Barbara Sheehan Acquitted?

Okay, I understand the whole Battered Wife Syndrome issue and years of abuse at the hands of a violent husband; but where is the physical evidence of this claimed and relentless abuse? I mean in general, in most domestic violence cases, there are numerous complaints, questions of bruises or physical wounds related to abuse by co-workers or other outside the family sources. Did any of this evidence exist? And as far as her son's testimony, wrapped around an angry letter about his father's newly discovered girlfriend, written when he was in his teens, well it's an angry letter of betrayal, not a corroboration of physical abuse. And of course, dad is dead and mom is faced with prison for his murder; taking both parents out of his life; whom do you think he is going to corroborate with? Is "yep he abused my mom millions of times" just simply enough to corroborate her shooting her husband ELEVEN times with TWO different guns? I can maybe see a panic stricken self defense shooting where she uses a revolver and repeatedly continues to pull the trigger until it goes click-click-click and realizing what she had just done. But to also quickly grab a second weapon that was allegedly present, a semi-auto pistol, release the safety, or even rack one in the chamber and then shoot him another 6 times? That just seems a bit beyond the heat of the moment. He was apparently shaving, turned and pointed his weapon at her head and she got the drop on him, an experienced veteran law enforcement officer and shot him five times and he never got one shot off at her is his own natural defense? Seems a bit odd to me too. And all the character damaging allegations of perverted sexual encounters she was "forced" to watch? Easy to make those claims because he simply can't defend them, he's dead. And those encounters likely were never witnessed, so it is a she says, he says, oops he can't say can he? Well she says it happened and just puts more icing on her syndrome induced shooting defense.

I know, I didn't watch the trial and haven't read the transcripts, but I have many questions that raise my doubt of this being a justified self-defense shooting. And yes, it appears reasonable doubt got her acquitted.

1. Was there physical evidence of long time abuse?
2. Were there corroborating statements of the son that match the timelines of the alleged abuse? "It happened all the time" is not specific corroboration; it's a generalized statement.
3. If he had a girlfriend; why would he oppose her leaving? Did he beat the girlfriend too?
4. What experience did Barbara have with firearms and their use?
5. Why did she never seek help from friends or family over the years? Yes I know, it's a syndrome thing. But she wasn't 30 years old with young children to protect. Opportunity could exist. After all she was allegedly trying to sneak out of the house when the shooting occurred. Why didn't she just walk out one of the many times he was at work or at his girlfriends? Certainly she shows she was afraid to leave.
6. Was he really shaving with a loaded pistol on the vanity with one in the chamber and the safety off? Did she testify that he racked one in the pipe or un-clicked the safety which perpetuated her fear for her life when he allegedly pointed the gun to her head?
7. Why would the court allow her to wear a purple scarf in court? It certainly prejudices the jury. It just screams "I'm battered and I need your sympathy".

I have to agree with some of the commentators on the articles written about this case and it's outcome. Had a man been subjected to years of mental or physical abuse at the hands of his wife; and he shot her; well he'd immediately be guilty of murder! After all, there are no Husband Battered Syndromes, no shelters for battered men and no support groups for them either. It just doesn't get talked about because the whole concept just seems a bit ridiculous or far fetched. In my opinion, the crime, no matter who commits it, should be looked at from only the facts, evidence and statements that specifically corroborate those facts. A syndrome on it's own should not be a defense for murder! Perhaps the prosecutor should have been seeking a manslaughter charge instead of murder and maybe she would have at least been held accountable for something.