« Dogs and Dinner | Main | There's love n the air between Democrats & Republicans »

Tough Love: Jennifer Hudson

By now you probably know that the mother, brother, and nephew of singer and Oscar-winning actress Jennifer Hudson were murdered last week at their Chicago home.

And you probably know that the prime person of interest in police custody is the estranged husband of Hudson's sister, the stepfather of the boy.

I feel sympathy for Hudson and her sister Julia,first and foremost. But beyond that sorry I had to think hard about the blame game in this case.

What prompted my reflection was part of a statement Julia Hudson wrote on her MySpace page about the murders of her mother, brother, and son: "...Now because I chose to do what was natural to me and love someone, it cost me my beautify family my wonderful beautiful loving supporting mother Darnell, my true blue baby brother Jason, I love you Big Baby...And last but never not (sic) least my only son Julian, my innocent baby one that was sheltered from all the evil oin (sic) the world because we loved him so much..."

The logic for her self-flagellation? William Balfour, Julia's estranged husband and the Chicago Police Department's "person of interest," has a lengthy criminal record, peppered with violent behavior, including attempted murder, for which he was convicted and served prison time (from which he may have accidentally been paroled too soon).

I get why Julia Hudson would blame herself. She survived. Her kid and family didn't. Survivor's guilt is a common reaction after this sort of tragedy.

But she's not to blame for the murders. The killer, who hopefully will fry, is to blame.

That being said, let's talk bluntly about relationships. Julia Hudson married this fat head within months of his release from prison. There was no mistaking where he'd been all those years. Reportedly, as their marriage got rocky, Balfour told Julia Hudson repeatedly that while he had girlfriends on the side, if she dated anyone else he'd kill her. Why in the world would she have wanted to hook up with this kind of guy? Again, she's not guilty. If he killed her family, he's guilty. Still, I say my question's a valid one.

A female friend scolded me over this line of thinking earlier this morning, 'cause, she said, Julia Hudson likely had low self esteem.

Ladies, you have to help me understand this self esteem thing. How badly do you have to feel about yourself that when you consider the sort of man you want in your life and your child's life you settle for a violent felon? Why not hold out till a nice guy comes along?

That's all. No more pontification from me. The murders aren't her fault 'cause she didn't commit them, but you can't run away from the fact that this guy didn't have to be in their lives at all.

Peace and prayers to the Hudson family.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tough Love: Jennifer Hudson:


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


James I think we have to agree to disagree on this one.

There comes a point where one has to take responsibility for your own personal bad decisions. Relationships doubly so.

If a woman is in a relationship with a man and he hits her, the woman should leave. There can be forgiveness, but there can be no second chance on something like this. He can say sorry, and the woman can say I forgive you but I'm not coming back.

Any woman who stays after being hit once is partially responsible for being hit a second time because, hey, guess what, abusive men will abuse again. If you choose to walk in a clearly labeled minefield, don't run crying to me when your legs are blown off.

A LENGTHY arrest record including attempted murder should be a cue to NOT DATE this man. If he is indeed the foul animal that murdered the members of the Hudson clan then Julia Hudson must bear some responsibility for exposing her mother and child to such a dangerous person.

Here's an analogy for you. If Julia had kept a loaded gun in the house where her child had access to it and the child accidentally shot the mother and himself, is Julia responsible? Of course she is.

In this instance, if her estranged husband William Balfour committed the crime.. he is the loaded gun. She knew he was a violent felon and she brought him into the lives of her family.

James B.

WavemanCali, I think we do agree. I'm saying she's not responsible for the murders because she didn't commit them. But I get why she feels guilty, because she allowed this man into her family's life. If I repeat that she's not responsible, it's because I'm erring on the side of caution for those people who will read this post and inevitably accuse me of accusing her of directly causing the deaths of her relatives.


I especially love how Dick Da Turd Daley came out immediately against the EEEVIL GUNS.

Look, Dick, the guy broke the law by having the gun AND BY MURDERING PEOPLE. What laws do you think you can pass that he would not have broken? How about making it legal for people to defend themselves? Hell, how about DOING YOUR JOB and not letting a guy off who broke paroll by POSESSION OF DRUGS?

Sorry for the rant, James. I just see this as a horrible, horrible tragedy that could easily have been averted in any number of ways, and instead of copping to the failure of the system, Daley immediately goes to "ban guns!". It's his pat answer for everything- because he is terrified of an armed citizenry.

James B.

Og, no apologies necessary. We agree 100% on this one. It appears this violent numbnut should not have been out of prison yet. And yes, the gun(s) he allegedly used to murder his in-laws and stepson did not pull their own triggers. These murders were the result of a killer killing, a parole/probation system failing (assuming the estranged husband is indeed the killer), and to a lesser degree, in my opinion, a woman willingly entering into a relationship with a dangerous man, who had tried to kill before.


first of all i just want to say that there is something very fishy here! Julias son has just been shot dead execution style and she has energy to get on my space.....ok....wierd. Second is the mam shes married killed her family and shes still got pics of them hugging on her my space........wierd. Third she has a quiz on her page that explains she was the black sheep of the family and she felt that her mom liked jen and jason more.....true. Julia didnt cry once in public...true. I think shes a suspect. Shes been jealous and she set her own family up. Please chicago police question the whale with the mustache. She was probley jealous of her own son. Shes so ugly and i dont like jennifer either. She has a strong voice but she is a weak woman. Who would date punk. hes all for tv. Wow ghetto and wierd.


I think our disagreement comes on the level of culpability in regards to Julia Hudson.

I personally think if someone came after her civilly for wrongful death of the family members it would not be out of line.

Criminally she is not at fault in any way.


I know several young women in abusive relations and they can't be reasoned with.


Keep making exscuses for him Mommy. That's how he's gotten this far. You're a sad woman. A mothers love is one thing. But to be so blind as to creat a monster, (please, it's so obvious he was in a rage, and then had to kill the poor child, the only witness!) you get no sympathy, just derision.


i'm with you china. something seems fishy about the myspace thing. i do like jennifer hudson's music, but think she should wait a while before marrying a guy nick-named 'Punk'! What's the rush, but again...it is her life. I wish her well. Whatever the case, she needs lots of love and support in this sorrowful time. This was a sad tradgedy, but something seems weird about the sister.


I don't understand it either, James. Here I am - sitting in my room thinking I have always had real low self esteem - but it just made me eat chocolate - not date losers.

There has to be something else in the mix besides that to cause women to go into self-defeating relationships.

James B.

China, I hadn't thought of the suspicious nature and timing of the MySpace post. Good points. Food for thought.

WavemanCali, now I get ya.

Pamela, that's a damned shame.

PlayJoJo, if it turns out the estranged hubby did do it, then you and I are in 100% agreement.

Sammn, you and China raise interesting points. How sick would that be if the boy's mom turned out to be involved?

KarmynR, you are a wise woman. Chocolate's a much better option than abuse. And it's good for your heart, too!


Come on James....I'm sure you've seen it plenty of times-people are scared of being alone and they end up with people that are just bad for them-because in some twisted way they'd rather have that than nothing. You know you've seen this.

James B.

Claudia, when I think bad for you I'm thinking you've met a guy who cheats or is a bum with no desire to get a job. But this? This guy wasn't bad for her. That's too mild. This guy was dangerous...and bad for her family.

So yes, I get the "bad for you" thing. You're right. I've seen "bad for you" a bunch. But I think this rises beyond "bad for you."


Love is an emotional thing, it isn't subject to reason. I have been lucky.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise