Wife Who Killed Minister Wants Kids Back

Mary Winkler Is Seeking Immediate Return Of Her 3 Daughters

(AP)  Mary Winkler is seeking the immediate return of her three daughters, or at least frequent visitation with them, according to an emergency motion filed on her behalf Monday.

The motion in Carroll County Chancery Court in Huntingdon says Winkler's continued separation from the girls ages 2, 8 and 10 is "unconscionable and detrimental" to them. It says she has not had parenting time with the children in a year.

"Mother would show that she does not represent a threat of substantial harm to the children and therefore they should be returned to her immediately in order to serve their best interest," says the motion filed by Winkler's attorneys, Kay Farese Turner and Rachel Putnam of Memphis.

"In the alternative, mother respectfully requests that she be granted substantial visitation with the three minor children immediately with such visitation occurring on a regular and frequent basis," the document states.

Winkler's former in-laws are seeking to terminate her parental rights and adopt the girls.

Dan and Diane Winkler have also filed a motion trying to stop Mary Winkler from appearing on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" Wednesday. She is scheduled to talk on the show about fatally shooting her husband, Matthew Winkler, who was a Church of Christ preacher in the small town of Selmer.

She shot Matthew Winkler in the back with a shotgun in their home on March 22, 2006, after enduring what she described as an abusive marriage.

Mary Winkler, 33, was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, but served only five months in jail, followed by two months in a mental health treatment facility.

The Winklers state in their motion that they "do not believe it is proper to try this case in the press" and that the publicity would harm the children.

"It is in the best interest of the children to live normal lives and it is not in their interest for their private lives and problems to be aired in the newspaper and on television. No good can come of it," their motion states.

[aldewitt-2009]

You don''t punish someone who shoots her husband IN THE BACK, and WITH A SHOTGUN?

So she was abused. Big whoop. Did she know where the front door was? Did she know where the car keys were? Hadn''t she ever heard of divorce? Of course she had. She took the easy way and shot the old boy. She should be kept as far away from her kids as possible, and she should NEVER get them back.

All this baloney about how she was a victim is a crock. She was no victim. She could have gotten a lawyer and gotten a divorce, but instead, she got a shotgun. That''s someone who deserves to go to jail for a longer time than 5 months.

[pwrslm]

Mary Winkler, the woman who shot her pastor husband a few months ago and then turned herself in, had been battered and abused by him in every conceivable way, her family and friends say. She increasingly showed up with bruises which makeup did not conceal. He kept her from her family. She didn%u2019t tell when they asked her what was going on. She didn%u2019t tell anybody right away and hasn%u2019t yet, really. Her family is speaking up

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/LegalCenter/story?id=2667042&page=1

[pwrslm]

I cant believe some of you people. A woman who has been abused for years on years suddenly snaps, and defends herself, killing her abuser. You dont punish the woman like some cold blooded killer.

Its over, let her have her life back, and her children. Dont punish the children because of the fathers abuse.

[pwrslm]

I cant believe some of you people. A woman who has been abused for years on years suddenly snaps, and defends herself, killing her abuser. You dont punish the woman like some cold blooded killer.

Its over, let her have her life back, and her children. Dont punish the children because of the fathers abuse.

[bagag]

What bothers me about this story is that the minister''s parents now have custody. He didn''t learn how to become abusive in a vacuum. Chances are good that he learned it in his childhood. What might be happening to those children in their paternal grandparents'' home? I say let her have them back.

[usayesterday]

My final thought on this story....


...Mary Winkler''s punishment may not have been hard time in jail, (as it should have been). But may her punishment be a life full of torment and fear, from the constant barrage of death threats, anger, and rejection from those closest to her to the public at large.

May this happen for the rest of her life until she decides to end her life on her own, (which couldn''t come too soon).

[mignon5]

Give her her kids. She has paid her debt to society and should not have to be separated from her kids. I understand that her in laws hate her and think that the kids should be theirs. If all kids who have parents who have been in jail are taken away from them then do it to Mary, otherwise she should not be treated differently. Those are her kids and she loves them.

[susanhelit]

No, they don''t need their mother. She''s no fit mother and worse than no mother. And she is a danger to those children. She''s already done incalculable harm to them. She was convicted - not found innocent, convicted. She lost her rights when that happened - not that she ever had any right to harm her children. They are not posessions, and parents who abuse them, neglect them, harm them, have no right to keep them. Especially when there are some wonderful, non-murdering grandparents who have cared for them for more than a year, that the children want to stay with. Doubly so when the children say they don''t want to be with their mother.


Oh, and if you believe that nonsense about Matthew and Mary arguing, you didn''t follow the court case very closely. Not only do the children say they heard no such thing, but also Matthew''s bladder was extremely full - enough so to prove he was asleep because anyone - yes, anyone at all - awake with that type of pressure, would be off to the bathroom first thing. His position - he was laying down, shot in the back. Everything shows he was asleep and helpless when she shot him. The kids also put to rest the lies about her running around frantic - she was just walking around calmly - as a cold blooded murderer would.

[Krazcarl]

trbl24you you mean someone actualy reads something but there own post I''m impressed. as for me let the cable go {cheap}
computer is the option. This is no longer about freedom of speech it''s about advocating your personel agenda.

[usayesterday]

For the record, I can agree with "tankersmash" to the point that the Liberal idealism had shifted personal responsibility away from oneself onto various reasons/excuses either "discovered" through psychological means or just plain ''passing-the-buck''.

Lack of personal responsibility can NO LONGER be considered a Liberal issue, or an issue of any political ideology, but it greatly affects everyone, (especially those in political power).

The jury of the accused did this country a great disservice. What''s more sad is that the jurors'' and the judge''s decision has now set a legal precedent for other defense attorneys to follow. It will take much more effort on the part of the county prosecutor to prove that murder is murder and that an excuse of "abuse", as arbitrary as it is, cannot hold ground in a court of LAW unless there is clear physical evidence proving such.

It''s all to easy to blame others these days. Various psychological terms have helped us to do that. Most notably, "road rage". "Abuse", sadly, has also been overused to the point where if a spouse does not allow their significant other to get their way every time, all the time...

...that significant other can claim "psychological/emotional abuse"! That term alone is hard to prove, but even harder to dispute, especially if the accused has a very good defense attorney and a parade of psychologists to back up that arbitrary claim!