Read other letters about this article
My point was that the jury (and the audience in the courtroom) convicted Matt Winkler, a man who had been shot in the back in his sleep and therefore wasn't able to offer his side of the story, of abusing his wife, based on the small-town knee-jerk reaction to a pair of fuck-me shoes. A woman got away with killing her husband (she's free now, and trying to get her children back) largely because of the emotional impact of those shoes.