- Link (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1078520/Woman-walks-market-holding-severed-head-man-tried-rape-her.html) -


Woman walks through market holding severed head of man who tried to rape her

Crowds in a busy market fled in terror as a woman walked among them holding aloft the severed head of a man who had attacked her.

Covered in blood, she held the head high like a trophy, said police - her way of showing that she had delivered her own kind of justice to her attacker.

The gruesome scene was played out in Makkapurva village, 170 miles south east of the Indian city of Lucknow, where, last night, the woman was being held behind bars.

According to police officer Ram Bharose, the unnamed 35-year-old woman had sliced off the man's head with a sickle she had been using to cut grass near her village.

'She was getting grass for her cattle when the man came up from behind her and tried to sexually assault her,' said Mr Bharose.

'In a bid to save her dignity, she turned on him and during a struggle managed to chop off his head with the sickle.

'We have no doubts about her story because she had bite marks on her neck and cheek when the man tried to take advantage of her sexually.'

So determined was the woman to show that she had beaten off her attacker, who she claimed had been stalking her for three months, that she decided to take his head immediately to the local market.

'She put the head on parade,' said Mr Bharose. 'She walked right through all the crowds who were buying their vegetables, holding the head up high.

'All her clothes were covered in blood, but as far as she was concerned that didn't matter. She just wanted to make a point and she definitely succeeded in doing that.

'Everybody scattered. It was a very terrifying sight.' Mr Bharose said the woman had no regrets about her actions.

'We have to follow the letter of the law and although she says she acted in self defence she will probably be charged with culpable homicide,' said the police officer.


Justice was served indeed. :cool:

Rape is totally uncool, justice FTW!

Oh holy fuck.

I think she went too far. Don't get me wrong; defending herself was definitely the right thing to do. Even killing the man is justifiable, if there wasn't another way of stopping him that was quick and effective. But severing his head and carrying it into a busy marketplace, with her clothes drenched in blood? That's fucking psychotic. What that woman needs is to be institutionalized.

I agree with both Kina and SK. Rape is HORRIBLE but she did go to far. And he attempted to sexually assault her, he didn't actually do it. Props to her for defending herself and all, but her way of doing so was...questionable.

Wait, she's going to be charged with homicide? I thought you could kill in self defense.

^ You can. But since she showed off his head after killing him, they probably think she didn't have to go that far to stop him and just wanted him dead.

If everyone knew they'd end up dead for rape, they would think twice about doing it. I don't think she went too far. She defeated rape from a male, and now she has a trophy. Would you not give a winner his trophy in a baseball game because it "hurts the loser's feelings"? No.

dont be weird fresh grease. i dont think that she took it off with 1 swipe, i mean it isnt a samurai sword. so if the guy was dead and then she proceeded to continue cutting his head off, yeah thats kinda weird and it questions the validity

I dont think ppl should be KILLED for rape, castrated seems more appropriate.

i dont mind the killing part, just the parading around town with the head

I think she'll be fine in jail, lol. No ones gonna fuck with that bitch.

HOLY SHIT That was fuckin awesome. Fuckin prick, I hate rapists, he deserved that shit. Also I'm not surprised by this happening in India, we've had tons of shit happen in India and Bangladesh. I remember when I went Bangladesh some lady and her son had a brawl in the middle of the streets and he wacked her with a two by four and she severed his arm and gashed his leg with a chopper. I saw that shit live and I was only 10, that was fuckin insane and uncalled for, this not so much.

Man, the weirdest shit happens in India.

And yes, Justice was served.

That is one crazy bitch.

Now justice is served and parade. C'mon if this kind of woman is living the US. how many head you will see at Wal-Mart?

yeah she could have killed him but she brings the head on a market... that's too much...

First off, awesome!

Secondly, I don't get it either. If she killed him while defending herself, then that shouldn't be murder. Unless she just hurt him, and he started running away or some shit, THEN she chased him down and fucking killed him or some shit like that. Walking around with a head is fucked up, but that's not murder. So I don't get that potential charge against her.

