appreciated for their business acumen.
4. Both have affairs but women keep theirs secret. Women often use the affairs of their husbands to get more stuff... go on enormous spending sprees and lavish trips. They themselves are not interested in sex with disdained husbands so the exchange is mutually beneficial. Unless if the affair threatens the marriage or becomes a social liability.
5. Divorces are often nothing more than schuffling around of partners within a social circle. Unless someone marries their "bimbo."
6. Extended family is given respect based on who and how much is in the will.

Betty Broderick talks exactly like these women I see all the time, and am sure her husband resembled the ones I know. Do these kinds of people inspire respect and admiration? Not to me.

Seabeyond has already told me she despises my generation, that we're useless, and she likes taking everything I say personally. Some people like to argue because they have nothing better to do.

[seabeyond]

169. "told me she despises my generation, that we're useless..." grow up. nt

[dustbunnie]

170. Again, advice you should take to heart yourself.

Rather than ask for clarification of what I said in my original post about the people who frequent my gym, you decided to pounce instead and accused me of something I never said. That's your MO and it's repeated ad nauseum here almost daily.

[saracat]

196. And what business is it of yours how these folks live their lives?

Why are you so offended by them? It is a personal choice.you really sound as if you resent them and I can't imagine why.It has nothing to do with you.And clearly, folks with money bother you. You might ask yourself why.

[dustbunnie]

198. Haha... your commentary is getting more and more out there!

These people bring tons of money into my establishment. Why would I resent them? I welcome them with open arms.

You imply that because I don't respect or admire their sad, empty lives it somehow means I'm envious. :crazy:

[saracat]

202. ?Sad empty lives? I guess you see their souls. But you really want that tons of money they

have and can bring you. Hmm. Undoubtedly you deserve the tons of money more than they do :sarcasm:

[saracat]

72. I most certainly AM a feminist and what was done to Betty was not right. But she didn't have the

right to kill anyone.I do not have my facts wrong and you seem to value very little a woman's contribution to a marriage. Martial partners should have equal status under the law.Her so called settlement was "generous" but not equal and BTW, isn't it as bit patronizing to use the term generous as though she weren't entitled to anything?

And as for your assumption that I think women are lesser beings, I did not state that and I do not think anyone is a hot house flower. Betty had obvious mental problems. Her husband made them worse and seemed to realize he was doing it.That is what I said. would have said the same if a women exacerbated the mental problems of her husband.
Perhaps you are not aware that mental problems can affect both genders?

[sufrommich]

74. You can value a woman's contribution to a marriage

without cheering on murdering psychopaths who hide behind the cause of feminism to explain away their inability to accept that they've been dumped. It doesn't make any difference why she was dumped.or how. Dumped happens every day to millions of people who don't kill because of it or wear it proudly as their warped badge of feminist cred.

[Kalyke]

163. I didn't hear any cheerleading in her post.

She said there were feminist elements in this case, but murder was not one of them.

The feminist elements are the treatment of Betty by her husband both as a disgusting cheater and via his connections within the legal system.

She never condoned the murder. She said that had Betty gotten treatment and a fair settlement and had Dan and Linda not taunted her (feminist issues), then Betty probably could have gotten on with her life (feminist issue) and not murdered them (non-feminist issue).

[tonysam]

171. And some people did that. They aren't real feminists, of course,

but they touted the line that because Betty gave her "best years" to her husband, she was entitled to everything, and Dan and Linda got what they deserved. Broderick is nothing more than a professional victim, a true blue liar, not to mention a coldblooded killer.

[dustbunnie]

84. Your post absolutely condoned murder. You're making excuses for a narcissist.

YOU said this murder was a feminist issue, in that women who are wronged have a "right" to off the offending partner. You imply that women are less capable of handling marital problems and so they shouldn't be "blamed" for murder. What garbage. Women are just as unfaithful as men are, and instigate divorce just as often. Most women end up with the house and the children. In this case, she didn't get as much as she could have because her disgusting antics repelled everyone, including the judge. She lost out because of her seething rage and sociopathy. Still, $16,000 a month is nothing to sneeze at, and anyway, it wasn't the money that caused her to murder. It was that she lost her social "position" and because as she said, she "couldn't let them win." How anyone can defend that is beyond me.

You do have your facts wrong. Especially when it comes to that crime of passion law... thank heavens. That law worked for men 1000 times before it ever worked for women.

[saracat]

92. I did not condone murder. I said the opposite. There ARE feminist issues in this case

Murder is not one of them. You seem very personally invested in this and I can't imagine why. And for some reason, you dislike women with money or women who get money in settlements. I clearly said women and men ought to be judged equally in the application of the law. Men and women both can have mental issues.If this case were reversed, I would argue the same way.

