Murderess Mary Winkler Walks
August 15th, 2007 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
Murderess Mary Winkler--who shot her husband in the back and then refused to aid him or call 911 as he slowly bled to death for 20 minutes--walked away a free woman this week after serving a farcically brief "sentence" for her crimes.
Winkler scammed the court with uncorroborated claims that Matthew (pictured with his wife and three daughters) abused her. According to the testimony from Matthew Winkler's nine-year-old daughter, Patricia, the dead father--who as he lay dying looked at his wife and asked "why?"--was a good man and did not abuse her mother.
Winkler at first claimed the shooting was an accident and that she panicked, but after her arrest, she switched to the "abused woman" defense that killer women employ so effectively. There was no evidence or corroboration of her abuse claims, but the jury found her guilty of the lesser crime of voluntary manslaughter. After her conviction, she served a mere week in prison, then two months in a mental health facility. She will serve three years of probation.
According to CNN, before Mary Winkler killed her husband Matthew she "told Tennessee authorities about losing $17,000 in what investigators have described as a 'Nigerian 419' check-kiting scam." Matthew was unaware of it, and the day he was killed they had an appointment with one of the banks. At this meeting Matthew would have been made aware of her actions. Mary was nervous about being discovered, and chose to murder her husband instead.
During the trial, Mary threw trash on the dead man, who was unable to defend himself. She now plans to fight for custody of their three children, who have been living with Matthew Winkler's parents. Matthew's parents have filed court papers seeking to terminate her parental rights. As outrageous as it is, I think Winkler could get custody--murderess Clara Harris did (see my column Convicted Murderess Can Get Custody but Decent Fathers Can't, Houston Chronicle, 9/19/03). The CNN article on the case is below.
Wife who killed preacher set free
8/14/07
(CNN) -- After spending a total of seven months in custody, the Tennessee woman who fatally shot her preacher husband in the back was released on Tuesday, her lawyer told CNN.
Mary Winkler, a 33-year-old mother of three girls, was freed from a Tennessee mental health facility where she was treated for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, lawyer Steve Farese said.
"She is out," Farese said.
Farese said his client will not talk to the news media because she continues to wage a legal battle to win custody of her girls and faces a $2 million civil suit filed by the parents of her slain husband, Matthew Winkler.
Except for her oldest daughter's brief testimony at her trial, Winkler hasn't seen her children in a year, the lawyer said.
Winkler will return to work at the dry cleaners in McMinnville, Tennessee, where she worked before the trial, Farese said. She is living with friends.
Winkler served about five months in county jail as she awaited trial, then spent two months undergoing therapy at the mental health facility following her conviction for voluntary manslaughter.
Winkler never denied shooting her husband, Matthew, the popular new preacher at the Fourth Street Church of Christ in Selmer, a town of 4,500 people about 80 miles east of Memphis.
On March 22, 2006, church elders found his body -- with a shotgun wound to the back -- in the bedroom of the parsonage after he failed to show up for an evening service. His wife was arrested the next day with the couple's three young daughters in Orange Beach, Alabama, on the Gulf coast.
Mary Winkler was charged with murder, which could have sent her to prison for up to 60 years, but a jury found her guilty of voluntary manslaughter following an emotional trial in which she testified about suffering years of verbal and physical abuse.
In a statement to police after her arrest, Winkler said she didn't recall pulling the trigger .She said she apologized and wiped the blood that bubbled from her dying husband's lips as he asked, "Why?"
Prosecutors and Matthew Winkler's family members said he was a good husband and father.
But on the stand, Mary Winkler described a hellish 10-year marriage during which, she said, her husband struck her, screamed at her, criticized her and blamed her when things went wrong. She said he made her watch pornography and wear "slutty" costumes for sex, and that he forced her to submit to sex acts that made her uncomfortable.
She testified she pointed the shotgun at her husband during an argument to force him to talk through their problems, and "something went off."
