Skip to comments.INJUSTICE: Winkler Sentenced to 3 Years for Killing Husband, May Serve Only 60 Days
Posted on 06/08/2007 2:30:09 PM PDT by midwesteastcoastconnection
SELMER, Tenn. A woman who killed her preacher husband with a shotgun blast to the back as he lay in bed was sentenced Friday to three years in prison, but she may end up serving only 60 days in a mental hospital.
Mary Winkler must serve 210 days, or about seven months, of her sentence before she can be released on probation, but she gets credit for the five months she has already spent in jail, Judge Weber McCraw said.
That leaves only two months, and McCraw said up to 60 days of the sentence could be served in a facility where she could receive mental health treatment. That means Winkler may not serve any significant time in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Had it been a gay preacher, she would never see the light of day.
That's just silly on so many levels.
Why did that worthless prosecutor allow 10 women on that jury?
Man I’d better hide my guns cause my wife may get ideas.
this is so disgusting.
Wow! kills her husband in cold blood and gets 3 only 3 years and release on probation is possible in 7 months? What the...?! Does the judge know the man is dead..brains blown out ?! Something is seriously wrong in a system that gives this women only 3 years....I’m sure liberalism, morals are relative way of thinking and taking God out of public life have nothing to do with it. /s
Phew! Somehow I thought the Fonz had gone gay!
I’m suprised the judge didn’t include a “yep, it’s open season on
spouses, provided they are male, a preacher, and have talked in
a mean way to their wife sometimes.”
Jun 8, 2007 11:50 am US/Pacific
Preacher’s Wife Sentenced To 210 Days In Prison
CBS News Interactive: Crime In The U.S.
(AP) SELMER, Tenn. A woman who killed her preacher husband with a shotgun blast to the back as he lay in bed got a three-year prison sentence Friday, but she may be allowed to serve her time in a mental hospital.
Mary Winkler, convicted of manslaughter in April, could have received up to six years for killing her husband, Matthew, in the parsonage where the family lived in March 2006.
The preacher’s mother, Diane Winkler, told Mary Winkler from the witness stand that the couple’s three daughters were having nightmares about people with guns breaking into their house.
“You’ve never told your girls you’re sorry. Don’t you think you at least owe them that?” she asked.
Mary Winkler, 33, went on trial for first-degree murder in April, but a jury found her guilty of the lesser crime of manslaughter after she testified she was physically and emotionally abused by her husband, Matthew Winkler.
She testified during her trial that her husband hit and kicked her, forced her to look at pornography and demanded sex she considered unnatural. Jurors were shown a pair of tall, platform shoes and a black wig Winkler said she was pressured to wear during sex.
“The monster that you have painted for the world to see? I don’t think that monster existed,” Diane Winkler said.
Mary Winkler faces a maximum of six years in prison, but her lawyers have asked for diversion, which would keep her out of prison and eventually clear her record.
She would be eligible for parole after serving 30 percent of her term and get credit for five months already spent in jail while awaiting trial.
Winkler and her defense team arrived about 45 minutes early for her sentencing hearing Friday morning, but she did not talk to reporters.
Church members found Matthew Winkler’s body and reported his wife and children missing. They were located the following day in Orange Beach, Ala.
Winkler is fighting with her husband’s parents for custody of the children, ages 9, 7 and 2.
Mary Winkler’s sister, Tabitha Freeman, called her “the best example of a good person I can think of” and asked the judge to give her a chance to be reunited with her children.
“She just needs them. She’s not complete without them,” Freeman said.
Does the jury hand down the sentence? That is news to me.
Generally it is thought that women are less likely to buy the battered wife defense.
It is my opinion that those shoes were purchased after his death, else we would have heard of them sooner. The prosecutor should have done some record checking, because I'm pretty sure those things weren't purchased at Payless in Selmer, TN.
I didn't see the trial, but a friend of mine watched some and the prosecutor let her accusations go unchecked.
for instance she had said that she was on her hands and knees cleaning the floor, and he just walked up and either kicked or punched her in the head. The prosecutor asked why he would do that, and she just said "i don't know". And he just let that stand. That is rediculous.
No, in TN it is done by statute. Judge has to select the appropriate sentence according to the guidelines. but he gets leeway in deciding how to rate the aggravating/mitigating factors. As a first timer, she is presumed to get the minimum sentence for the range.
I do not agree with this sentence, it is way to lenient.
It is more of our government REWARDING criminals with time off for 'good behavior'.
The only good thing in his ruling is that she can't have her record expunged.
At least we’re safe from Paris Hilton....
Give her a reward and set her free.
I think the blame here goes mostly to the jury, not the judge. They acquitted her of murder and convicted her only of some petty charge.
The judge and prosecutor both live in my county.
The judge is a good guy. He did what he could on a voluntary manslaughter conviction.
He did refuse to expunge Mary’s record.
Your opinion is wrong about the shoes. The lawyers were not allowed in the house without the police.
Good thing for her, her name last name wasn’t Hilton.
Were the shoes entered into evidence at the time the crime scene was processed, or were they entered by the defense at some later date? If there are photos of them in her closet the day after the murder, then maybe she wasn't lying. What I was saying is that the prosecution should have (maybe they did, I don't know)tried to establish when the things were purchased and by whom.
Here is the scenario I'm picturing: lawyer interviews Mrs. Winkler. He is looking for anything he can find to create doubt or justification for his client's actions. He asks if he had any peccadillos. Winkler is a plain jane preacher's wife. She was probably very modest about her body and sexuality. Preacher man wants her to sex it up, gets her to wear lingerie and heels. Nothing weird, just bought stuff for her from Victoria's Secret but to her it was still vulgar. Had nothing to do with why she killed him, but the lawyer doesn't have much to work with.
