Does Wife Acquitted of Murdering Batterer Husband Now Have License to "Terminate" Spouse #2 and #3?

Barbara Sheehan Acquitted for 

Killing Batterer Husband

Should feminists or anybody else be celebrating the acquittal of Mrs. Barbara Sheehan, The New York woman who pulled out two guns and fired eleven shots into her wife-beating husband?   I sincerely hope not.  
There was no doubt that Mrs. Sheehan had killed the man.  The question before the jury was whether she was justified because of 24 years of alleged physical and emotional abuse. The murder victim, a retired police sergeant officer, had reportedly beat his wife with such vigor that one of the couple's children called the father "a monster."

My question is the following.  If society condones the so-called "battered spouse legal defense," what do we do when the acquitted spouse remarries someone remarkably like the first husband, who also turns out to be a batterer?  Psychologists have long noted that someone who divorces an alcoholic spouse is upon remarrying, more than twice as likely to choose a new wife or husband who is also an alcoholic.  The same principle applies to battered women.  In such a case, should the battered woman be acquitted for shooting the second and third husbands for the same reason as she disposed of the first?   Or better still, should a wife-beating husband be acquitted for killing a co-dependent wife, claiming self-defense because she could have snapped and "terminated" him at any time with impunity?  I do not wish to make light of the painfully serious subject of spousal abuse, but as with so many aspects of human behavior, the courts may be the last place to go in search of our common humanity.  


America is already the most violent country in the industrialized world. Should we be offering even more justifications for us to pull out the .44 Magnums and Remington semi-automatic rifles and shoot someone for being just as flawed as we are?