A defense psychologist testified that she was depressed and showed classic symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Mary Winkler initially received a three-year sentence in June. But Circuit Court Judge J. Weber McCraw required that she serve only 210 days, and allowed her to serve the rest of the time on probation.
She also received credit for five months she spent behind bars awaiting trial, which left only about 60 days to her sentence. McCraw ruled she could serve the time in a mental health facility.
Since Mary Winkler's arrest, the couple's three children have been cared for by Matthew Winkler's parents, who have filed court papers seeking to terminate her parental rights.
"));
19 queries. 0.425 seconds.
August 15th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Doesn't that make you want to throw up, cry, and break things?
August 15th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Why hasnt she been prosecuted for money laundering and wire fraud and bank fraud?
And here is another question, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot them in the back - you will be prosocuted because if they werent facing you you werent in immediate danger. So how in the hell can you shoot your husband and get off with little more than probation?
August 15th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
And to think I was nauseated years ago when Betty Broderick got first a mistrial and then only second-degree for shooting her ex-husband (also in his bed and also yanking the phone from the wall afterwards) after pulling out the old abuse excuse. She also claimed that the gun went off accidentally, that she only meant to use the gun to make him listen to her, blah blah blah.
And this murderess got completely off with the same old tired lies. Unbelievable!
August 15th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
As a woman and mother who has been married to a very abusive man.....I say it is not likely that a nine year old daughter would know about sexual abuse by one parent to another...unless in time, he chose her as his next victim.
I have a friend that grew up in a very religious home much like the Church of Christ members....she gave birth by c-section...and the DAY she came home from the hospital her husband RAPED her
So if you are a man..you really can't be a judge of what a powerful man can do to a woman...and if you choose not to believe it, then I wonder what is in your life you wouldn't want shared.
I am praying for Mary. I hope she gets her girls back from the people who raised the man that abused her.
Be careful what you judge....it may come back to bite you HARD!
August 15th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
I called my the office of one of my 2 states' senators today (he's on the senate judiciary committee) and I told the aide over the phone that I thought the current situation, in which there's a sentencing disparity between wives who kill their husbands and husbands who kill their wives, amounted to a violation of the 14th Amendment, and that the judiciary committee should take-up an investigation into this matter.
I don't expect anything to be done, but if more people called other senators on the committee, it might have a chance of getting some response.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Hey Deborah;
The only person in this story who judged anyone is Mary Winkler. She appointed herself the judge, jury and executioner of her husband. She had NO right whatsoever to do what she did. When did we as a society accept the premise that it is OK to murder someone because you feel like it? And the only person who's going to get bit HARD in all this is also Mary Winkler. Her day of reckoning is coming.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
If she hadn't have killed her husband, what are the chances that she would have done more time on the money laundering and fraud charges.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
I believe that she was abused and being a preachers wife, who could she tell? who would believe her? I think she should have gotten more punishment than what she got, but I lived in an abusive household for 13 years. It's only by the Grace of God, that I didn't kill him. Ohh, how I wanted to.
August 15th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
My take on this is that Mary Winkler shows signs of being a clinical psychopath.
This is consistent with her engaging in bank fraud, as well as heartless murder. It is also consistent with her being extremely convincing at trial, and with her changing her story around.
In this same blog, we can see a video tape of a women who falsely -- and very convincingly -- accused a police officer of sexual assault/battery of her. The police car's own videocam shows that she was a shameless and skilled liar.
This country has more shelters for battered women than it has shelters for homeless people, but this woman couldn't find her way to such a shelter? However she apparently had no trouble finding her way to the bank?
Our country's judiciary needs to wake up and recognize that there are some women who are members of the human race who are just as criminally dangerous as the most criminal of men -- but more so because people don't believe that they are, and that's how they get away with murder, among other things.
Facing this type of woman in "family" court can be almost as fatal as facing her when she has a gun and finds it inconvenient for you to keep on living.
I say that she is likely a clinical psychopath, and the judge is a dangerous incompetent.