Maybe the cop they questioned is just kind of stupid, or they have crazy laws in India.

but she has mental problems and needs to be hospitalized because, she paraded around town with his head, clearly shes not all there

i dont mind the killing part, just the parading around town with the head
This, basically. It's not like she meant to kill him. Twas self defense.

I dont think ppl should be KILLED for rape, castrated seems more appropriate.

I agree. If a man can't be responsible with his penis, he doesn't deserve to keep it, I say. A far worse punishment in my opinion.

@Kilik: That's the point of the murder charge... she probably did mean to kill him. But it's justifiable if there was no other fast, effective way to stop him.

Wait, she's going to be charged with homicide? I thought you could kill in self defense.First off, awesome!

Secondly, I don't get it either. If she killed him while defending herself, then that shouldn't be murder. Unless she just hurt him, and he started running away or some shit, THEN she chased him down and fucking killed him or some shit like that. Walking around with a head is fucked up, but that's not murder. So I don't get that potential charge against her.

Maybe the cop they questioned is just kind of stupid, or they have crazy laws in India.This, basically. It's not like she meant to kill him. Twas self defense.



She's going to be charged with culpable homicide, which means her sentence will be downgraded to manslaughter (lesser peanalties, less jail time).

I'm guessing she wasn't acquitted due to the gruesome nature of the crime. I mean, in legal terms, self defence is when you use reasonable force to defend yourself. Reasonable. She sliced his head clean off. If someone tried to rape me from behind, my first reaction isn't to decapitate him... Her actions after the murder shows she has no remorse either.

^If anyone tried to rape you I would decapitate them.

i dont mind the murder in self defense. but she cut his head off, thats overkill and she should be charged with something. the person is already dead. what more does she want

India.
Both of them deserve what they got.

I'm guessing she wasn't acquitted due to the gruesome nature of the crime. I mean, in legal terms, self defence is when you use reasonable force to defend yourself. Reasonable. She sliced his head clean off. If someone tried to rape me from behind, my first reaction isn't to decapitate him... Her actions after the murder shows she has no remorse either.

Now, did she cut his head off from swinging at him wildly, or did she take aim and hack him down? Because there's a big difference between the two.

Now, did she cut his head off from swinging at him wildly, or did she take aim and hack him down? Because there's a big difference between the two.
It says sliced in the article, not hacked, so I'm assuming her sickle was just really sharp.

that's creepy... It's one thing to use self defense and slicing his head off but it's a totally different thing to parade around a market holding the head as a prize.

omg.

It says sliced in the article, not hacked, so I'm assuming her sickle was just really sharp.

Well then, I don't see why she's being charged with anything.

Go back and read Mashed's post again. That explains exactly why.

(the longevity of these threads will never cease to amaze me)

and you've got to remember, she isn't under US jurisdiction, so therefore, the laws, etc regarding this situation may be less stringent than if she were to have done this in the US.

I think justice was indeed served. I think she held the aputated head because she wanted to show because that since she is a woman, she had the right to think and defend herself.

Slicing off someone's head can be considered reasonable if there is sufficient reason to believe that you are in a situation of extreme danger. Being raped usually qualifies as such. So if she just took one slice at his head and killed him as he was attempting to reap her, it should be considered self-defense. Assuming india self-defense laws aren't retarded, of course.

I mean, I could be chilling on a bench with a rocket launcher and if someone came up to me with a fork, said "I'm gonna kill you," and charged at me I could explode the mother fucker with a rocket and it'd be all cool (assuming I'm allowed to have a rocket launcher...). I don't have to go easy on a dude or feel bad about it. He was trying to kill me and I used what I had to stop him. Infact, not using the rocket launcher when I had the chance to could be used against me in court, since a reasonable person would use the surest means available to stop an attacker if he seriously considered the attack to be life threatening.

That's why you don't attack people with mother fuckin' sickles.

