What do you say to this?

he is,, typical asian male,,, give hime to me ,,,just 10 min is all i need... the coward,,,, is he your relation????? if not why worry

At the time of the trial the information was deemed to be correct. Therefore the punishment was justified at the time of the trial. The fact that the information later turned out to be incorrect is a moot point.

If someone is charged with murder and the evidence at the time of the trial says that they did, in fact, commit murder and they are punished for it, the punishment is deserved at the time. If evidence later clears the person that doesn't make the initial punishment any less justified.

Judges can only make decisions on the evidence they have presented.

The vertict was unjustified (wrong) from the start. Decisions based on wrong information can never be termed right, under any circumstances.

And yeah, the doctor surely should be sued for committing an error like that.

But at the time of the trial the punishment WAS justified. The doctors said he had caused a miscarriage, and because of this he was sentenced to 1 year in prison. The fact that the doctor turned out to be wrong later is beside the point (and he was released as soon as this was discovered, so the punishment was annulled and no doubt he can sue the doctors for the 3 months that he was held). At the time of the trial, with the knowledge presented to the court, the judge made the correct decision.

So in answer to this question: What do you think, did he deserve this punishment or not?

Yes, at the time of the trial he did.

...And that's the inconsistency which I'm talking about.

Condemn him to what? To cut him into pieces and throw those pieces before the dogs? To set dogs at him and let him be eaten away alive? To hang him or let him rot in prison for life? What kind of condemnation would satiate your cruel heart?

We all are saying he should have not taken the law into his hands. He should probably have informed the police regarding her wife's intentions and that is all. However, now that he was found guilty of domestic abuse, why should we justify for him a punishment which was for causing abortion? What is wrong with you guys? Can you just not get a simple concept? I wonder how you managed to get through all the grades. Honestly.

...But some also argued that regardless of the abortion issue kicking a pregnant woman is enough to condemn him.

Precisely!

...But most thought that the crime was domestic violence hence kicking the hurting baby error just seals the deal for the 1 year term.

Well, I thin I get what Segmund is saying :)...the man was punshed for something he had not done. He was punished for hurting the baby due to his kicking.

Th baby was not hurt after all, as found out later...so, the punishment should have been adapted....did I get it right Segmund?

Everyone jumps into it because the guy deserves the punishment for kicking a pregnant wife. And besides if you complete the whole story it becomes inconsistent about the abortion scenario because the man's action can also cause miscarriage & the woman after 3 months had a healthy pregnancy even though she wants an abortion. It's obvious that the 2nd phase of the story is a ploy to change the facts on the 1st phase of the story but it can pass for medical purposes only.

You are perfectly right. Some doctors are just a shame to the general good name of the profession.

now a days some doctors are just not that carefull. Have you heard that my country is promoting medical torism and yet certain leader who actualy was the head of the country during it was established couldn't even trust our doctors and equipments for just broken bones....

LOL

please stop

I am sorry for mistaking your writings (actually, the signature is not different from the posts, so I mistook, anyways, my bad!)

I completely agree and understand your point. I am not saying you are altogether wrong. But I must dare to say that your argument is rather shallow and superficial. There was a mistake done, and this mistake must have been acknowledge (that the man got a punishment for something else than he actually did).

Trying to say that three months is justified for domestic voilence is too arbitrary.

Instead of saying this, in order to be reasonable and logical, I would say, we should put it like this: this man definitely deserved to be punished. Because he took the law into his own hand by being abusive to his wife. His wife must also be taken into account as per the law (of course some unnecessarily intelligent people pointed out abortion is legal in a few countries, so be it).

I wonder why it is so hard for everyone of us to just admit that after listening to half of the story, it is natural to be tempted to say he deserved this treatment but after knowing the complete story, we should reconsider the punishment. If he deserved more punishment (for instance two more months), he should serve the remainder of the term as per the law. If he got more than he deserved, he should be compensated. That would be justice done.

Anyways, thank you all for contributing.

Seeing as you have a signature yourself Segmund, I'm sure you are aware of what signatures are. MY signature (as seen at the bottom of ALL of my posts) is: This post is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.

And my signature actually refers to MY posts, hence the 'This post" And was in no way directed at you, and I'm not entirely sure why you thought it was, or why it deserved such a lengthy response.