August 15th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
This is just another example of a woman getting away with one of the most grievous domestic violence scenarios; marital homicide. If this were a man that claimed that his wife was abusing him and that the gun went off accidentally, then he would have been laughed at all the way into a prison cell. This lady should have been locked up and left to rot. The outcome of her supposed punishment was totally devoid of any justice. She wasn’t suffering abuse; she was trying to avoid fraud. And the tragic thing is that the judge bought it. I am a Buddhist, and I totally believe in karma. I agree with SouthernDad, her day of reckoning will come.
August 15th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Sorry, I don't buy it. Maybe if she had not been racketeering and there was no other motive I may give her a little more credit, but don't you think it is a little too coincidental that the night before she is about to be outed for illegal activity she suddenly shoots him?
If this man truly was abusive the girls would have known something was going on. They would have seen fear in their mother around their father. None of the kids support this. Add in that there are dozens of women's shelters she could have gone to, and yes, they would have believed her.
Finally, just because Karen and Deborah's friend were abused, does not mean Mary Winkler was. I think it is appalling that a person can kill another and get away with it with so little effort. She should be in prison and should never be able to see those girls again.
August 15th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
I don't buy it, either. Not one word of what she claimed her life was like. I pray to God she does not get custody of her children. (She is fighting to get them back.)
August 15th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
Deborah,
There is NO evidence that Mary Winkler was raped. Claiming rape was a convenient way to portray herself as the victim when she was the perpetrator of a heinous crime, committed solely to cover up her illegal financial dealings.
She robbed her own children of a life with their father, who by all accounts was a devoted husband, a doting father, and a decent man. Mary Winkler, on the other hand, was a dishonest, conniving woman who was making money by deceiving others and ripping them off.
If the genders were reversed, and her husband had killed her to prevent his dishonest financial dealings from being discovered, he would be serving life in prison.
To say her children should be returned to her is utterly ridiculous. I know here in Australia that the prosecution would be appealing the outcome of the sentence to a higher court. I can only hope this is the case in the US.
August 15th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
This is America 2007:
A woman kills her husband and does seven months.
A man kills a dog and does 18 months:
http://www.wtov9.com/news/13884736/detail.html
Conclusion: If you are a man, your life is worth less than a dog's. I hope all the idiotic chivalrous white guys take heed. It's time to stop doing old-fashioned chivalrous crap like fighting for your country, being a volunteer firefighter or serving on any civic committee. This is not the country for that anymore. Idiotic chivalrous men, with their outdated, useless "christianity" are to blame for this as much as feminism.
Whether or not the feminists realize, it Mary Wilnker's sentencing was the patriarchy in action. The judge was a member of the fraternity Labmda Chi.
August 15th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Meanwhie in Canada, former comedian Tony Rosato -- who is now mentally ill - has spent the last two years ina detention center because of an allegation that he threatened his wife:
http://www.thewhig.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=654232&catname=Local+News&classif=
He's still awaiting trial and they're going to throw the book at him.
I really believe, at this point, that Western culture has become so female-centric that it's doomed to die as soon as a more male-centric culture overtakes it. I'm now FOR opening up all the borders and letting every illegal from a macho, male culture come in and stay as long as they want.
I'm not kidding; a sea change of culture will change all this.
August 15th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Actually Tony the jury was comprised of 10 women and only two men. The women on the jury wanted to acquit Mary Winkler and let her go scott-free. It was only after the men on the jury objected did they compromise and voted for voluntary manslaughter. I think what you have in this case more than anything is "transference". Women who have been in an abusive relationship or know someone who has sympathize with this woman by viewing her dead husband through the prism of their own life experience. Her husband, Matthew, in many ways has been made into the scapegoat for abusive men everywhere. Previous posts by Deborah and Karen illustrate this perfectly.