[dustbunnie]

95. As I said earlier I respond to threads like this because I believe I'm a feminist.

I despise the fact that there are men out there who murder their wives because they've been "humiliated" or hurt, the wife has left them for another guy, or because she has ended up with the house they "worked their asses off to buy." There are many more such murders than there are women like Betty Broderick killing their husbands. And when you make excuses for women like this, which you totally did, then you are excusing all the men who do it by proxy. If you don't get that, maybe you should think about it.

Maybe you're changing your mind now, but your first post completely defends what this woman did.

Edited to add: nope I see you're still on this blame the victim thing. So I guess all women who leave their husbands deserve to be murdered for exacerbating their mental instability.

[saracat]

133. That is complete nonsense.Logic seems to be in short supply for your argument.

I can only reiterate that I do not condone murder, nor do I judge men and women by separate standards, nor does anything I have written substantiate that I do. You, OTOH, do not display any empathy at all for the obvious mental illness that Betty Broderick suffers.And apparently, have little understanding of how such a condition could effect her judgment. Whatever.

None of these people are my concern and I refuse to debate this issue any longer.

[dustbunnie]

151. Actually it's you who's short on logic.

You can't seem to make up your mind if Betty B. was justified in murdering two people, or mentally deranged and not culpable. You make victim-blaming posts, then deny them. You claim that Dan B. success rested solely on the shoulder's of his wife's efforts, then deny it.

You claim these people don't concern you and that you refuse to debate the issue, then go on to be a one-woman posting show on this thread. Your opinion really holds a lot of weight for anyone who actually has a brain to think with.

[saracat]

192. You seem to have problem reading to comphrehend.

Apparently things are very black and white to you. Murder can be wrong while victims do not have to be saints and murderers who are mentally unstable can be pushed over the edge. Two spouses can equallt contribute to a single lucrative career.All things aren't mutally exclusive. Some people can hold more than one thought at a time in their minds.I have already debated this issue but your mind is made up.It is pointless to continue since you respect no opinion but your own.An exchange of ideas is of no interest to you.

[tonysam]

64. There were TWO sides to the Broderick story.

Dan was an ass, there's no question, but Betty was no better. In any case, there was no justification for her doing what she did, killing both of them while they were sleeping. She could have found a top-flight lawyer to help in her case, not take the law into her own hands.

She is very lucky she got only second-degree murder; it really was first-degree, pre-meditated murder.

[dogday]

181. As I understand it, Betty had troubles getting any lawyer in

the state to represent her against Dan because he was president of the California Chapter of the Bar and none of the lawyers wanted to go against him.

It might also be noted that Dan sold the house out from underneath Betty by using a legal maneuver. She was holding out for a better price, but he wanted it sold.

[Hansel]

80. No one else can drive you to anything that you don't allow them to.

Betty Broderick had choices. Now she is paying the price. Many people have been through bad relationships and have left them behind. Betty is still hanging on, trying to prove to the world that she is the victim. It's been 20 years. Isn't about time she got over it and admitted how horrible her actions were? To her, of course not. Because she is a narcissist.

What should prove in no uncertain terms that Dan had a good reason to leave her is that she committed cold-blood murder of two people while they were in bed asleep. She didn't just snap. Her behavior was absolutely bizarre for quite awhile before she killed them and is still to this day.

Dan was her EX-husband and as hurt as she was, she had no 'rights' to him. He was a separate human being and he decided to move on. She got a decent settlement from the court. Maybe not what she thought she deserved, but more than most women ever dream of.

Maybe the guy was a jerk. So what? Lots of men and women are jerks. Their partners can choose either to wallow in self-pity or move on. Betty chose to wallow and hate and destroy. Not only these two people, but her children.

Betty's actions were about control, not love. How dare he leave her! She is a narcissist and she is clearly a very dangerous woman. This isn't about a jilted lover. This is about an inherently mentally ill woman. She's had 20 years to get better and still has not. This is not an instability that someone else has created. This is hers and hers alone. She has more than likely been a self-absorbed selfish person her entire life.

We've all been through pain. Many of us have done stupid things out of spite. But most don't murder people and don't pretend 20 years later that our pain was so great that we don't have any reason to look back and admit it was wrong.

As far as Dan's 2nd wife goes, lots of people have affairs with married people. It's not always about pursuing them. Sometimes people just fall in love. It has nothing to do with the wife. The punishment for that, if one is even required, should never ever be a death sentence.

[cali]

85. What was it Eleanor Roosevelt said? Oh, yes. "No one can make you

feel inferior without your consent". That may not be wholly true, but it has a strong component to truth. Lots of women do what Betty did for their husbands/partners, and men do it too, though not as frequently. Men and women get screwed over. They get their hearts smashed and the vast majority don't fucking MURDER other people.

I was in a terribly abusive marriage. I'll spare you the details. I am not bitter. I don't hate my ex. In fact, I swallowed a lot for the sake of my kid. He grew up without the burden of his parents hating each other, let alone one of them killing the other.