Now he is in Nashville for court and stop in at one of the local ballet parlors downtown. For some reason he thinks of Mary Winkler and her prudish attitude towards the 2 1/2 inch closed toe pumps she thought were slutty, and he thinks to himself "now if he made you wear something like these 7 inch lucite platforms that Bambi here is wearing, I could see your point in blasting him".
Cue the little light bulb over the head. Next thing is that classic photo of the shoes in the foreground, and little miss murderer behind them looking forelorn and disgusted.
What is your ‘take’ on this....
This sentence makes me so angry. The Winkler family (Matthew’s parents, his grandparents and uncles) are very nice caring people. Even she admitted when she was first caught that she did something wrong! Sickening
Her early statements are what leads me to believe that the scenarios she claims were pure fiction.
They were. She got caught in a money scam and he got angry. She shoots him in the back and leaves him to die. End of story. That in itself is terrible, but then she lies on stand about his character. Not only did she take his life, she took his good name and he isn’t around to defend it. Her meanness goes deep to the bone.
I believe she was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, a Class C Felony, which could have brought at least two years served if she had 2 priors. that is one of the problems of a sentencing schedule; when a person's first offense is a murder, they get off much easier than they should
If they had got her for 2nd degree murder, a class A felony, a standard offender could get out in 4.5-7.5 years.
I totally agree. What I don’t understand is why the prosecution let her get away with such a rediculous scenario without a more vigorous inquiry. They basically let her story go unchallenged.
yeah, they probably didn’t think anyone would believe it would see through it, but you never should take that chance. :(
Number two, I would be very surprised if they would ever step inside Platinum Plus or any other sleaze joint.
For some reason I believe her, but whatever happened did not warrant killing him, unless her life or the children’s were in danger, which they apparently were not.
Exactly! Her daughter testified that she never saw her father mistreat her mother. They ignored her testimony. She changed her story 3 times. She left him to die. She knew he was still alive and she jerked the phone out of the wall to keep him from calling for help. There was never any proof whatsoever other than her testimony and inuendos from her friends that she had been abused. She was involved in criminal activity that he was going to find out about the very day she shot him. She was on the phone talking and agitatedly pacing at her job the day before she killed him. She violated her bond by being out drinking New Years Eve and the judge and parole board ignored that, too. It was premeditated murder pure and simple. Her employer and the people she lives with just love to shove it in our faces that she is getting by with it. The day she was found guilty of manslaughter, they had a big sign on the marqee of the drycleaners where she works. It said “Welcome Home, Mary. Its just sickening. Meanwhile, Matt is dead and can’t even defend himself.
Good question. And the shoe was brand new. Never been worn.
Another thing she claimed was that he got up that morning because the baby was crying, and put his hand over the babys’ mouth and nose to quiet her, then went back to bed. But the autopsy showed his bladder was full. So full that had he been awake, he would have had to visit the bathroom really bad, yet he supposedly got up, tried to smother the baby and walked back to the bedroom, passing the bathroom, and went back to sleep with a very full bladder.
The older girl said she didn’t ever want to see her again.
No. He was a very nice decent minister in a small town church. Very much loved by the town and his congregation.
Strange, too, that in her confession, she was acting almost cocky, like she was enjoying the attention. But she wouldn’t say that he was abusive. As a matter of fact she said he never abused her, that he was upset because the church was broke. I guess so seeing she used the churches money for her little check kiting scheme she had going on. Then her lawyers tell her to keep her mouth shut and they come up with this abuse defense and suddenly it was her he was mad at, not the church. At one point in her confession she even said, “ he was so good.”
Thats right! She said her ugly came out. I had forgotten about that.
She was fixing to get caught. I honestly believe she killed him to keep him from finding out what she had been doing. Thats even worse.
Even after her confession that she was not abused and the fact she changed her story 3 times? Once she told details about how she did it, how she went to the closet and got the gun, exactly where she stood and how she felt and even her thoughts. She said she had to steady herself by holding on to the footboard of the bed because she thought the gun was going to kick. She said it wasn't as loud as she thought it was going to be. Once she said she got the gun to go talk to him and make him listen. Then at the trial, she doesn't remember anything. And she lied to those precious children about it. The judge said the children weren't involved but the little girl heard the gun and got up and saw her daddy on the floor bleeding. They asked her what he was doing and she said, "he was moaning." You still believe her even after the overwhelming evidence of the check kiting and the lengthes she went to, to keep him from finding out?
Maybe I wasn’t clear about what I thought Mary was telling the truth about. I do believe her about the abuse.
I don’t because I was abused myself. Its fairly easy to spot. I know someone like her who will go to any lengths to keep people from finding out about their deviousness.
They handed down a conviction on voluntary manslaughter, not murder.
Too bad Paris couldn’t have had Winkler’s lawyers.
Let’s see 60 days for cold-blooded murder, 45 days for driving while intoxicated
No, but the jury filled with Oprah watchers failed to convict a murderer on the first degree charges that she deserved. Not a single allegation of abuse was corroborated and I'm still wondering what he was doing while sleeping to make her want to shoot him in the back.
This stupid, evil, selfish woman should be spending the rest of her life in a cell with some Big Bertha to show her what abuse REALLY is.
No he wasn’t. He appears to have been a good & decent man. Nothing his murderer said could be backed up with actual evidence.
Set her free? She should have gotten the death penalty.
Yes, she should have gotten the death penalty. Letting her get away with this not only sets a murderer free, it also lets other would be murderers know they too can get away with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.