i'm still not sure if this is a true story even. i asked for a source, but didn't receive any. i also didn't find anything by googling the text.

so just for the sake of conducting a thought experiment:

she could've defended herself by non-lethal means while obviously risking revealing her promiscuity.

she didn't dare to take the risk of becoming known as an unfaithful wife, because she was concerned with her reputation more so than she was concerned with the moral implications of taking another person's life or considering the greater damage to her reputation if her plan was foiled.

this is quite clearly the behaviour of someone who's willing to disregard the well-being of others to achieve one's goals by any means.

so she's also a manipulative cunt.

all sorts of intimate relationships are possible between people and her relationship with her husband was clearly of an exclusivist nature. plus it was obviously not warm enough for her to trust her husband to understand the circumstances and forgive her had she admitted her fault to him, or at least that's what she was thinking.

one might continue to argue that maybe she depended on her husband for sustenance--so she was afraid to ruin the relationship because she was desperate for his support, but judging from the info given in the text--that's simply not true because she's described as being a successful entrepreneur on her own.

and the murder was clearly premeditated, creatively thought out and carefully planned. it wasn't a knee-jerk reaction to immediate danger.

so she killed the dude quite consciously because she didn't want people to know that she's a slut and she didn't want to lose her money: narcissistic and/or machiavellian, manipulative, materialistic, violent murderer.

i'm not trying to defend the dude, because he was obviously also a manipulative and a materialistic cunt, but judging from the text--we don't have any info on whether he was physically threatening or if he had any murderous intentions.

so she's a murderer who got away with a jail sentence, while the dude who was merely a con artist got killed.

i don't understand the logic behind defending or even giving merit to a murderous psycho while placing all the blame on a slightly less mad, but dishonest psycho