Parading around with a severed head is pretty fucked up though. But that could easily be justified by mental trauma that results from engaging in bloody battle against a god damn rapist after he attempted to sneak attack reap her.

The thing is, Miburo, beheading someone isn't easy. You have to get through a fair bit of flesh as well as the spine, and even if the person was standing still, it would still take quite a bit of strength to cut their head clean off. In this situation, there's almost no way she could have decapitated her attacker unless she was explicitly trying to decapitate him. If someone attacked me and I had a blade, I would either go for the throat or try to injure the attacker badly enough to make him back off. That's reasonable. She decided that wasn't enough and cut the dude's head off, then went parading around the market with it. That's savage.

put in extreme circumstances people
sometimes act inhumane(if thats even a word)
this could be justified due to the trama
she had been given form the man
not only stalking her but attempting to rape her
her actions were justified
and her after actions were heroic
the charges are bullshit

justice was severed
lulz
/badpun

True, but here in the States, excuses like that don't fly. Maybe things work differently in India.

The thing is, Miburo, beheading someone isn't easy. You have to get through a fair bit of flesh as well as the spine, and even if the person was standing still, it would still take quite a bit of strength to cut their head clean off. In this situation, there's almost no way she could have decapitated her attacker unless she was explicitly trying to decapitate him. If someone attacked me and I had a blade, I would either go for the throat or try to injure the attacker badly enough to make him back off. That's reasonable. She decided that wasn't enough and cut the dude's head off, then went parading around the market with it. That's savage.

I don't know how fucking sickles work when it comes to chopping off heads. They might go through that shit like butter, who knows. Doesn't really matter. It's not unreasonable to aim at a guy's neck if he's perceived as an extreme threat.

Take my rocket launcher analogy and change the rocket launcher to a pistol. I could aim for the leg or some other less-lethal area of his body and potentially stop him from coming at me, sure. But if I seriously think that if I don't stop this guy that I'm going to die, I'm allowed to use the most effective way possible to stop him. So I'm still going to aim for his chest anyway. Again, this is why people shouldn't attack other people. They're allowed to fucking kill you if a reasonable person can consider you an extreme threat. Hell, they're allowed to claw your eyes out, bite your nutsack off, etc. until you stop being a threat. You can be brutal and savage as fuck when defending yourself.

And as for parading around with a head (Or even cutting the head off a dead body, if you're implying she did that), that's not killing anyone so it shouldn't be considered any form of homicide. And it can easily be attributed to not being of sound mind, which would be completely understandable considering what she had just gone through.

I don't know how fucking sickles work when it comes to chopping off heads. They might go through that shit like butter, who knows. Doesn't really matter. It's not unreasonable to aim at a guy's neck if he's perceived as an extreme threat.

Take my rocket launcher analogy and change the rocket launcher to a pistol. I could aim for the leg or some other less-lethal area of his body and potentially stop him from coming at me, sure. But if I seriously think that if I don't stop this guy that I'm going to die, I'm allowed to use the most effective way possible to stop him. So I'm still going to aim for his chest anyway. Again, this is why people shouldn't attack other people. They're allowed to fucking kill you if a reasonable person can consider you an extreme threat. Hell, they're allowed to claw your eyes out, bite your nutsack off, etc. until you stop being a threat. You can be brutal and savage as fuck when defending yourself.

And as for parading around with a head (Or even cutting the head off a dead body, if you're implying she did that), that's not killing anyone so it shouldn't be considered any form of homicide. And it can easily be attributed to not being of sound mind, which would be completely understandable considering what she had just gone through.

The main difference I see with this situation and your rocket launcher or pistol analogy is this: with the pistol, it would take as much effort to kill the guy as it would to injure him; you'd be pulling the trigger either way. With the rocket launcher, you pretty much have to kill the guy. Both cases would be reasonable. But this woman made an extra effort to cut off the dude's head. Sickles aren't that sharp, it would take some effort to cut off his head. Where she could have made just enough of an effort to be certain of her own safety, she went further.

There was a similar news story a while back where a 12-year-old kid walked into the kitchen and found someone trying to rape and kill his mother, so he grabbed a knife, went for the dude's throat, and killed him. I said that was completely justified, as is the attacker's death in this news article. The difference is that after the man was dead, the kid didn't keep on stabbing his body for the hell of it or start working on severing his head to show to his friends. He did what he had to and left it at that. That's what this woman should have done.

As for the homicide charge, they probably assumed from her behavior afterwards that at some point, she set out specifically to kill the guy just for revenge. What you said about not being sound at the time does make sense; in that case, she should receive psychiatric treatment. That's all I'm saying.

yeah, sickles arent samurai swords and im not sure how strong the woman was but it isnt easy to cut someones head off. and im not saying it didnt happen but its a good way to get away with murder.

The main difference I see with this situation and your rocket launcher or pistol analogy is this: with the pistol, it would take as much effort to kill the guy as it would to injure him; you'd be pulling the trigger either way. With the rocket launcher, you pretty much have to kill the guy. Both cases would be reasonable. But this woman made an extra effort to cut off the dude's head. Sickles aren't that sharp, it would take some effort to cut off his head. Where she could have made just enough of an effort to be certain of her own safety, she went further.

There was a similar news story a while back where a 12-year-old kid walked into the kitchen and found someone trying to rape and kill his mother, so he grabbed a knife, went for the dude's throat, and killed him. I said that was completely justified, as is the attacker's death in this news article. The difference is that after the man was dead, the kid didn't keep on stabbing his body for the hell of it or start working on severing his head to show to his friends. He did what he had to and left it at that. That's what this woman should have done.

Alright, change the pistol to a rusty pipe laying on the ground. If I smacked it off the dude's head so hard that it caused his entire body to explode in a fine mist of blood somehow, and I fully intended to do so and proclaimed afterwards that it was fucking awesome, then it's still self-defense.

Self-defense doesn't work the way you think it does. If someone attacks you in a way that would lead you to believe that they mean to cause extreme harm to you (Rape, kill) then you can do pretty much anything to him until he stops. Chopping off heads is cool, both legally and generally speaking.

No matter what, the killing was justified. And even if she did mutilate the dead body afterwards (Nothing indicates she did in the story, but I'll roll with it anyway), that's not murder. You can't kill a dead body.

I didn't read all the posts but I read enough to be able to state my points. Rape whether completed or not is a attack not on just the physical being but on the mental as well. I am a sexual assault response coordinator and most times women act like nothing has ever happened they put it behind themselves its a type of shock in all honesty. It also goes the same way when the women actually overpowers there attacker. The victim normally mentally blacks out and anything that happens after that is usually remembered when going over there story.

1. The woman may not have actually done that had she been in any kind of state of mind.
2. She shouldn't be charged with anything other than public disturbance or something along those lines.
3. About the sickle. have any of you honestly ever been to third world countries where those are actually used. I have and most that I have seen are freaking razor sharp. People keep those kind of tools just as sharp as any samurai sword I have ever seen.
4. I think She was justified in what she had done.

Thanks

The Raper just got what he deserve..

not even an eye for an eye can justify what she did!!!!

i mean sure tht guy should have got something but murder???

no way

OHHH THAT MAN CLEVA!.. HE GO TO MOLEST WOMAN HOLDING SICKLE... HE SMART! smart man! i wish i cleva as him ohhh i be so smart i get all de bitches.


i go to molest woman holding flamethrower cuz i cleva

I dont think ppl should be KILLED for rape, castrated seems more appropriate.

You don't think people should be killed cause they rapped someone.. but yet a lot of women who are raped are killed. So its ok for a woman to be rapped and killed and the guy should survive..

Not to mention those who do rape and get put in jail will eventually be let go to do it all over again.. Even those who have raped and killed were let go and guess what they did,they rapped and killed again but yet they shouldnt get killed for raping someone. I disagree.

