woman sets fire to husband who sexually abused daughter.

February 28, 2015 - Vincent Phillips, age given as 52, was doused with a flammable liquid, by this wife, whom then lit match and ignited him while he slept. Sounds serious, yes? Well, even more seriously, Vincent Phillips, the woman’s husband, is facing 1st-Degree Child Molestation charges for allegedly harming his 7-year-old step-daughter. The question is being raised, “What should happen to the woman who took the law into her own capable hands?” Doubtlessly, this matter will be soon presented to a court of law.

Tatanysha Hedman, aged 40, was so sickened by the perverse act allegedly committed against her small child, a daughter, 7 years in age, that in her fury she set her ‘husband’ intentionally on fire. Yes, waited for him to go to sleep, then doused him in with a combustible liquid, and did set a lit match to upon him. It is being debated by the public whether, or not, if it is acceptable that she did so, and has done. Hedman, herself, now faces assault and arson charges by area police in Renton, Washington, and currently remains jail awaiting disposition of her case. The public appears to be siding with her cause.

what should they do? they should let her go that's what.

Her daughter will need her at a time like this. Yes it was irresponsible of her knowing it would separate them but what would you do?

I hope the young girl comes through this mess and can muster a decent life out if what is left.

She gets a....Trophy

And another can of lighter fluid.

a reply to: sg1642
Well, I can't say I fault her for her actions. I might have done much worse in her shoes. Nevertheless, the courts can't exactly let this go. She at least has to stand trial. She needs a good attorney who can get her off on temporary insanity, or something similar. Yeah, she'll have to go through a lot of psychological evaluations and therapy for years to come, but that's better than prison, which will do nothing but add insult to injury. Her daughter was molested, dammit!!!

And what the hell was he doing running around free if this was known by authorities? He shouldn't have been there in the first place.

a reply to: sg1642

I would say that if it was after a conviction, she did alright.

But the simple fact is that until the "truth" comes out in court and a jury rules on it, there's no telling whether he actually committed the atrocious acts. There's been too many times when people have been falsely accused. Sometimes kids make stuff up, most of the time they don't.

But rest assured, regardless of the sentence, he'll get what's coming to him in prison.

The guy has / had a right to a trial before she acted as judge and jury. Unless she actually saw him doing this I can't justify her actions.

I agree totally with all of the above posts. Good for her if he is guilty, I hope her sentence reflects the state of mind she would be in but I also hope to hell he was a guilty man because if he isn't it's too late to take it back now.

I prefer the Lorena Bobbitt method.

a reply to: sg1642

I dont judge people like this woman. She has the right of a mother to punish the one who hurt her defenceless daughter.

I say thank you to her. One less.

a reply to: sg1642

As a mother, there are no bounds for what I would do to protect my children.

I can't say whether I would go to those extremes or not but, I haven't been in that situation before either.

People that abuse kids are the worst scum of the earth...period. They will never get sympathy from me.

EVER!

Let her go. She performed a public service.

Having had this happen to me, I don't know the rage and the steps I would go through if someone did this to my daughter. I probably would lose control. I have been known to disassociate before, so I'd be scared of what I would do, and if I would even know it, to tell the truth.

I only wish she was more devious in how she made this man pay. Only so she can keep custody of her daughter and not face repercussions.

ETA : Are we certain the child didn't do this? This could be nothing like what the public is thinking?

originally posted by: Metallicus
The guy has / had a right to a trial before she acted as judge and jury. Unless she actually saw him doing this I can't justify her actions.

I hate to say it but I agree with you.


You cant take the law into your own hands as there would be caos.


She should get the minimum sentance allowed. But she should still have pay for her crime.

Innocent until proven guilty should always take precedent over emotional kneejerks.

He must still be alive if it's only an assault charge.

& we don't know how badly he was burned anyways...



She shouldn't get in too much trouble, imo.


But she does need to be taught a certain lesson about maybe the year we are living in and the moral code in which our society has been built upon in recent years.

a reply to: sg1642

I'm sure I'm gonna get flamed for this(pardon the pun) but as a society where does it end? As someone else said he wasn't convicted in a court of law.

If this is a precedent how many angry wife's will do the same and just say "he molested my daughter"?

We are a society of laws and we have to enforce those laws even when they aren't necessarily convenient.

In the OP, "Her daughter will need her at a time like this. Yes it was irresponsible of her knowing it would separate them..."

That says it all for me, during this time her daughter will need her more than ever, and now she won't be there. She should have thought of that before taking the law into her own hands.

Would I do the same? I would personally have maybe given him a good serious beating, got myself in jail for a day or so and than let the prisons do what they do to his kind...

originally posted by: Skid Mark
Let her go. She performed a public service.

If he is guilty, I agree.

In my views:

Yes the man deserved punishment, but not death. Normally I think anyone should suffer life in prison for taking a life without a valid reason, but due to the circumstances (the man committed a terrible crime), maybe she should face a few years in prison (I'd say around 10 or more) instead.

Raping a child is not something you end up dying for, it is something you end up getting terribly punished for. The man should have faced 10+ years in prison and torture.


Edit: The man didn't die. Therefore let the woman go and the man go (still the man has to pay charges).

1. The woman did what she had to do, she punished those who committed a punishable act
2. The man got what he deserved and received a very very brutal punishment. The man, now punished, should be let go as long as he pay's any charges that were set. The man must also stay away from the family and not be able to even see them.

Even if he is guilty she shouldn't just be let off Scott Free. Set the precedent for vigilantism?

Trust me I am not one to undermine the gravity of his crime. A close family member of mine, around her age, went through almost the exact same thing and her life has not recovered. Its been over 30 years for this family member of mine. Sexual molestation and rape destroys lives. It's a very very terrible crime.

Still. We need to see the bigger picture, and the kinds of consequences vigilantism implies. Until Batman or Green Arrow shows up we need to encourage the normal route for our justice.

premeditated murder, the woman gets LIFE or a good hanging - Now where wil the kid be?

- i swear if this so called "woman" who is just as bad as the rapist husband doesn't get convicted of this crime - "TANJ" to quote Larry Niven, " There Ain't No Justice!"

When two wrongs make a right we are all Doomed and will get steamrolled on by everyone. This woman's crime cannot be allowed to stand!

So your endorsing setting someone on fire?

The guy is a pos kill him but setting someone on fire is brutality that we in the civilized world cannot justify.

We are not ISIS.