As to your "justification" for your reasoning, in your initial post you asked in the punishment was deserved, to which everyone has answered you in the affirmative that it was. When the punishment was given, the courts were under the impression that the wife had miscarried, therefore the 1 year was justifiable. That it turned out later that the pregnancy was still viable and he was released is a moot point. At the time the sentence was given, the punishment was justified.

My nose is bleeding now after reading your last post

I thank you indeed for taking all the trouble to read all the posts--- with painstaking trouble. As to the grammatical mistakes, let me assure you, they were, by no means whatsoever, supposed to beautify or, in any way, enhance the overall effect of these posts. It is only beauty of your disposition which is making you perceive it so. The actual reason behind the typos is that most of these posts were composed on my Iphone while I was either having tea in the cafe or having a five minutes break between seeing two patients. Anyways, I thank you indeed, and let me admit, I am impressed someone is there who can pick grammatical mistakes.

As to the issue in question, I am convinced now that most of us here, are numskulls to say the least. Instead of focusing on the grammatical mistakes, if we could have probably tried to focus on the content of the posts, things could, perhaps, have been alot better.

In this very case, every Tom, Dick and Harry is coming up with the same conclusion: kicking was not permissible. And in the same breath, everyone seems to be suggesting that I hold an opposite view on this one.

I really wonder why no one can see my point which is as clear as the sun in the heavens. My point is this: instead of jumping to a conclusion, one ought to assess a situation in its entirety.

Constantly have I been telling you guys that I am never justifying the man's kicking. I am only saying that the man got punished by mistake (he should have been punished for kicking the woman, not for causing an abortion, something which he was attempting to stop).

This, miss Mimi, is my point. He was trying to stop the woman from aborting the child. And he got punished for abortion. Now, that was no justice done. Is that not as plain as hell?

I am even not saying that his punishment was less or more than he deserved. I know all the pseudo-feminists are happy that he was jailed. But what these pseudos fail to see is that it was a human punished for something which he had not done. If the judge would have ordered him to be put in jail for five years for domestic voilence, I would have always respected the jury's decision.

But in this case, the man was punished for something which he did not do. And this, in my opinion, is not justified. I think I have made myself pretty clear now. If you still have any confusion (which you would most probably have, if you do not get out of this nasty habit of flaws-finding), I can only pray for you.

The coward should be jailed, if i seen him i would punch the living shit out of him,, no woman deservs to be hit in any way,,, send the bastard to me .. i wil do it for free

Double Post.

I would say it isn't right to hit anyone, man or woman, regardless of the circumstances.

tinker with all respect to women and would never lift a hand on a woman.

But can't stop saying that there are some B**** out there who might deserve it?

There are women in Qatar who are unlawfully terminating unwanted pregnancies!

Also, abortion is not a crime in many countries. To say that it's the worse of the two is entirely a personal judgment. I would say kicking a woman is worse.

Tinker Kicking a Women whether she is pregnant or NOT is unjustified. Full Stop!

How was he punished wrongly? Are you saying spousal abuse is justified in certain cases?

To be fair, Both the Parties are at wrong side in this debate.

The woman shouln't have thought of aborting(unless it threatened the mother in any way medically).

And in a fit of rage, to teach a lesson, the man shouldn't have kicked her.

Both are guilty and annocent life was terminated.

You are a bigger idiot even. Abnormality that threatens survival ( mother or child) is an indication for abortion. Innocent until prpven otherwise. He talked and tried his best. Kicking was not good but he got punished wrongly too. Do u hv any brains to just get wt i am ssying?

Segmund, seeing as I can see that you withheld part of the story for some reason, what is there to stop us supposing that there might be some good reason for her wanting to abort - danger to her life, severe abnormality with the baby that meant it could not possibily live a pain free happy life?

EITHER way, it is no reason for him to kick his wife to the point she has to complain to the police - was he so ignorant he could not talk to her?

Segmund... You're the one who can't get a simple concept. Your question was did the husband deserved the punishment?

Yes, he did regardless of the abortion nor the medical point...

This are the facts...

* The husband kick his wife to a point where she went to the police & received a medical report. Fact

* The husband was sentenced for 1 year term. Fact

Your additional story line which is inconsistent...

*Her Wife wants abortion so he kick her which can also cause miscarriage...

*Her Wife got a healthy pregnancy after 3 months despite the reason of wanting an abortion...

