Jump to content

Texan Man Kills (Alleged) Child Molestor - But Will Not Face Jail


  

44 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

There is no doubt in my mind at all when I think about this. I would likely want to first make sure my child is safe and then want to kill the person responcible. Whether or not I would show restraint would be unknown because it didn't happen to me but each time I play this fellas senario in my head its a ripped out windpipe or a broken neck each time.

 

I could see charges brought against the person in a uk senario but a minimum term and an open prison or a suspended term awarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

wow, a pretty damning reflection on the members of this forum that 50% think he shouldnt be charged.   of course he should be charged, tried and found guilty of manslaughter.   The mitigation shou

Oh right, yeah. Of course, he should be charged. Anyone who thinks not would be a fucking dunderhead in not recognising that it involved a person ending another's life. But I don't think any decisi

I don't think the Manx, British or US legal systems work like that. Not every incident where someone ends up killing a person due to their direct actions ends up with a murder or manslaughter charge,

wow, a pretty damning reflection on the members of this forum that 50% think he shouldnt be charged.

 

of course he should be charged, tried and found guilty of manslaughter.

 

The mitigation should be reflected in the sentence

Edited by kokorito
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh right, yeah. Of course, he should be charged. Anyone who thinks not would be a fucking dunderhead in not recognising that it involved a person ending another's life. But I don't think any decision should involve punishment IF the person was caught whilst molesting the child and there was very, very little time between seeing this and becoming violent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh right, yeah. Of course, he should be charged. Anyone who thinks not would be a fucking dunderhead in not recognising that it involved a person ending another's life. But I don't think any decision should involve punishment IF the person was caught whilst molesting the child and there was very, very little time between seeing this and becoming violent.

 

Absolutely! - In any case like this the person should be charged, a thorough investigation conducted and a fair trial held. Despite what some people on these forums believe the law treats people as innocent until proven guilty. As such the burden of proof is on the prosecutors to prove the case rather than the defendant to disprove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, a pretty damning reflection on the members of this forum that 50% think he shouldnt be charged.

 

of course he should be charged, tried and found guilty of manslaughter.

 

The mitigation should be reflected in the sentence

I don't think the Manx, British or US legal systems work like that. Not every incident where someone ends up killing a person due to their direct actions ends up with a murder or manslaughter charge, let alone conviction.

 

I don't feel we have enough information about this case to make a judgement. The evidence was put before a grand jury and they found there was no case to answer.

 

If you are attacked by somebody and in defending yourself you kill that person it is possible you will not be charged - the justice system will say there is either not a case to answer, no prospect of a conviction, or that it is not in the public interest to press charges.

 

The same applies when you defend somebody.

 

The press reporting is simply not clear enough for me to say that this man was not acting to protect his child. The child molester was a direct threat, actually assaulting his child, he acted to end that threat and hit the man until he was no longer a threat and then undertook first aid. Such things happen regularly when the police shoot on a person - they keep shooting until there is no longer a threat.

 

The Grand Jury will have had a far greater opportunity to examine the situation than the press can report and found their investigation was sufficient to mean no further action was required. I do not feel that I can say there is a miscarriage of justice given this.

Edited by Chinahand
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The child molester was a direct threat, actually assaulting his child, he acted to end that threat and hit the man until he was no longer a threat...

 

And then kept attacking him. Reasonable force. Or more appropriately in this case, unreasonable force. The man did not use proportional force on the attacker. The "molester" was a threat when he was attacking the daughter, but as soon as the father stopped him, he was no longer a threat to the child.

 

Instead of restraining the man for handing over the police, the mans rage took over and he beat another human being to death with his bare hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The child molester was a direct threat, actually assaulting his child, he acted to end that threat and hit the man until he was no longer a threat...

 

And then kept attacking him.

Just asking MDO, where does it actually say that? Are you sure it isn't coming from your preconceptions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The child molester was a direct threat, actually assaulting his child, he acted to end that threat and hit the man until he was no longer a threat...

 

And then kept attacking him.

Just asking MDO, where does it actually say that? Are you sure it isn't coming from your preconceptions?

 

A man attacks another man until he is unconcious and then calls the police, telling "I think he's dead, he's unresponsive".

 

This tells me the father beat the man until he was unconsious (and quite possibly dead or certainly dying).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This tells me the father beat the man until he was unconsious (and quite possibly dead or certainly dying).

Erm yes, there is no dispute about that.

 

The question is whether this was a single incident where the father was taking necessary action to defend his child, and himself, in a struggle with an attacker. Or two incidents, where the father afterwards assaulted the rapist.

 

To simplify IF the father had hit the rapist once and he'd fallen to the floor and banged his head would you say the father had gone to far?

 

Twice, three times etc. What was the rapist doing during this - lying passive, or fighting back?

 

All I am saying is that there is a lot of information missing which means we can't make a clear decision.

 

I totally agree, if the man was passive, and no threat and the father then went back and attacked the rapist beating him to death that is murder, but there is no evidence that is the case.

 

If it is a violent struggle where the father is trading blows with the rapist and its only by laying a real couple of haymakers on the rapist he's able to end it, its a very different situation.

 

The Justice system hasn't taken no action. The police have investigated, reported their findings to the Grand Jury which would have been able to see a lot more detail than we have.

 

You seem able to interpret the situation to imply a miscarriage of justice has occurred.

 

Instead of restraining the man for handing over the police, the mans rage took over and he beat another human being to death with his bare hands.

 

How do you know this is what happened?

 

I think you are extrapolating far too much. It's something you do quite a bit.

Edited by Chinahand
Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask if you are a parent, MDO?

 

Relevance?

When I held my first-born in my arms for the very first time, I experienced a feeling that I think only a parent can understand; the feeling that there was now someone in the world that I would be prepared to give up everything - my own life included - to protect from harm. If someone had attempted that child while I was still responsible for her, I can only shudder to think how far I would have been prepared to go to prevent it happening - and how far the rage it would have induced would have taken me.

That is the relevance - and only a parent can really understand that.

 

Ah the good ol' "only a parent can understand" bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask if you are a parent, MDO?

 

Relevance?

When I held my first-born in my arms for the very first time, I experienced a feeling that I think only a parent can understand; the feeling that there was now someone in the world that I would be prepared to give up everything - my own life included - to protect from harm. If someone had attempted that child while I was still responsible for her, I can only shudder to think how far I would have been prepared to go to prevent it happening - and how far the rage it would have induced would have taken me.

That is the relevance - and only a parent can really understand that.

 

Ah the good ol' "only a parent can understand" bullshit.

Ah the good old retarded imbecile poster dogshit. Clearly you haven't bred - let's be thankful for that.

 

So only a parent can understand sacrifice or defending the life of a loved one? What a typical angry parent poster you are.

Edited by MilitantDogOwner
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems funny how you dislike people saying how you can understand something because you don't have first-hand experience, yet you do the same when people talk about military matters.

 

But you are right. Yes, you can understand the bond between parents and child. And you don't have to be a parent to understand it. You might not be able to feel it as a parent but you can understand it.

 

Anyway, MDO what are you fucking getting at? Is it the case that you think the person ought to be punished from the information that you have?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...