Also i think justice was served.

Some say she was a psycho for doing what she did. Do you even realize the type of trama someone goes through when they are being attacked. Wondering if they are going to live or die and even after its done some wish they were dead. Its easy to say your crazy for doing that unless you have been through that experience itself.

You don't think people should be killed cause they rapped someone.. but yet a lot of women who are raped are killed. So its ok for a woman to be rapped and killed and the guy should survive..
Being castrated is worse than being killed. If you had a penis, you'd understand.

@Miburo: I was under the impression that you were only allowed to use as much force as is necessary to stop the attack. If you're free to do whatever you want to your attacker, then there should be no legal basis for her prosecution. I still think her reaction was over the top, though.

@J1aBob: I'm still not convinced that a sickle would be able to decapitate a man as easily as you're saying it would.

Also, to everyone who says rapists should automatically die, I disagree. But there's not really anything to argue, since it's an issue of mercy vs. mercilessness.

@Miburo: I was under the impression that you were only allowed to use as much force as is necessary to stop the attack. If you're free to do whatever you want to your attacker, then there should be no legal basis for her prosecution. I still think her reaction was over the top, though.

Kinda. If you justifiably feel your life is in danger then you can use whatever force necessary to protect yourself from harm and stop the attack as swiftly and safely as possible. Could she try to knock him out with the butt end of the sickle? Yeah, maybe. But that's a lot more difficult, and therefore more risky, to do. Just like I can try shooting the kneecaps of a guy with a handgun to stop his attack, but it's a hell of a lot safer and more reliable to just pop him in the chest. Bottom line is that she was attacked and could rationally conclude that her life could be in danger, and she didn't use any more force than necessary to stop the attack. Meaning no foul.

Also, you seem to be misunderstanding the whole "more force than necessary" thing. If you attacked me and I slammed you on your head, knocking you out, then it's all good. If I slam you on your head, knock you out, then kick you in the teeth a couple dozen times then I became the aggressor since you were no longer a threat to me once you were knocked out. If you punched me, then ran away and I chased you down and knocked you out then I'm still in the wrong because you were no longer a threat to me once you started running away. That's what that means. You can't become the aggressor and still claim self defense. It has hardly anything to do with what action you take to defend yourself against an aggressor. The only exception is if you had a clear alternative that would be just as effective in stopping the attack, just as safe to you (No extra risk), and if you were aware of the alternative at that moment in time (Hindsight doesn't count, you don't have time to weigh the pros and cons of different defensive methods when you're subjected to a surprise attack. Something you also seem to not being taking into account).

Gotta look at things in her point of view. She was attacked out of nowhere and didn't have much time to think. She had to stop that guy as quickly as possible, because who knows what the hell he's going to do to her. You can say "Oh, she should have done this or this" all day long because you have time to think about it. She wasn't afforded that luxury though. Add that to the weeks of stalking or whatnot, and one can only imagine how mentally debilitating that whole situation must have been. Empathy, man. It's useful shit sometimes.

Not to mention how utterly ridiculous it is that anyone in this thread could be douchebaggish enough to criticize a woman for defending herself against a potential rapist in any way. Let alone a way that is legally and (easily argued to be) morally acceptable. She was a god damn victim, for fuck's sake. You don't blame them. >.<

Kinda. If you justifiably feel your life is in danger then you can use whatever force necessary to protect yourself from harm and stop the attack as swiftly and safely as possible. Could she try to knock him out with the butt end of the sickle? Yeah, maybe. But that's a lot more difficult, and therefore more risky, to do. Just like I can try shooting the kneecaps of a guy with a handgun to stop his attack, but it's a hell of a lot safer and more reliable to just pop him in the chest. Bottom line is that she was attacked and could rationally conclude that her life could be in danger, and she didn't use any more force than necessary to stop the attack. Meaning no foul.