Fuck her. Just fuck her. let her rot.

[seabeyond]

91. no one can make you..... anything, without your consent. isnt that the truth

one of the greatest universal lessons if we can learn it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. I'm on Betty's side

Dan was a scum. No he didn't deserve to die. But he treated her like shit.

[tonysam]

69. Unfortunately, we don't have his side, never have.

He's not here to defend himself, and neither is Linda.

[proud2BlibKansan]

73. He was a despicable bastard

I followed this case very closely. At first I thought Betty was the bad guy. Then I learned more and more about the piece of shit she was married to. No he didn't deserve to die but he screwed Betty over badly. His Karma was definitely fucked.

Betty needs counseling. She is a very sick woman.

[cali]

94. She needs to stay in prison until her dying day.

She's dangerous. She was dangerous before the murders and I believe she's still dangerous.
She abused her children, physically and mentally.

She's far, far more despicable than he was.

[proud2BlibKansan]

97. Dan had very bad Karma

Betty should be in a psychiatric hospital.

[cali]

101. this has nothing to do with karma.

she's a vile murdering abusive woman who deserves every day she spends in prison. Dan and Linda were the victims.

[otohara]

70. Meredith Baxter Was Amazing As Betty

in the two TV movies they made about Betty B.

[calico1]

90. It's important to remembert though that those two

movies were movies, not documentaries. Both took some liberties with the facts as do most dramatizations. If you have never seen the A&E documentary on the case I recommend it.

[otohara]

98. I Fell Off A Truck Just Yesterday

So, Meredith Baxter is not Betty Boderick?

I suppose this means Stephen Collins was not Dan Broderick either.

Damn!

[calico1]

102. Sorry...

I just thought you might find the documentary interesting as I did.

I know several people who see movies about a real case and then think the movie portrays the facts exactly as they were. That's why I made those comments.

In fact one time at work we were discussing the case and one gal kept talking about Meredith Baxter in the movie like she was Betty Broderick.

So, some people do think movie and facts are one and the same.

Sorry if I came across as implying you were too but I just know so many people that have totally mixed up the movie with the real life case.

[otohara]

110. I'm A Democrat

those who can't distinguish reality from fiction are over at that other site.

Not a problem :hi:

[lumberjack_jeff]

77. To recap:

On DU, defending a two-count murderer on the basis "I don't know what took her so long." is mainstream.
On DU, suggesting that men should have a forum is too controversial.

Donations down? Look in the mirror.

[cali]

86. It's just sickening to see this vile murderer defended here.

And it disgusts some of us women just as much as it disgusts men.

[cherokeeprogressive]

116. LOL Excellent point

^5

[hyphenate]

78. self-deleted

[sufrommich]

82. She was getting $16,000 a month in support and

a house in La Jolla.Hardly left "without anything".

[shrike]

115. She got the support because the judge ordered Broderick to pay it

Broderick wanted a much smaller amount, which would have gradually tapered off to nothing.

Plus, Broderick exercised his option to request reimbursement for the support he paid Betty during the separation. He was reimbursed for every penny. It all came out of her property settlement, so she was left with a pittance; Dan got to walk away a wealthy man. And that house in La Jolla was saddled with debt; she was going to have to sell it.

That said, if you read the book "The Twelfth of Never," by Della Trumbo, you'll end up with little to no sympathy for anyone involved, save for the Kolkena family. The Brodericks, Dan's siblings, tried to block them from inheriting anything from Linda's estate; they said that since Linda had died maybe a minute and a half after Dan he had "outlived her," so ALL the estate belonged to the Brodericks.

[calico1]

131. Thanks for the book recommendation.

I will have to see if it's still available and check it out.

[tonysam]

159. Don't justify a killer, please.

You make me sick.

[shrike]

188. If anything should make you sick, it should be the milieu from which sprung BOTH Brodericks

[tonysam]

177. Some of us have read it.

Still doesn't change the facts. Broderick belongs in prison--permanently.

[shrike]

189. I agree

She's where she belongs.

[shrike]

190. I agree

She's where she belongs.

[calico1]

87. I do not condone what she did and she is where she

belongs. That said, Dan Broderick was no saint.

There was a very interesting documentary on the case some years back on A&E. Unfortunately, many people think that the movie version with Meredith Baxter was totally true. Betty Broderick certainly has issues, but in the movie she was depicted as a complete bitch from day one, while Dan Broderick was depicted as the nicest guy in the world.

Watch or rent the documentary sometime if you haven't,. It is much more objective.

Betty Broderick did work and put her husband through school then she played the dutiful wife after he became successful. And he dumped her for a younger woman.


Does this justify what she did? Of course not.

But according to the A&E documentary they both dished it out to each other. For example, Dan would tell her she was fat and old and goad her and push all her buttons. She was already furious at being dumped for a younger woman and he would torment her which made the situation worse.

