I am not pawning off liberalism, you are, and the fact you aren’t able to see it is mind boggling.
You are making a complete moral relevancy argument, this wrong act is worse that this wrong act, ergo the person who engages in the lesser wrong act has no consequences for doing so.
That’s complete moral relevancy and liberalism 101 my friend. You need to look in the mirror, the fact you can’t see the argument you are making is the very backbone of modern liberalism is astounding.
This man would be convicted in the deepest part of the bible belt, to think he will walk is self delusion. Which, since you can’t see that you are making the most complete liberal argument for your stand, I have to assume you have a lot of.
A “crime of passion” is still a CRIME... and no it does not absolve the person who committed that crime from facing the consequences for their actions. A “crime of passion” legally does NOT absolve the person for facing the consequences of their illegal action. Generally its used to remove premeditation from consideration for the punishment for their actions.
In this particular case, even “crime of passion” is not likely to even be relevant because this is not a situation where a husband walks into his own home and unexpected walks into his wife being unfaithful, and just reacts to a situation he did not expect a second before. This is an act of a man who showed lots of premeditation and engaged in a series of acts, all of them bad decisions, and many of them illegal over an extended course of time.
So, your line of argument is frankly uninformed and not relevant legally.
As to alienation of affections, that my friend is a CIVIL law, which means hubby is free to sue the man she is being unfaithful with for damages, but it doesn’t put him in jail and it doesn’t give him any right to enter his home without permission.
I’ve been trying to tell you, unsuccessfully, that such belief is about as traditional as it gets in the US that I’m familiar with. You must be from some more urban area. He would likely not even have been charged here, her boss would have been too embarrassed to press charges. There are mitigating circumstances that do come into play in criminal matters. First offense? Lesser penalty or maybe even let off without being convicted. Distraught because his wife was screwing around with he boss? Misdemeanor trespassing at worst, they’re lucky nobody got shot which would also be entirely understandable.