Also, you seem to be misunderstanding the whole "more force than necessary" thing. If you attacked me and I slammed you on your head, knocking you out, then it's all good. If I slam you on your head, knock you out, then kick you in the teeth a couple dozen times then I became the aggressor since you were no longer a threat to me once you were knocked out. If you punched me, then ran away and I chased you down and knocked you out then I'm still in the wrong because you were no longer a threat to me once you started running away. That's what that means. You can't become the aggressor and still claim self defense. It has hardly anything to do with what action you take to defend yourself against an aggressor. The only exception is if you had a clear alternative that would be just as effective in stopping the attack, just as safe to you (No extra risk), and if you were aware of the alternative at that moment in time (Hindsight doesn't count, you don't have time to weigh the pros and cons of different defensive methods when you're subjected to a surprise attack. Something you also seem to not being taking into account).

I understand everything you're saying. I'm not against the fact that she killed him; that was easily the quickest and most effective way to stop him using the sickle, and of course, it was a reflex. But it seems to me like cutting off the dude's head would take more effort than simply killing him as quickly and easily as possible, with no practical advantage. If she'd just slit his throat or something, I'd totally be on her side. However, your earlier point that killing him and then mutilating the body isn't really a crime still stands. Still a bit fucked up, but not a crime.

Well, we don't know if she lobbed the head clean off, or cut it off afterwards. Who knows?

Either way though, after that kind of traumatic attack it would be completely understandable that she wouldn't be in the most rational mindset. Of course walking around with a severed head is kind of fucked up, but what happened to her directly prior to that was also pretty fucked up. Again, it's pretty low to fault someone who just went through what must have been a unbelievably traumatic situation for not being at the peak of sanity shortly after the fact. She is a victim. She didn't do anything wrong.

so its understandable to cut someones head off and parade around town with it as a trophy. thats a little crazy. i have no problem with her killing the guy, just what came afterward makes me question her sanity

How sane do you expect someone to be after they are attacked.. they arent sane. How can that even be possible when you go through such a tramatic experience.

What are they supposed to do.. get attacked and get raped and wonder am i going to die and after its all and done with go back to being normal. Some women never go back to normal and some end up killing themselves afterwards. It kinda makes me sick how some of you act like that guy even had rights. How bout talk to some of the families of women who were raped and murder while the guy who did it was let go out of prison and back on the loose while their wife and daughter are dead. They have no freaking rights. Who cares if there head was chopped off. Luckily for her although she isnt lucky cause she had to even go through that but lucky she had something to fight back with cause if not she would be dead. However according to some of you i guess that would be ok.

Edit: he is dead and he won't be missing his head trust me

It's one thing to kill your attacker & another to decapitate them & parade around town holding the head like a trophy. I find it hard to believe that she was able to take off the head in one swing. This just leads me to believe that she killed him then decided f*** it I'm cutting this f***er's head off for my collection. The woman was probably temporarily insane because of the attack but one must question her general sanity when she decides to do something like that. I personally wouldn't want to be her husband after hearing something like this. I'd be afraid to even glance at another woman. This woman has some serious issue's not related to this attack.

Not true i have to disagree.. just because she did that with being attacked doesn't mean she would literally do that just to do it to a guy that ticked her off. When your attacked and so on you have tons of different emotions going on. I hate to say it but a strong one is hatred. Like say if a woman was attacked and she stabbed the guy and then she is in such a state of shock and hatred for that person she doesnt stop at one stab but sits there and constantly stabs him. Thats pretty much the same case. Its not like she is taking it back home to put it on it her wall. More and likely she was dazed and in shock, scared , mad and all that jumbled into one. So no woman is sane after being attacked. In time they finally calm down and go back to normal but as i said some never go back to being completely normal.

She was getting grass for her cattle which meant she must of been on some type of farm. She then took the severed head & walked for who knows how long to get to a market area so she could show off her kill. These are not the actions of a sane individual. There comes a point during this long walk where one must ask themselves if parading around town with this head is really a good idea. She had time to think this action over & really didn't care. Unless the walk was less then a mile I really don't see how these are the actions of a woman who wasn't already mental disturbed before this attack.