I feel the worst for the kids and of course for the woman caught in all this mess who then lost her life.She probably had no idea how bad the situation was.

[tonysam]

100. It doesn't matter. She killed Dan and Linda in cold blood.

No sympathy for her. Period.

[calico1]

104. Okay.....

[tonysam]

105. Well, she did. They were asleep when she shot them.

No excuses for her. EVER.

[calico1]

106. I said okay....

Stop scolding me already.

[cali]

99. she abused her children.

"Betty Broderick's diaries were read in court, and Dan's answering machine tapes were played -- including one in which their son pleaded with his mother to stop using "bad words" about his father. The couple's oldest daughter, Kimberly, testified that her mother told her she hated the girl's father and wished the children had never been born."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/21/california.betty.broderick.parole/?hpt=T2&imw=Y

I haven't a scrap of sympathy for this piece of shit.

[slackmaster]

107. Good. She's safe and comfortable in prison, and can't hurt anyone.

We don't need an unrepentant double murderer running loose on the streets.

[tonysam]

112. Some forgotten facts about the case

During a bitter and protracted divorce, Daniel Broderick won full custody of their children and married Linda Kolkena in April 1989.

Seven months later, armed with a .38-caliber pistol, Betty Broderick walked into the couple's bedroom and fired five times. Linda Broderick died instantly. Dan Broderick was shot in the chest and died more slowly as his lungs filled up with blood. Betty Broderick ripped the telephone extension from the wall so he could not call for help, according to testimony.

Asked at Thursday's hearing why she didn't commit suicide, as she said she'd planned to, Broderick responded, "I didn't have any bullets."

Other facts seemed to have been lost in the drama. Broderick had bought the gun a month before her husband remarried. She practiced shooting. She made threats. And, she took her daughter's key to sneak into a house that, under a restraining order, she was forbidden to enter, according to testimony.

More

Some "wronged" woman.

[slackmaster]

128. Stories about "wronged" women always bring out the sexist double standard that many people hold

If the genders had been reversed, you wouldn't see nearly as many people saying that the killing was justified, or giving any credence to the "she made me do it" theme.

[MicaelS]

142. Amazing, isn't it?

I view these "wronged" women stories, and their defenders as the American version of "honor" killings.

[varelse]

113. I have some empathy for this woman

However, she does not deserve to be paroled.

[tonysam]

120. No empathy or sympathy for a woman who was getting

$16,000 fucking dollars a month--in 1980s dollars--and still couldn't move on with her life.

[Darth_Kitten]

132. He apparently made tons of money thanks to HER efforts.

Just saying......

[cali]

140. right. because HIS efforts had absolutely nothing to do with it.

:eyes:

[saracat]

144. You seem to think hers had nothing to do with it.

[cali]

145. no. I said nothing of the sort. YOU are the one who claims it was all due

to her effort. go back and read your own bizarro posts.

[saracat]

147. I said she made it possible. He obviously went to school.

I just suggested there should have been parity in assert distribution.nothing "bizarro" about that!

[saracat]

134. See post 115! And Dan was making $150,00 a month due to Betty's efforts

he is somehow entitled to 4 times the amount she was awarded?And he wanted to give her far less.The judge ordered him to give her that money.And he actually didn't pay it. He paid it when he chose to!

[cali]

141. yeah. his efforts had nothing whatsofuckingever to do with it.

are you kidding?

[saracat]

143. Didn't say they weren't but hers were "equal" and should have been treated as such

or maybe you believe he was worth 4 times as much?:shrug: Perhaps a spouses effort , particularly one that puts someone through both law and medical school isn't really worth as much as the one that went to school on the others effort?:sarcasm: Odd how those millionaire actors spouses seem to get treated more fairly in asset distribution in California(which is theoretically a community property state) than the wife of a well connected wealthy lawyer. Coincidence? Not likely.Oh, and yes, I do know the difference between community property and alimony.:hi:

[cali]

146. Fair? I don't know. I know that life isn't always fair

most people who get treated unfairly don't murder in cold blood. the responsibility is all on her. nothing mitigates cold blooded murder.

I'm glad that she's rotting in prison.

[saracat]

148. And I NEVER said anything mitigated murder.

but I do think an psych intervention was indicated before this tragedy occurred I do think the legal system is stacked against the spouse with no money.

[saracat]

149. members of my family who were "unfairly treated" in a divorce didn't murder anyone

but they didn't walk away and shrug either.It is a question of value and you must believe and fight for your own self respect.You may not win, because the deck is stacked but you should try.This is an area of the judicial system that needs a lot of correction and the corruption is rampant. Dan was a bastard and certainly used the system.My family member's ex did the same. These folks just laugh at justice.No one can make a spouse with lots of cash adhere to the law.

[tonysam]

160. +1,000

I can't believe people sticking up for a total liar like this woman.

She doesn't feel a bit of remorse for what she did. It was premeditated, regardless of what the second jury came up with.

