Father Kills Child Molester

[Densaner]

Manslaughter not murder. He didn't have a weapon but used his fists. He could argue diminished responsibility on the grounds of protecting his child.

[Galla-]

Reasonable belief is all he needs, especially since it was in his home and he has no "duty to retreat".

This.

Manslaughter not murder. He didn't have a weapon but used his fists. He could argue diminished responsibility on the grounds of protecting his child.

The prosecution will probably seek manslaughter charges, but the guy will walk.

It was defence under Texas law, as stated.

[Ifreann]

Reasonable belief is all he needs, especially since it was in his home and he has no "duty to retreat".

This.

Manslaughter not murder. He didn't have a weapon but used his fists. He could argue diminished responsibility on the grounds of protecting his child.

The prosecution will probably seek manslaughter charges, but the guy will walk.

It was defence under Texas law, as stated.

This all depends on what the investigation turns up. A lot of people are going to be kicking themselves if it turns out that the man they've been praising and recommended for medals was the one molesting his daughter and the dead man they've been saying is the scum of the Earth was trying to save her.

[Tekania]

This all depends on what the investigation turns up. A lot of people are going to be kicking themselves if it turns out that the man they've been praising and recommended for medals was the one molesting his daughter and the dead man they've been saying is the scum of the Earth was trying to save her.

That assumes a capability to realize error and admit mistakes. Something the raging reactionaries we get here and elsewhere are not capable of. If it turns out as you say it will barely get a mention by them. They'll simply vanish into the woodwork like cockroaches and pretend nothing happened.

[Tekania]

Texas Senate Bill 378:

The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used ... was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery

Seems to me that he should walk, then.

EDIT: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=80R&Bill=SB378

Of course, that at best only absolves you of criminal liability. It puts a real hitch however on your defense against a potential civil liability now that your admission of facts relating to the event are official court record.

[The Taryegeans]

[quote="Tekania";p="9731776]Of course, that at best only absolves you of criminal liability. It puts a real hitch however on your defense against a potential civil liability now that your admission of facts relating to the event are official court record.[/quote]

A wrongful death suit would never get anywhere if the dead was killed while molesting a 4 year old.

[Galborg]

"Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. "

Sheriff also said that they were investigating. In theory, the Father might have killed the guy for some other reason and made up the molestation story, this needs to be checked. Texas uses Common Law, so unless they have changed it a lot, there will be an Inquest for the dead guy. Inquest is done on Balance of Probability, Criminal trial is done on Beyond reasonable Doubt.

Difference between rape and sexual assault: rape is with a penis; sexual assault is with anything else, finger, dildo, broken bottle etc.

Difference between child molestation and statutory rape: if a 14 year old says "No." it is regular rape; if she says "Yes.", it still counts as rape because she cannot give consent.

[Trollgaard]

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/11/justice/texas-abuser-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

This is the best news article so far.

What do you think about this? Should the father get off without any punishment? I highly doubt he was remorseful like the article says and I bet he actually meant to do it. Even if he's charged he'll get a light sentence since it wasn't premeditated.

I tried to find updates but so far nothing came up.

This man should receive a medal, and the dead molester's bank account should go to the daughter to pay for therapy, if necessary.

[Galborg]

"Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. "

I agree.IF the Inquest shows that the Father spoke the truth.

[The Taryegeans]

This man should receive a medal, and the dead molester's bank account should go to the daughter to pay for therapy, if necessary.

While I do not think the man should be charged, the receivial of a medal and monetary compensation for killing someone (molester or no) should not happen.

Can you imagine the chaos if people were handing out cash and medals for killing sexual offenders? What would happen next? What if the dead was actually innocent, and their murderer was paid and rewarded for their act.

All that should happen in this case, and in similiar cases will be the absent of charges. And in cases where the molester was killed when posing no threat to anyone (i.e. killed by vigilantes) they should be charged with murder and pay for their crime.

[Ifreann]

This all depends on what the investigation turns up. A lot of people are going to be kicking themselves if it turns out that the man they've been praising and recommended for medals was the one molesting his daughter and the dead man they've been saying is the scum of the Earth was trying to save her.

That assumes a capability to realize error and admit mistakes. Something the raging reactionaries we get here and elsewhere are not capable of. If it turns out as you say it will barely get a mention by them. They'll simply vanish into the woodwork like cockroaches and pretend nothing happened.

