She refused to give evidence against him, it was a big part of the build up to the case (and several appeals about whether the case could even go ahead without her support).
Lots of abused women 'stand by their man' in a way that I can't say I personally understand. Hopefully it means there's been no repeat of the behaviour since and he's addressing his clearly abusive relationship with alcohol.
Alternatively it might just mean that the prisons are full and they have to find just about any possible reason not to send someone down.
It's generally fear bud. Lot's of these women {and men} try to leave many times. Compounded over several years and made to feel like they could never possibly achieve anything or survive without the controlling factor of said abusive spouse. Barton is exactly this. It's often nearly always about control and a huge dollop of narcissistic and/or sociopathic tendencies to boot.
But one thing they tend to really hate is the thought of losing control of their ''world'' or life on their terms.And often those types {like Barton} crumble when it happens.
Only know a few cases personally but one in particular very close to home. To a point that the person at the hands of controlling and abusive {mentally as well as physically} partner, actually wanted to die - in order to be free of it all. At a point saying to them ''please just kill me, do it now so I don't have to live like this''. Ironically, the c/a person didn't carry it out {somewhat thankfully}. The reason likely being is they would have also lost control of their world if that scenario materialised but they'd instilled enough fear into the abused, that they were confident that the person would never leave, no matter what.
It's no so much a standing by their man/woman {I know you inverted this somewhat} more a 'I'm so fucking scared of this person that if I don't stay with them, I have no idea what they will do to me', almost a double version of hell. You're living in hell but have been convinced you need them, if you leave you'll still be living in hell but have been convinced you're nothing without them.
The only way this actually ended is by action and confronting them. Essentially yes, putting themselves at risk {but at no more risk than they had always been at, once getting beyond that fear} but bringing the c/a to their worst nightmare - telling them that they are leaving and actioning it. It takes some big balls and a huge bunch of adrenalin; the c/a is never expecting that to happen {because of how they've curated and structured the lifestyle} and often shocked, then followed by anger. Which is often why, when so many make an attempt to leave, brute force it used in desperation by the controlling/abusive partner. To again bring the abused back into the c/a's idealist utopia - with more compounded fear. Unfortunately for many, they can never leave the situation because of this. Often because they may not even have the options to escape the situation.
I often use the analogy in a light hearted way in respect of football fans {especially of clubs in misfortune}. In that the club/ownership is often the abuser and controller of said loyal fan who keep on going back {essentially, like an abused partner}.
I'm not saying you have said this but more of a generalisation; we should in no way ever put any emphasis that this is the fault of the abused. Manipulative people like Barton will go to great lengths to continue controlling their scenario. It is a great shame that the judge appears to have passed such that they have somewhat sided with or enabled Barton to continue doing what he is doing. Often ''what about the kids'' is usually a crux that the abuser will use as way of manipulating the prevention of a break up {amicable or otherwise}, even if it is quite clear that a somewhat more healthy relationship and environment to raise children in - between two parents, would be more better achieved if the adults separated but again, the judge has seemingly done the manipulation for Barton by proxy; quite incredible.
Just send the cunt down or give him restrictive orders which will allow the woman to leave the relationship of her own genuine free will. They can make arrangements in regards to childcare and have a mediator/moderator where the kids are dropped off with the two even needing to come into contact in person. With additional orders in place to stop the manipulative little cunt hanging around, stalking, watching after dropping the kids back off. There were so many ways in which the judge could have applied restrictions on Barton but for all intents and purposes they've just said ''you've got kids, i'm not getting involved - nothing to see here''. Whilst simultaneously recognising that Barton is a dangerous wife-beating monster.
NB:
This really wasn't a topic for trivialness but hey ho. Also think, in a largely male dominated forum, it's important to talk about and raise conversations about these things. As men do, we often tend to skirt around things like this either through some form of taboo within our own gender or otherwise. It's definitely ok to call out a fellow bloke if he's being an abusive and controlling fucker. But it can be difficult to do so and/or warrant the business of getting involved. This is why often hope that the prosecution succeed in doing so - it seems here it's let itself down. We should still continue to have the conversations though.