[cali]

162. she's disgusting and so are the excuses that some here are digging up

just mind boggling. oooh, it was unfair that she didn't get half of his earnings. ohh, linda was a gold digger. she stole betty's husband.

crap and nothing but crap.

[tonysam]

167. Adultery among the rich or newly rich is routine stuff. The Brodericks were nothing special.

In fact, adultery is common among the not-so-rich. Women and men put their spouses through school all the time, and they often get dumped. My landlord was one such case of putting his wife through nursing school, and she dumped him for another man. But people get over being mad, and they move on. They don't kill their spouses or former spouses. Betty wanted revenge; that's what this was about. If SHE couldn't have or keep Dan, by God Linda wasn't going to have him, either.

There are similar cases of vengeful spouses or former spouses, and not all are insurance claim-related or even adultery-related. A recent case that is still being investigated and was profiled on a recent 48 Hours is the Mike Sisco/Karen Harkness murders of Topeka, Kansas. The 2002 murders remain unsolved, but the family believes, and the circumstantial evidence appears to point to, Sisco's ex-wife as the killer, and who is even crazier than Betty Broderick. Evidently Mike had told her just a couple of days prior to the murders he was going to marry Karen (Mike and his ex-wife, Dana Chandler of Denver, Colorado, had been divorced for several years at this point, but she made it her "job" to hound and harass Mike and Karen), and he had told family members he was afraid of what would happen when she found out. It's believed Chandler drove the 1,000-mile round-trip to Topeka from Denver and back specifically to kill her ex-husband and his fiancee in their bed after they returned home from a night out.

[tonysam]

158. Doesn't fucking matter how much he made. He was the one with the law practice, not her.

SHE wasn't starving; she could have afforded a lawyer to argue her case during the divorce settlement proceedings and get even a bigger share of the pie, but she was too nutty to do it, as she was a professional victim at this point. Instead, she represented herself. Besides, he had three of the four kids, while she was granted custody of one of the kids.

$16,000 a month in 1989 dollars, close to $200,000 a year for being a "wife and mother." Cry me a river that she was impoverished.

WHY are you defending a murderer?


American Justice:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3 Note this part has a snip of a truly awful phone call between Betty and her oldest son, Dan, when Dan was a mere 11 years old. Dan, by the way, did not want his mother paroled.

Part 4

Part 5


She is a total liar, very proud of herself she killed her f****** husband and his c*** wife (in her words).

She was obsessed with this "monster" for FIVE YEARS. You tell me she was justified.

[tammywammy]

178. Thanks for posting the links

I watched that show years ago.

[saracat]

193. Wow. Both my parents were lawyers and if my mother had heard

that because my dad made more money because she stayed home with me and claimed it was "HIS practice, she would have nailed them. My mother made my Dad's career possible. My husband and I have separate careers and if he claimed he was entitled to more of our marital estate because he made more, I would drag his butt to the cleaners. We each make the other possible. Spouses are equal.It doesn't matter who has the practice. She contributed equally to the foundation of it.The practice was an asset acquired during the marriage.What is it about "equal " distribution under the law that you do not understand?

And it is an established fact that he did NOT pay her the alimony except when he "chose" to! And the use of the word "generous" by some to describe unequal distribution of marital assets is very telling.

And I am not defending a murderer. She was convicted and punished.She is also batshit crazy and should have been under psych supervision.

[seabeyond]

195. i had a talk with hubby today after reading a couple of the posts here

not that there is any question what so ever, i simply reiterated that IF we were to ever divorce 50% is mine.

lol

poor dude standing there, ya. i know. lol. whats up

ah well.

[saracat]

197. Some of these folks are scary.Their hatred of equal distribution

and for some, the hatred of anyone they perceive as having money is pathological. It reinforces why Stupak passed and so called liberals are dismissive of equal rights for women.

I talked to my hubby too and for the record, he agrees with me! And while we both agree Betty was unstable, Dan was a bastard. And it is very odd how they use dismissive terms like "meal ticket" to describe Betty's martial assets and yet defend the actions of Linda's family attempting to grab Dan's estate from his children.

[Darth_Kitten]

206. Well, SHE apparently worked to fund HIS education.....

Yeah, being a wife and mother matters.

Doesn't excuse murder of course, but why was he allowed to hold all the cards?

[varelse]

176. That is where you and I differ

quite possibly because we aren't both working with the same narrative about this case. It really depends whose story you believe more. I think the ex husband was very bad news also, and that if he had lived, this sad story would have been repeated when his second wife began to age a bit.

Nonetheless, one thing is clear, and we both agree on this: it would not be wise to parole Betty. I believe she will die in prison. She seems unable to grasp the fact that she committed the ultimate criminal act - taking the lives of two people who were completely helpless at the time of the attack. That cannot be justified, and it should never be forgotten.

