[Tom4784]

Given what we know now, I think it's wrong to paint both sides as equally wrong. She's a psychological abuser, she put him in a position where she basically said she could do what she wanted to him and he'd be the villain and she proved it right with her lies to the world.

He was likely broken down by her abuse and lashed out which isn't right but it doesn't make him an abuser either. If you were to flip the genders, would you say a woman is an abuser if she is abused, finally snaps and lashes out? According to the law, she wouldn't be considered so given that there was a murder charge that was overturned a year or two ago with a woman who, after years of abuse, killed her husband. She was found guilty, I believe but then the courts recognised the effects of things like psychological abuse and coercive control and overturned it and I believe they wrote it into law as a justifiable defense although I'd have to google that last bit.

It's an extreme example, but, regardless of gender, if you abuse someone and they eventually snap, it doesn't make them an abuser for defending themselves.