The story is supposedly like this: wife goes to a mall with friends, one of which is armed with a video camera, intending to catch her husband in the act, that is, going out with his alleged mistress. Wife sees the husband with the mistress, and she - along with her posse - moves in for the kill. The wife proceeds to beat the living daylights out of the alleged mistress. Mall security personnel rush in intending to break up the beat-down, but the death-grip-from-hell wife manages to inflict a reasonable amount of physical punishment to the alleged mistress. Husband, standing there with his box of donuts, mounts a halfhearted rescue effort. After the whole fiasco, the husband goes after the alleged mistress leaving his wife behind in the hands of mall authorities.
This video highlights a few issues that sadly takes a back seat to the general reaction of the public who have viewed it: justifiable vengeance. However, I opine that no issue or conflict can ever by justified by vengeance, but in so saying, vengeance is, admittedly, a somewhat useful (if oft violent) deterrent.
Infidelity is an issue that has been around since marriages (and relationships for that matter) became commonplace. It has been the cause of countless study and philosophizing, but in the end, no one really has an all-encompassing answer for this social problem, if one sees it as 'a problem'. There are various legal ways of finding resolution to these kinds of conflict, and the option of choice for most is divorce. However, this highlights the difficulty in procuring a divorce here in the Philippines. Most married couples - and I speak from personal observation and opinion only - who wish to "end" their love affair simply stay away from each other and pretend a marriage never happened. In this case, it seems like the wife held her marriage at a high enough value as to pretty much do anything in order to "punish" whoever gets in the way. Props to her, but now this brings about problems.
First of all, even if the husband was cheating on her, the husband and the alleged mistress was clearly on a group outing. It could hardly be said that they went out "alone" as their friends were spoken to by the camera handler. Any notion of exclusivity in this scenario is out of the window. I am not saying he was not cheating, merely that it is difficult for me to see any exclusivity between the husband and the alleged mistress.
Secondly, it has never been easy to justify assault and battery. Every sovereign state on this planet have laws against private citizens hurting each other - no matter the reason bar self-defense. "Self-defense" is clearly not applicable here (unless we take into account that the supposed cheating as an "attack intended to cause bodily harm" towards the wife); actually, the very fact that the wife's party had a video camera suggests that they intended to capture in film some sort of confrontation or - as seen in the video - a downright physical fight. The bottom line is, for whatever intents and purposes, the wife clearly assaulted the alleged mistress. Emotionally justifiable? Perhaps. Ethically justifiable? Personally, I would say yes. Morally justifiable? No, because she did inflict bodily harm on the alleged mistress. Legally justifiable? HARDLY, as far as I am informed. We cannot simply harm (or wish harm) to another person because we were offended or insulted. Infidelity is a serious breach of love and trust, yes, and that is exactly why we have a legal code. The majesty of the law should be our number one back-up in cases of severity such as these.
Finally, it is said that there are two sides to a coin. It takes two to tango. I can rattle on more relevant phrases, but it all underlines a simple point: why did the wife assault the alleged mistress, when her husband - who she is in a legal and consecrated relationship with - was easier to have access to, so to speak? I can understand the anger, insecurity, and mistrust the alleged mistress probably caused to the wife, but attacking her does not solve anything if her husband himself was the instigator of the affair. If I was to justify a beat-down (and I'm not saying I would, in any part of this post), I think that the husband was more deserving of it simply because he either opted to cheat out of his own free will OR he took the bait that the other woman dangled in front of him. Whatever the reason, it was HE, the husband, who should have borne the brunt of the consequences arising from his infidelity.
Having said that, this post is merely a reaction to many comments I have read online regarding this matter. There are so many people who laughed at the alleged mistress, with many egging on more punishment for her in the future. There are some who state that they would inflict even worse damage on her, including enough harm as to cause her her death. DEATH. There are many crimes worthy of the death penalty (I support the death penalty for drug-related crimes, murder, and rape), sure, but infidelity? It is painful, yes, but I doubt that it is necessary to want to take someone's life because of it. Jealousy and envy - no matter how justifiable - should never be the basis of any reaction, opinion, or thought. The sad part is, none of us who have seen the video can truly know the story in its entirety; we are limited by what we see in that video.
From what I've seen, the wife should have just filed for annulment, demanded her fair share of property and assets, and at home, beat her husband silly (she looked capable anyway), and be done with it. There is no need to stoop down to the level that she succumbed to on that one eventful day at the mall.