[tonysam]

187. We have only one side of the story, and Betty isn't the most truthful

or sane person in the world.

People just don't go into someone else's home, violate a restraining order, and kill two people in their sleep. This was premeditated murder.

[slackmaster]

129. Same here

Well said.

[slackmaster]

150. Man accused of beheading wife claims abuse

She drove that poor man to it! I wonder why it took him so long.

He put her through school so she didn't have to work. He was deeply in love with her. He committed his life to his wife, and she threw it all away as if it meant nothing to her. He was never able to get past that.

He's the real victim.

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/932322.html

[dustbunnie]

154. Yes, it appears the details are very similar. She took the kids and the house.

He was facing dire fiscal problems. I don't know... what DID take him so long?

[Kalyke]

166. Maybe you read something else?

I don't see a thing in that link that says he put the woman through school so she didn't have to work and that she threw anything away.

What I read said they both worked, started a business together, and that he had four children by three different wives.

Try again, because that story does not match up with the Broderick case at all.

:shrug:

[dustbunnie]

168. Of course it's similar. He put himself out for her totally.

She wanted the television station and he bought it for her. He bore the burden financially for her gain. The business was already hurting and divorce meant he was going to lose his shirt. In addition, he wanted his family and she not only threw him out of the house but she got a restraining order so that he couldn't see the kids. The wife completely ruined the picture perfect marriage. All of these details are incredibly similar to the Broderick situation... if that's good enough for Betty Broderick to go on a killing rampage then why not this dude?

[samsingh]

156. i think she should hang

[tonysam]

173. Some choice comments from the San Diego Union-Tribune

following the story on Broderick. These are from a couple of people who claim they knew the Brodericks, or had family members who knew them:

Really? Not a threat? Those with families who actually KNEW HER beg the differ. But keep speaking from your soap box of ignorance. Put it this way... if Betty never committed the Murders... she'd still be the craziest person any of my extended family ever knew.

No my mom knew her best... but other people in my family were around her family over the years (I'm the youngest of four by quite a bit, so my siblings had more time around the family). Also a friend of my mothers was essentially Betty's best friend - this friend was considered being used as a character witness at a point in time - to testify against her in trial... I actually was around her myself, but I was pretty young at the time, so it's unfair for me to personally comment. Over the years hearing the stories my mom had in her bump ins with her... well lets just say she was all sorts of crazy.

You do realize the Murder was the 3rd break in she had into her husbands home right? The first was to spray paint all his walls black, and the 2nd was to drive her car through the front... the third... to murder them in cold blood. Again she could have NEVER killed them and still been the craziest person any of my family ever was around.. I grew up in La Jolla, I NEVER in all my life heard anyone who was in social circles with the family argue she was anything short of off her rocker.

There are plenty of women who are seriously abused and lash out somewhat justifiably... This wasn't one of those cases. Not even close.

Where did I say I was never exposed to dysfunctional families? Frankly I have yet to find a family that isn't in some way... All I said is she takes the cake. She wins the gold. Completely and absolutely off her rocker.

Dan got a sweetheart legal deal? REALLY? 20,000 a month or a quarter of a million dollars a year... even when you DO NOT have custody of the children is a raw deal?

Wow... talk about an absurd point...

Just for comparisons sake former USC football player and Arizona Cardinal backup QB Matt Leinart (if you don't know of him that matters not) gives the mother of his child $20,000 a month in child support. You know what his net worth is? $50,000,000. I guess he'll get shot soon justifiably because his status must have given him such a cush settlement...

So I guess Dan wasn't that great of a lawyer... because he was no where close to as wealthy as Matt... and this is 2 decades later... plus HE had custody of the children... not his wife.

Seeing you "DON'T" know her so well... what can you use as evidence to her sanity? I'm just curious.

Yeah I am baffled by some of the replies on this thread. I figure they really know nothing about the facts of the case, as it has been awhile now, and they just read the article above which is short on the FACTS of the case and heavy on her personal defense. Again she was absolutely off her rocker folks. If you'd give her a minute of your time with a friendly greeting, she would give you about 40 uniquely placed cuss words about what she thought of her ex-husband - and his wife. I couldn't imagine a circumstance (short of divine intervention) in which she would have the ability to repent of anything regarding her crime. If anything she probably regrets not doing it sooner. That's the type of wiring this woman has.

Reply to bbflagg: It was more like $20G cash a month plus he paid the mortgage on her house, the car payments, and paid off the credit cards -- which she used liberally. I used to work as a receptionist for Dan's law firm and had to keep a separate log book for Betty's calls. She was mean, vile, vindictive and just a nasty woman. She even had a racially-biased nickname for me after her many visits with "trouble" being her goal. She was relentless in trying to make people feel inferior -- anyone who dared look her in the eye. I hear she still is a mean old goat.

link

[shrike]

191. Never understood why Dan didn't pony up for an alarm system

If she did indeed break in three times, why didn't he just invest $1,000 or so (in 19880s dollars) a security system?

