Mulheres que Matam: duas sentenças contrastantes – dois casos similares

Otros responsables
Fecha
11/2015
Editorial
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Antropologia Social da
Revista
Ilha Revista de Antropologia
Título del libro
Nombre del evento
Fecha del evento
Institución organizadora
ISSN
2175-8034
eISSN
ISBN
Idioma
Portugués
Tipo del evento
Clasificación temática
Palabras clave
Resumen
Neste artigo propõe-se comparar dois casos jurídicos aparentemente semelhantes protagonizados por mulheres que assassinaram seus parceiros agressores. Porém, trata-se de casos que apresentam resultados jurídicos contrastantes. Pois enquanto num deles o tribunal condenou a mulher, no outro ela foi absolvida, alegando que o homicídio foi em “legítima defesa”. Trata-se então de casos análogos e de sentenças contraditórias? Ou, pelo contrário, esses casos são muito dissimiles e não seriam então contraditórios na sentença? Sem desprezar o fato de que nenhum caso é igual a outro, encontrada-se nas análises dos dois casos um conjunto de semelhanças evidentes. Refere-se especificamente aos casos de Graciela Aguirre e Valeria Pérez Aquino, acontecidos no ano de 2007. O primeiro foi no distrito de La Matanza, província de Buenos Aires, e o outro, na província de Chubut. Este estudo considera como fontes os meios de comunicação, especialmente os jornais, para analisar um dos espaços dentre os quais são construídas moralidades e valores que envolvem representações sobre as relações de gênero, a dualidade vítima/agência e a violência de gênero.
The purpose of this article is to compare two juridical cases that, at a first glimpse, seam to be similar. Both of them were homicides in which women kill their abusers. However, both cases have contrasting juridical results. Meanwhile in one of the cases the court condemned the killer, in the other she was considered not guilty asserting that the homicide was in “legitimate defence”. Are this cases similar but with contradictory sentences? Or, on the contrary, are this affairs really different and thus there is no contradiction in the judgements? It is obvious that no case is equal to other but in the analysis of both we come across to a series of similarities. We specifically refer to the Graciela Aguirre and Valeria Pérez Aquino cases that happened during the course of 2007. The first took place in La Matanza, Buenos Aires province, the other in the Patagonic province of Chubut. This study takes into account and selects media sources, specially from newspapers, to analyse how moralities and values around gender relations, victim/agency and gender violence are constructed.
The purpose of this article is to compare two juridical cases that, at a first glimpse, seam to be similar. Both of them were homicides in which women kill their abusers. However, both cases have contrasting juridical results. Meanwhile in one of the cases the court condemned the killer, in the other she was considered not guilty asserting that the homicide was in “legitimate defence”. Are this cases similar but with contradictory sentences? Or, on the contrary, are this affairs really different and thus there is no contradiction in the judgements? It is obvious that no case is equal to other but in the analysis of both we come across to a series of similarities. We specifically refer to the Graciela Aguirre and Valeria Pérez Aquino cases that happened during the course of 2007. The first took place in La Matanza, Buenos Aires province, the other in the Patagonic province of Chubut. This study takes into account and selects media sources, specially from newspapers, to analyse how moralities and values around gender relations, victim/agency and gender violence are constructed.
Colecciones
Aprobación
Revisión
Complementado por
Referenciado por
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como by-nc-sa