The husband was sentenced for kicking his wife that's the fact. Your only argument was the wife wants an abortion as a reason for the given crime. If it's just for medical purposes it can pass even with inconsistency but if your arguing for the punishment because of a simple kicking regardless of medical point of view then you should also consider the inconsistency.

The kicking was a big deal because he kick his wife which is also a pregnant woman. Plain & simple.

I find it hard to argue with numskulls yet sufficeth to say all humans are so biased. If they are men, they would prove it they are right in every instance. If they are women, they would do the same.

No the offense does not become less serious, regardless of what their argument was, he lost his temper and kicked her. That is a crime. And no, she shouldn't be charged with attempted murder as she was only thinking of getting an abortion, she had not actually attempted to get an abortion yet. You can't punish someone for their thoughts.

Also, depending in which country this case occured, abortion might be legal, therefore he is still in the wrong and deserved his punishment.

You can simply not get a simple concept I am trying to convey. My point was that initially the kicking seemed a big offence, so everyone was saying the punishment was justified (mind you, I never asked if the kicking was justified, but you silly people are constantly bringing that into the discussion).

After knowing that it was not simply a tantrum, but it was a fight over a serious issue the act of kicking (although it is still not acceptable) becomes less serious as an offence. And if he needs to be put behind the bars,she also should be jailed for attempted murder.

And this is not a simple case, it is a perfect example of how we often tend to jump to conclusions.

Well if this story is just for medical purpose only may be even with inconsistency it can pass... but if you put psychology into it the story is open for debate...

all agreed that man should NEVER have kicked the woman in the story.

But knowing it was asked by a medical professor as some sort of a case study in forensic medicine, now it should be viewed as relationship between forensic medicine being applied to such cases. The presumption that the man was judged haphazardly, brings the importance of forensic medicine or investigation in the case (which I presume was the message being relate by the professor to his students.

Of course this is just a presumption as the OP had never told the whole scenario. There is always two sides of the coin as there are two sides of a circle!

Segmund... What you post is not that hard to evaluate. The man kicks his wife over just a heated "argument" now bare in mind that she is pregnant. With a medical report she's got evidence so the courts decision was justified. Now if there is some underlying story like he tried to stop her getting an abortion so he kick her how come the court sentenced him if that's the real case? I think the story is misleading if you add the other instances... How come after 3 months the wife still did not abort her baby if she really didn't want it? 3 months is too long for a woman not to know that she's still pregnant. So the man shouldn't even got out if the baby is fine because it can be argued that the man could have lied about she wanted their baby to be aborted & take note kicking her wife could cause miscarriage so it's flawed scenario that the husband wanted to stop abortion if his action could also cause miscarriage.

ROFL!!!

How does kicking the woman stop her from aborting the child?

That has to be the dumbest thing i ever heard. Anyone with even the tiniest amount of common sense knows that kicking or punching a pregnant woman in the abdomen or back could cause a miscarriage. Also, regardless of his motivation it is never acceptable to use physical violence against a person. So the punishment is justified.

Segmund,I am sorry, as I am not in the medical profession, I can't share. I was just surprised at the simplicity of this question, considering the environment it was stated in.

Then again, simplicity is, at times, the best option...so who knows? ;)

Well, may be you are right. But that is what the professor presented to us, and that is what I shared. I would love to hear from you any interesting case and discuss it. I have been studying forensic medicine since childhood and I find it fascinating.

And yeah my medical school is one of the best in the world (not according to me, but according to those who matter). :)

d/p

Well, of course I am not saying that was the best remedy at hand to kick her behind. I am just saying he did not kick her in a manic frenzy, but just desperately tried to stop her. I am even not supporting his case. But still I think it was the right thing to stop his wife from aborting the baby without a genuine reason (like medical illness or something).

This further piece of information definitely changes the outlook of the case. That is actually my point.

Segmund, I find this is a rather strange question to ask people at Med school. I am sure there are much better cases to demonstrate the necessity of thorough investigation before making a judgement.

I find all this a bit...errm, simplistic.

Segmund there you are!

And where did you go to med school Segmund???

Errrmm, so kicking her behind would result in her not wanting to abort? Strange people!!

They say the masses are asses.

It is interesting to know how we humans are easily taken in by our emotionality. Not everyone is an ass though. Some of us do have some wits about them; most, however, I am sorry to say, are freaking retards.