Guy probably spent that much on suits to wear to trial; why he didn't just drop some bucks on top-flight security is beyond me.

I really don't have much sympathy for either Betty or Dan; as Betty's biographer so aptly put it, they deserved each other. But it MIGHT have spared the kids the trauma, and the Kolkenas MIGHT not have lost a daughter.

[saracat]

194. Exactly the point I made earlier.Dan allegedly wore a bullet proof vest to his wedding

Why didn't he get security if he had a crazy ex-wife? And I think she was crazy.

[shrike]

200. Made absolutely no sense to me; either; i.e., not getting a burglar alarm

Arrogance, maybe? God complex?

Strange people, strange situation. Maybe that's why it fascinates us so. Like watching a car wreck . . .

[tonysam]

175. A truly sick aspect of this case

is there is now a Facebook "fan" page of Betty Broderick:

link

Many if not most of the comments are truly sickening.

[Name removed]

179. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[apocalypsehow]

180. Facebook? Hell, she's got her own "Fan Club" right here - and their comments defending her are every

bit as odious as anything going on over at FB. Mostly from my "usual suspects" file - of all the pro-murderess comments I've seen on this thread most of them are from the most unpleasant segment of DU's regular participants.

[apocalypsehow]

182. O.J. Simpson no doubt tells himself in his heart of hearts "what took me so long?" Betty Broderick

and him should swap Valentine's day cards from their respective prison cells - they are moral equivalents.

[tonysam]

184. Absolutely.

They're two of a kind.

[Nikki Stone1]

203. Tonysam and others: here are the actual facts

Yeah, they're from wiki, but they're good enough. I'm from Southern California and I remember this case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Broderick
...
Marriage Break Down

After Kim's birth, and after completing his medical degree, Dan announced that he didn't want to proceed with his medical training and that he intended to combine it with a law degree. He enrolled at Harvard Law School while Betty held down a variety of jobs to support his studies. Later, the family moved to San Diego, and to its La Jolla area, where Dan became a success as a medical malpractice attorney. The couple was well known within San Diego social circles, and enjoyed a life of increasing affluence. At the same time, the already-problematic marriage was further deteriorating. Eventually, after Dan hired Linda Kolkena, a former airline attendant who had become a receptionist, as his assistant, he began an affair with her.
Betty long suspected the affair, although Dan denied it for some time. He finally moved out of the family home and eventually took custody of the children when Betty demanded that he do so, to Betty's own surprise. There followed a lengthy and complex divorce settlement in which Betty felt that she was unfairly treated owing to Dan's extensive legal connections and influence.
Betty obsessed with her anger towards her ex-husband. Among other behaviors that later worked against her in court, she repeatedly left obscene messages on his answering machine, and frequently abused him and his new wife in recorded telephone conversations with her children. One particularly notorious instance was her driving her vehicle through the front of Dan and Linda's house.

Murder
Following her receipt of legal threats from Dan's lawyer, Betty purchased a revolver and gained entry to her ex-husband's home in Marston Hills with a key that she had stolen from the purse of her elder daughter, Kim Broderick. She murdered Dan and Linda while they slept. Allegedly, Dan's last words were, "Okay, you shot me. I'm dead."
Linda and Dan Broderick are listed as buried together at Greenwood Memorial Park in San Diego, California. But according to Greenwood personnel, Dan Broderick lays alone in this grave as Linda is buried elsewhere, though named on the memorial marker.
At the subsequent trials, Betty denied having any intent of murdering the couple when she broke into the house. When asked why she brought a handgun into the home that night, she simply replied "because I wanted him to listen to me." She then claimed that she shot her ex-husband in the heat of passion while they argued.


Trials
Betty's first trial ended in a hung jury when two of the jurors held out for manslaughter rather than a murder verdict, citing lack of intent. Prosecutor Kerry Wells was more successful in the second trial, when the jury returned a verdict of two counts of second-degree murder. Betty Broderick was sentenced to two consecutive terms of 15 years to life plus two years for illegal use of a firearm. Broderick is currently serving out her sentence at the California Institute for Women (CIW), Corona, California. In January 2010, her first request for parole was denied by the parole board because she didn't show remorse or acknowledge wrongdoing. Broderick won't be eligible for another parole hearing for 15 years, although she could reapply in three years if she makes progress.

The Facts:

1. Betty did support her husband and family through law school. A spouse's contribution to the other spouse's degree is something that can be legally considered in a divorce hearing. Spousal contribution was considered a feminist issue in the past because it was usually the wife working ( typically) low paid jobs to keep food on the table and school bills paid so that the husband could get a better credential for the good of the family. Spousal contibution to the other's degree is considered an investment, the same way that a company's contribution to an employees education can be considered an investment, and the employee can be expected to stay with them a certain number of years to pay off the investment. It's actually a fairly simple concept and should not, in any way, cause the rage that I have seen in the responses here.