August 15th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
My sentiment is with JenK. I see the debate over alleged abuse as some what trivial and that is certainly not because I see it as being acceptable behaviour. It see it this way because of the one thing we can prove -- she is a murderer.
The will and power to kill but not the strength to walk away.
August 15th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
# Deborah Hovater Says:
August 15th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
As a woman and mother who has been married to a very abusive man.....I say it is not likely that a nine year old daughter would know about sexual abuse by one parent to another...unless in time, he chose her as his next victim.
I have a friend that grew up in a very religious home much like the Church of Christ members....she gave birth by c-section...and the DAY she came home from the hospital her husband RAPED her
So if you are a man..you really can't be a judge of what a powerful man can do to a woman...and if you choose not to believe it, then I wonder what is in your life you wouldn't want shared.
I am praying for Mary. I hope she gets her girls back from the people who raised the man that abused her.
Be careful what you judge....it may come back to bite you HARD!
What about restraining orders, divorce, woman's shelters, 911?
If she was abused, she has more options than you can shake a stick at. The fact that she shot her husband in the back when he was sleeping shows that she wasn't in danger at the time.
There is no excuse for her to kill her husband even if he was abusive which isn't likely if her own daughter calls her a lier and wants nothing to do with her.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Wow, what a disgrace. Maybe they can give her 3 years for the writing of bad checks and the scams. Apparently the murdering doesn't matter.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:48 am
On the fraud charges - does anybody have more info on those? I've tried looking in other sources, and most of them paint a different picture from Glenn - that she was an innocent victim of the scam. If she had an abusive husband (again, we have no knowledge of that either way) then it would fit that she would kill him the day he was finding out that she got horribly ripped-off, since an abusive man would be terrifying to a woman who just stupidly lost a bucketload of money...
The stories of abuse are only corroborated by her family, but they do create "reasonable doubt" - less reasonable doubt than most falsely-accused convicted rapists and abusers get, but still some reasonable doubt.
Not to deny Glenn's theory, but to suggest an equally plausible explanation, based on the articles I've read.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:59 am
To say she was an innocent victim is somewhat disingenuous. She sent off the money to the scammers and by 2006 these scams were well known.
August 16th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Sounds like Matthew Winkler's family should at least file a civil suit against her.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Deborah and Karen - I'm not sure when the laws changed in this country. I don't think anyone here would say that abuse is ok. But no one here would say murder is ok either. Abuse does not justify murder. There are many avenues one could utilize to find help in an abusive relationship. She chose not to. She killed her husband, in cold blood, period. She deserves an extended jail sentence and her children deserve a life without her present. I can't believe that any woman out there would find something that justifies abuse. (e.g., maybe he beat her because she was verbally abusive to him--she really knew how to push his buttons) How then, can women repeatedly justify murder?
August 16th, 2007 at 9:29 am
This illustrates the effectiveness of having a legal team that knows courts are there to provide the battlefield for you to go in and kill your opponent, leaving a dead, burnt bleeding body on the floor. Her state-paid legal team did what they had to to prevent a fair trial or see that justice was metered out. They went in to do whatever was necessary to get her off, whatever it took, whatever the cost to whomever. They succeeded. Go Team!
Unlike when dealing with family court issues with you having to interview 10 to be able to pick from 2 that have a clue, she was handed a free legal dream-team at the onset.
In civil court, however, given about equal attorneys on both sides, it’s predictable she will get her butt kicked.
DanH
August 16th, 2007 at 9:41 am
The really uncanny thing here is that, to my eyes anyway, Mary is the one who actually fits the profile of the abuser.
1. Controls all the money.
2. Takes no responsibility for her actions or problems.
3. Acts out violently or coercively when her control is threatened.
4. Out of control. That is, she also had a serious gambling problem from what I understand.
That is, even if you believe she didn't intend to shoot him, she admitted she intended to intimidate and control him with the threat of shooting him.
I'm suspicous actually that she killed Matthew because he intended to leave her. This is a time that many abusers kill.