^Dumbest shit I've read in this thread, by far. Like it's totally outside the realm of possibilities that it really was that dramatic of an experience that she would be a off the rocker for more then an hour afterwards. Or that the only thing wrong with her is that some guy tried to reap the shit outta her. Right? Ugh.

Just because someone reacts in a crazy way after a ridiculously traumatic event doesn't mean that there has always been something wrong with her. Seriously, what a douchebaggish thing to say about someone who was victimized.

Self-defense is self-defense. Whether you blow it out of proportion or not, if someone is violating your rights, you should be able to take whatever means you can to defend yourself. Forget what the law says. Now if she was raped and then 2-3 days later killed him, that would be vigilantism and that would not be rational. However, self-defense is always rational.

She was getting grass for her cattle which meant she must of been on some type of farm. She then took the severed head & walked for who knows how long to get to a market area so she could show off her kill. These are not the actions of a sane individual. There comes a point during this long walk where one must ask themselves if parading around town with this head is really a good idea. She had time to think this action over & really didn't care. Unless the walk was less then a mile I really don't see how these are the actions of a woman who wasn't already mental disturbed before this attack.

So.... 5,279 feet would have been more acceptable?

She was being stalked, if I'm not mistaken...and was going to be raped. R.A.P.E.D. Have you ever been raped? Or violated in the slightest? That's the most insensitive thing I've heard in a while.

Yes, maybe not a completely normal reaction, but to be sexually violated, even the idea of it, is completely and utterly nerve wrecking =/

Her reaction was not a reflection of some non-existent string of faulty sanity that wound it's way to some surface in a pool of fear. Being defiled that way does shit to people, especially women. A lot of people don't have the opportunity to repay the people that have victimized them. If anything, I envy her, even if it's only slight :|

So.... 5,279 feet would have been more acceptable?

She was being stalked, if I'm not mistaken...and was going to be raped. R.A.P.E.D. Have you ever been raped? Or violated in the slightest? That's the most insensitive thing I've heard in a while.

Yes, maybe not a completely normal reaction, but to be sexually violated, even the idea of it, is completely and utterly nerve wrecking =/

Her reaction was not a reflection of some non-existent string of faulty sanity that wound it's way to some surface in a pool of fear. Being defiled that way does shit to people, especially women. A lot of people don't have the opportunity to repay the people that have victimized them. If anything, I envy her, even if it's only slight :|

yes i agree with this but still, she killed the guy...
i mean an eye for an eye and the world would b blind

You're right.... dying was honestly far too kind =]

Should strung him up by his ankles, chopped off his package, dipped him in "Buba's" favorite stake sauce and left him hanging in his cell at perfect tea-bagging level.

I would kill the guy, get my cell and call the cops, then go change clothes and watch tv... lol (Although im not a girl, theres still gay rapists... or ugly girls... hot ones ide enjoy a bit then kill em lulz)

I think you you should definitely defend yourself if you're about to be raped. And if the person dies in the process that's not the victim's fault. I even think hacking the head the rest of the way off is justifiable in that situation because being stalked for 3 months would put anybody on edge plus it's traumatizing. You'd want to make sure he was dead. That's how I see things, because in so many horror shows, you think the guy is dead but he gets up and kills you from behind and I always think. God if you'd just shot him one more time you'd be alive still. I'd probably have shot him one more time u_u or in this case hacked him randomly several times.

However, usually right after the act people in these situations go into shock which is heavy breathing or hyperventilation, fetal position, denial and maybe even a fainting spell. I think prancing through a public food market with severed head shows signs of mental queerness. I think even having the strength to walk proudly while covered in blood is strange. Whether that's caused by the adrenaline of victory or there was something going on in her head beforehand should be decided by a psychologist not a jury of her peers. I don't think she should be tried for homicide.