2. Betty's husband used his legal connections (like many lawyers do) to screw his wife over in the divorce in regards to custody. I have seen this happen: my best guy friend is involved with a woman whose ex-husband is a major loon. But he's a major loon with legal contacts. Even though he has stalked his ex-wife and my friend (just for going out with her), he was granted joint custody. He takes the kids for medical appointments they don't need--one kid got a tooth pulled for no medical reason; my friend had it checked out--and he STILL gets joint custody because he plays golf with the judge. From everything we heard about the Brodericks, it was clear that her husband was pulling the same tricks. This is also a fairly simple and understandable concept. Lots of people go through this.

3. Betty's first jury did not all want to charge her with "premeditated murder"; the holdouts would have settled for manslaughter, and the jusy probably should have gone with manslaughter. The prosecution did not meet its burden of the evidence for the premeditation. Remember, this was a San DIego jury: San Diego is a "law and order" town and their juries are full of retired conservatives from East San Diego county who would have been thrilled to put a woman away for murder. The fact that two jurors even objected to the murder charge is a shock. San Diego is the single most conservative part of the state: east county is a Pat Robertson dream. If two jurors in SD wanted manslaughter, then the case probably deserved a second look.

4. Eventually Broderick was convicted of murder.

Now, should Broderick be in jail? Legally, a lot depends on whether the murder or manslaughter charge was the correct one. She was up for parole and, considering the state's budget crisis and the fact that the state has released 40K prisoners in the past week, a manslaughter charge might have let her get paroled. But, my guess is that letting someone convicted of murder out on parole at the same time that 40K "non-violent" felons were released due to budget problems would have been too much of a public relations debacle. Betty Broderick will probably get parole next time around.

My only concern is that Broderick is being punished for her honesty. Other felons lie, say they have great remorse, are allowed out on the street and they kill again. Broderick has no remorse and is honest about it, unlike other felons, but would probably not kill again since the target was dead. My advice to Broderick would be to lie like a rug, pretend to "get Jesus", and get the hell out on parole. My guess is that she feels like she did nothing wrong, but that doesn't help you with parole boards.

One more note: Tonysam, I am worried about your severe problems with woman as reflected in your posts. I suggest therapy and FAST.

Nikki

[dustbunnie]

204. You Betty Boosters sure have a funny way of looking at the world.

1. Alimony has never really been meted out in "halfsies" payments. The settlement after dividing the assets, yes. But alimony no. Even way back when, women often had to work to augment the meager allowances they received, and they only lasted long enough till the used and spit out spouse could be handed off to the next man. That's why lunch ladies in Betty's circle often grab whatever they can during the marriage, amassing lots of jewelry and spending money like crazy. They view their marriages as a job, with ALL jobs, there is risk involved. There's some truth to that and homemakers and lunch ladies are not immune, just as no worker or business owner is. In today's world, alimony is still seen as a way of balancing the investment, as you say, but with the idea of getting the non-working spouse back on their feet. It's not all that often viewed as a life-long payout anymore. I certainly wouldn't like it if my spouse supported me for five years and after our divorce I was required to share half my salary with him for the next 35 + years, long, long after we've moved on and become separate beings.

2. Betty deliberately sabotaged her case. She dumped the kids at Dan's house, effectively giving them and her chance for real money away. She fired her lawyer and did everything she could to degenerate the situation to the point where murder seemed the only option. She was never interested in anything but destroying the lives of those around her. She could never get her social position back, and that was all that mattered to her... more than the children, more than happiness, more than anything.

2b. People get screwed over in business and relationships all the time. Men get fucked over in divorce cases at least as often, if not more today, as women do. Betty could have gotten a bigger alimony settlement had she kept the kids but since she didn't want them, she could easily have taken her $16-20k a month, moved to Palm Beach and started up in high end commercial or residential real estate. She had her license (gotten while she was married) and with her own connections in her social circles, could have made her own fortune. She even already had the boy toy to go with the package. But she didn't want a happy ending. She was completely eaten alive, totally verbissen over the loss of her social position. And this is who you hold up as a feminist icon? Perhaps it's because you aren't familiar with the lunch lady syndrome, but still. What kind of values do you people hold?

If you defend this woman, then you have to defend people like OJ, who took women that had nothing, supported them financially for years, and then get dumped and find they're supporting other men as well their ex wives. (It's well documented that Betty Broderick was abusive during her married life as well.) It's absolutely mind-boggling.

[Nikki Stone1]

205. Thanks for making a completely unwarrented accusation dustbunnie, but I'm not surprised

You're one of the loudest voices in this thread, and your loudness is in complete inverse to your IQ.

And that's the most you're going to get from me. When you learn how to identify facts and how to think, as opposed to throwing around mud and completely vacuous arguments, then reply.