Deborah-
One thing to consider that you've ignored. After she shot Matthew, she moved the phone out of his reach and unplugged the cord from the wall. She intended for him to die. She's a cold hearted sociopath in my opinion.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:47 am
Just a side note - this further distorts the ratio of woman murdering spouses vs. men murdering spouses, because she wasn't convicted of murder. (See Glenn's story on this topic for further reasons of disparity).
I'd like to see the ratio of manslaughter of husbands vs. wives - it could be very telling.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:54 am
I do wonder how anyone bought that he was a controlling abuser when she had control of the money enough to have bank access to all accounts as well as able to hide it from him so long. She was in control of finances. Any oppressive abuser worth his salt would control the money first [sarcasm].
August 16th, 2007 at 11:11 am
No wonder many of us single fathers are balking at marrying again. Besides the surety of financial ruin in a divorce, men can face the risk of harm to themselves or their children at the hands of a woman in the house, who by her gender is legally privileged and de facto and de jure , immune to punishment in case she harms her husband or his children.
I think the next generation of young women isgoing to be quite disappointed when they get out of college and experience being ignored and avoided when it comes to marriage. They have only their mothers and the legislature to blame.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Mary Winkler walks away but look at this story. This guy will go away for life:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20297388/
August 16th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Tim O'Brien,
In my view you are correct. I would steer you towards the term "psychopath" rather than "sociopath" however. All men concerned about avoiding dangerous women (dangerous to your money or even you life) should do a little reading on psychopathy. The subject is a real eye-opener. Learn to spot the warning signs.
August 16th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
I think Foo has a point. The scenario Foo posted is also possible. If she were the person committing the scam and not the victim wouldn't she get money not loose it? I am in no way saying she should have killed him. That would explain the lack of any further charges though.
August 16th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Deborah Hovater Says:As a woman and mother who has been married to a very abusive man....
This woman just used your pain and suffering to get away with murdering her husband in cold blood, over money.
Why doesn't that make you angry?
August 16th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
[...] To learn more, watch the Today Show video here or see the article below. Also, see my recent blog post Murderess Mary Winkler Walks. [...]
August 16th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
The only thing that the scam proves is that she had access to the family money.
She was in all likelihood primarily responsible for the accounts or he'd have found out about the fraud before he was murdered.
This alone is a good indicator that her husband was not abusing her - if he was, he'd have taken control of the finances (and a possible means of escape) away from her.
She was scared that she was going to be 'outed' on the fraud. She got so scared that she got up in the night, found then loaded their gun, took it back to the bedroom and then shot Mathew in the back as he lay asleep. She then unplugged the phone and made sure he couldn't call anyone for help. She certainly made damn all effort to get him help herself and just fled the crime scene.
How this woman can live with herself is just beyond my imagination. That she has now enlisted the help of her family to smear her husband's good name disgusts me. That some feminists have chosen to support this murderess just depresses (but doesn't surprise) me.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Chris said: This woman just used your pain and suffering to get away with murdering her husband in cold blood, over money.
Why doesn't that make you angry?
Excellent question.
August 17th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
"Why doesn't that make you angry?"
Maybe because Deborah is also lying. Wouldn't be the first time a female supremacist has lied...
August 17th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Deborah, you are downright scary. You don't seem intelligent enough, however, to be a troll. No offense - it takes a special person to be a good troll.
Since you have, then, posted what I believe to be a genuine comments, please allow me to offer you a little scenario, with my respectful request that you indicate for whom you would have sympathy in this situation.
Supposing I one day go postal because I can't take anymore of my man's ex's lies and what she did to him (which on the Richter scale of harm a woman can do to a man is an 10 +++++ ), and I shoot her and only wound her. Now she is zeroing in on ME, calling my place of employment and telling lies about ME - and I just can't take anymore and I find her and shoot her with intent to kill. (PLEASE: DO NOT CALL THE FBI - I don't have a gun and don't believe in them for myself. THIS IS JUST AN IMAGINATIVE SCENARIO.)