That's what I seem to recall happening to the people who blamed those bombs in Oslo on al Qaeda when it turned out to be Breivik.

---

"Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. "

Sheriff also said that they were investigating. In theory, the Father might have killed the guy for some other reason and made up the molestation story, this needs to be checked. Texas uses Common Law, so unless they have changed it a lot, there will be an Inquest for the dead guy. Inquest is done on Balance of Probability, Criminal trial is done on Beyond reasonable Doubt.

Aren't inquests just rulings on fact? No punishments handed down?

[Tekania]

[quote="Tekania";p="9731776]Of course, that at best only absolves you of criminal liability. It puts a real hitch however on your defense against a potential civil liability now that your admission of facts relating to the event are official court record.[/quote]

A wrongful death suit would never get anywhere if the dead was killed while molesting a 4 year old.[/quote]

Except we're talking about perception here, not fact. If they were not, in fact, molesting a 4 year old, and it was merely your perception of it, you would still be civilly liable. Which was the direction of the point through this particular branch.

[Tekania]

[quote="Ifreann";p="9732150"
Aren't inquests just rulings on fact? No punishments handed down?[/quote]

Typically, yes. But the findings of facts here can be used as part of a criminal investigation.

[Risottia]

Killing a child molester is always necessary.

Says who.
Please, quote the exact article of law that says that you have to kill a criminal you caught in flagrante delicto AFTER you've disabled him.
Come on. I dare you.

...

Then quit the bullshit.

[The Taryegeans]

Ah, I see what your saying then.

It all comes down to whether they were or were not molesting this child, really, where civil charges are concerned.

[Risottia]

What part of "self" in "self-defence" isn't clear?
Also, you have to prove it was self-defence. That's why human deaths are usually investigated - and trials are held.

In Texas the self-defense law is a castle doctrine, meaning any threat within the home to anyone is actionable by any residents inside the home.

One would have to prove there was a threat, I'd guess. Which is likely, but not proven.

If he can prove there was molestation.

According to that, no. All the actor has to have is a reasonable belief that those things are being committed.

So we're still back to the only witness available on the scene, which is the girl.

[Risottia]

You basically just said manslaughter isn't justifiable.

Exactly.
Considering that manslaughter is the crime of ILLEGALLY and unintentionally killing a person, it's not justifiable.
If an unintentional homicide is justifiable / legal, it's not manslaughter.

Unless I'm much mistaken, that is.

[Galborg]

[quote="Ifreann";p="9732150"
Aren't inquests just rulings on fact? No punishments handed down?

Typically, yes. But the findings of facts here can be used as part of a criminal investigation.[/quote]

If the Inquest shows that dead guy really was molesting the child, then by Texas law, the father is automatically innocent and the case is complete.

IMPO Texas law on self-defence is good and British law on self-defence is evil.

[Raeyh]

You basically just said manslaughter isn't justifiable.

Exactly.
Considering that manslaughter is the crime of ILLEGALLY and unintentionally killing a person, it's not justifiable.
If an unintentional homicide is justifiable / legal, it's not manslaughter.

Unless I'm much mistaken, that is.

Manslaughter is not always unintentional, it just means that you lacked malice aforethought.

It can also be justifiable and legal in the case of diminished capacity due to insanity.

[Galborg]

Wiztopia wrote:
You basically just said manslaughter isn't justifiable.

Manslaughter isn't justifiable. It is a crime. It is a smaller crime than regular murder, but it is still a crime.

Justifiable homicide is NOT a crime because it is justifiable. Do I need to xplain the word "justifiable" to you? "Just" = justice from the Latin "ius - iuris" = law. "Ifi" is a suffix meaning causing something to be whatever the adjective is. "Able" = possible.

[Tekania]

Exactly.
Considering that manslaughter is the crime of ILLEGALLY and unintentionally killing a person, it's not justifiable.
If an unintentional homicide is justifiable / legal, it's not manslaughter.

Unless I'm much mistaken, that is.

Manslaughter is not always unintentional, it just means that you lacked malice aforethought.

It can also be justifiable and legal in the case of diminished capacity due to insanity.

Diminished capacity isn't a justification for an act, but a finding of diminished responsibility/culpability relating to an act. In fact, arguing diminished capacity can cause a finding of guilt on a lesser-included offense in some cases.