The same question was put to us as medical students by our Forensic Medicine professor. Among a class of about hundred people, I was the only one who did not say the punishment was justified. Everyone looked scornfully at me.

It is most stupid to jump to conclusion for anyone. In this case, those people who said this information is incomplete, are actually on the right track.

Before justifying anything as good or bad, you should know it to a good extent at least.

The woman who got kicked was not kicked without reason. She had an argument with the husband over the continuation of her pregnancy. She wanted to abort (kill, let me repeat kill) the baby. The husband said no. At the point when the woman challenged the husband to stop her if he could, he kicked her behind. Do you think it is a big crime to kick someone to stop someone from killing an innocent?

It is also totally absurd of those who justify the punishment because the defendent was a woman. Being a woman or man does not make any more advantaged. That is true equality.

I was blamed for hijacking some other thread and here we are discussing of flashing lights, kicking the balls, respect for woman etc etc when the question posed by OP is "What do you think, did he deserve this punishment or not?"... so just not be ridiculed of hijacking again... IMO he shouldn't have been strictly going by the law, which is emotionless and the state should compensate him and the doc who prepared the faulty report be suspended for 1 year.

not having self-control. But there is a missing link in the story, was the man a regular beater? What was the situation during the beating, did he initiate it?

I also believe that no matter the situation is, man should not lift his hand (or feet for this instance, hehehehe) against his wife. The best defense is to go away.

Now, the final question is, where is the man now after his release? Back in each other arms?

1. The husband is wrong for beating his wife... he worth to be purnished.

2. The Doctor may be right in his report

3. The new pregnancy may be from another man since the husband is in jail.

4. Investigation continues.........................

kicking a pregnant woman... he deserves it right!

Regardless if the baby was aborted or not, he is still guilty of domestic violence. Hence, he should be punished by law.

He should not have been released immediately but could have gotten a lighter sentence since the baby was alive.

While driving a car , It is not possible that you have the freedom to accelerate only. You have to brake often.

Similarly in Life also sometimes there can be fight with wife. But a wife should be not like a nose that throws itself away when husband sneezes.

But one should consider her pregnant condition before punishing her.

Serves him right though I think he shouldn't had been released even if the pregnancy is well. He committed a crime as per court decision so it's like when a person committed attempted murder it's still punishable by law but I'm not saying this situation is the same though it could be similar in a sense.

I think it was a FREE-Kick,

That resulted in PENALTy for 1 year

Remember: FrEEKick leads to PenALty

I should know what type of kick was that before posting my comment. The story is incomplete and Courts should not rule over the sentiments.

He deserves to be punished..

The bas**rd deserves whatever he gets. I sometimes wonder when some idiot comes speeding up behind me flashing his lights whether or not he would get jail time for killing my unborn child if he caused me to get in an accident.

Issues between Husband and Wife is personal....

Sometimes there can be Fight between them.......

But it will be solved among them if there is no external interference.

But if external people involve, they try to benifit from the occasion and try to split them.

I curse them who split marriages and takes family matters to court

Serves the idiot damn right. Pregnant or not if he has lifted his hand on his wife he should pay the price.

“Treat women kindly, for woman was created from a rib. The part of it that is most bent is the top. If you try to straighten it you will break it, and if you leave it alone it will remain bent. So treat women kindly.” (Bukhari and Muslim) and

Rasulullah [Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "Amongst the most perfect of mumins in Imaan is he who is best Character and amongst the best of them is he who kindest towards his wife."

Rasulullah said: "He is the best amongst you who is the kindest towards his wives and I am the kindest amongst you towards my wives."

if she were a 'noble' woman or not?

He deserved to be punished.

One would have to know under what charge he was sentenced and the length of sentences the courts in that country imposes for the killing of an unborn child and assault on a spouse.

To be given only 1 year for the original charge of killing an unborn child(I presume) seems way too lenient.

But obviously one cannot be sentenced to a crime one hasn't committed, so it was no wonder he was set free - again, I don't know if he was ever charged with assaulting his wife, what the severity of the assault was or what the penalty is for such an act in the undisclosed country.

In short, not enough information to give a complete answer.

Interesting comments folks, :) Go on!

Serves him right. He assaulted her and deserves to be punished.

Serves him right. He assaulted her and deserves to be punished.

Dont tell me you were the doc writing that report while thinking of Reema khan!!!

Nothing else that you are a moran and you have got an escape goat now.