Now I go to trial and the lying sociopathic piece of human filth - er, I mean the ex-wife - does what she does best and lies about everything and I do mean everything. The fact that I shot her because I could no longer deal with the pain of her false accusations against my husband will come out in the trial, and she will continue to assert that he DID rape her and her children, etc., etc., even though the charges were dropped. She'll have everyone in the courtroom believing her, and feeling sorry for her and wondering why this travesty of justice occured.
I, on the other hand, decide to do a little lying of my own. (Actually, I would never - in fact, I'd be the hero of a few dozen persons whom this evil witch has destroyed or attempted to destroy over the years. But let's suppose I DO lie.) I state that the reason I lost it was because her actions toward my man and my husband reminded me of my ex husbands who abused me routinely and that's what made me go postal.
Oh, gosh - we've got TWO abused women. Whom are you going to believe, and for whom would you have the most sympathy believing, as you are wont to do, ANY and ALL CLAIM of ABUSE made by ANY woman?
What a conundrum!!!
Listen, I'm very sorry you were abused - and actually, I wasn't treated very well by either husband. But I know there are more good men out there than bad - many more - and really, if you ever want to get over your experience, you will need to stop allowing your horrible experience to color your vision so black and bleak.
This woman is a MURDERER. Do you really think murderers should be raising children?
Finally, you have asked otheres not to judge but that is exactly what you are doing: Judging each and every man in the negative. Please keep in mind what Jesus stated:
"Stop judging that YOU may not be judged; for with what judgment YOU are judging, YOU will be judged; and with the measure that YOU are measuring out, they will measure out to YOU. Why, then, do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the rafter in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Allow me to extract the straw from your eye’; when, look! a rafter is in your own eye?
Hypocrite! First extract the rafter from your own eye, and then you will see clearly how to extract the straw from your brother’s eye. "Do not give what is holy to dogs, neither throw YOUR pearls before swine, that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip YOU open. Mt 7:1-6
August 17th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Karen - so that makes it OK?
This is scary.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Rosemarie,
The answer to your hypothetical is surprisingly simple: you would be the liar. You married a known abuser. You perpetuate his poor behaviour, the power of the patriarchical system, etc, etc, etc. 'They' may pity you, but they will not believe you.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pm
George -
I know. I'm a pathetic excuse for a woman because I am in love with a "known" (but unconvicted) abuser.
If I'm tired (and I am ) of all the bull, I can't begin to imagine how tired you men are.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:07 am
I hate to harbor negative thoughts, but I certainly hope this animal suffers a painful life. I know the fathers family has the children and has taken legal action against this killer, but that's ony a drop in the bucket compared to what she should suffer.
I just can't understand how courts can treat these killers with kid gloves after what they have done. You have no right to take anyones life. Every opportunity is available to you so that you can walk away if you so chose.
Women who place the DV card to avoid prosectution are the biggest cowards.
August 25th, 2007 at 5:54 am
Mary Winkler is the scum of the earth. She is a murderer and a liar. Obviously we are a very sick society.
One should think for a moment of how the way we treat our men and our fathers feeds into our enemies' disgust with our way of life. What man would want a culture where access to his children, his property, and even his life are considered to have so little value?
August 28th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
I think after this case, whenever any man or women decide that they are abused, they should gun down their other half while they sleep and watch them bleed to death...just think..all they have to do is cry rape...funky sex acts..financial problems...and theyll be set free..free as a bird.. to fly and function again in society as if nothing ever happened...Oh and oh yes...she should get her kids back...because its going to be really interesting the hell they will have to live with knowing that their mother killed their father....I always wonder how OJ Simpson explains it to his kids...maybe Mary Winkler should chat with him and get some tips!
August 28th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Or read his new book - If I Did It This Is How It Happened
February 19th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
I don't believe a man like that would abuse his family. He looks like a hard-worker and devoted family man. Sad, very sad.