[Greed and Death]

Exactly.
Considering that manslaughter is the crime of ILLEGALLY and unintentionally killing a person, it's not justifiable.
If an unintentional homicide is justifiable / legal, it's not manslaughter.

Unless I'm much mistaken, that is.

Manslaughter is not always unintentional, it just means that you lacked malice aforethought.

It can also be justifiable and legal in the case of diminished capacity due to insanity.

Also mutual exchange of violence can be manslaughter in some states.

[Wiztopia]

So killing the person who committed it doesn't destroy their life? Oh, okay.

That is there fault. If people willingly break the laws? Sucks to be them doesn't it?

I 100% agree with this. We should be allowed to shoot any jaywalkers we see.

Oh, I get it. You haven't been reading my posts. First of all, I didn't say the DAD shouldn't "pretend to be a policeman," I was referring to your statement that more dads should be like him, to which I asked if you want all the dads of the world to hunt down child molesters like vigilantes. You then replied that you want to keep us safe, implying you would indeed like that to happen.

Nice job using context clues from a context that wasn't there. So in essence, yes that was a large straw man.

Yeah I think i'm done here. I gave you three chances to answer my question and you have dodged it three times. You seem to be comfortable enough implying that the father should have done nothing to help her, but you are not confortable enough to say it flat out.

This just in: Trolls can't read.

...I haven't offered my own opinion? Have you been reading my posts? Seriously?

And what does Buddhism have to do with anything?

Because you're one.

And really, you can take a lot out of the religion by the followers.

Yeah because no one would be angry at all in that situation, and would read this thread on NSG before reacting... Not saying he should have killed the guy, but if you refuse to acknowledge that hindsight is 20/20 its going to be hard to take what you say seriously.

It's not about hindsight, the actual guy who actually did this regrets the whole thing, because despite what ITGs would have you believe, killing someone is a hell of a thing no matter what the circumstances.

It is rather addressing those looking at this and going "Fuck yeah!" In fact, the only people who seem to be 'sure' of how they would respond are the ones trying to one up each other on how badass they would be. The rest of us are trying to acknowledge how fucked up the situation was and preferring if anything it could have gone better.

That's only what the article says.

"Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. "

Sheriff also said that they were investigating. In theory, the Father might have killed the guy for some other reason and made up the molestation story, this needs to be checked. Texas uses Common Law, so unless they have changed it a lot, there will be an Inquest for the dead guy. Inquest is done on Balance of Probability, Criminal trial is done on Beyond reasonable Doubt.

Difference between rape and sexual assault: rape is with a penis; sexual assault is with anything else, finger, dildo, broken bottle etc.

Difference between child molestation and statutory rape: if a 14 year old says "No." it is regular rape; if she says "Yes.", it still counts as rape because she cannot give consent.

It counts as statutory rape.

Wiztopia wrote:
You basically just said manslaughter isn't justifiable.

Manslaughter isn't justifiable. It is a crime. It is a smaller crime than regular murder, but it is still a crime.

Justifiable homicide is NOT a crime because it is justifiable. Do I need to xplain the word "justifiable" to you? "Just" = justice from the Latin "ius - iuris" = law. "Ifi" is a suffix meaning causing something to be whatever the adjective is. "Able" = possible.

Manslaughter isn't murder so saying "regular murder" is wrong. I guess I have to explain what it really means. If comes from justify which means somebody can try to claim their actions are justifiable even if they are the only ones who believe it. In the defense of another when somebody dies during a fight then it could easily be justified.

[Cannot think of a name]

It's not about hindsight, the actual guy who actually did this regrets the whole thing, because despite what ITGs would have you believe, killing someone is a hell of a thing no matter what the circumstances.

It is rather addressing those looking at this and going "Fuck yeah!" In fact, the only people who seem to be 'sure' of how they would respond are the ones trying to one up each other on how badass they would be. The rest of us are trying to acknowledge how fucked up the situation was and preferring if anything it could have gone better.

That's only what the article says.

Sorry for going with the information available. I guess I should have just made a bunch of shit up?

[Ifreann]

That's only what the article says.

Sorry for going with the information available. I guess I should have just made a bunch of shit up?

I bet he wants to give himself a medal.