|
|
|
|
|
| | Justifiable Homicide?Page 2 of 4 (1, 2, 3, 4) | The Murder Enablers Act...aka Stand Your Ground...aka Castle Doctrine laws have shown an opposite effect of what they were purported to have accomplished.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/06/11/study-says-stand-your-ground-laws-increase-homicides/
From the study:
Results indicate that the prospect of facing additional self-defense does not deter crime. Specifically, we find no evidence of deterrence effects on burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. Moreover, our estimates are sufficiently precise as to rule out meaningful deterrence effects.
In contrast, we find significant evidence that the laws increase homicides. Suggestive but inconclusive evidence indicates that castle doctrine laws increase the narrowly defined category of justifiable homicides by private citizens by 17 to 50 percent, which translates into as many as 50 additional justifiable homicides per year nationally due to castle doctrine. More significantly, we find the laws increase murder and manslaughter by a statistically significant 7 to 9 percent, which translates into an additional 500 to 700 homicides per year nationally across the states that adopted castle doctrine.
Thus, by lowering the expected costs associated with using lethal force, castle doctrine laws induce more of it. This increase in homicides could be due either to the increased use of lethal force in self-defense situations, or to the escalation of violence in otherwise non-lethal conflicts. We suspect that self-defense situations are unlikely to explain all of the increase, as we also find that murder alone is increased by a statistically significant 6 to 11 percent.
| |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 4:28:53 AM | ^^^So, Earth Puppy: This man should go to prison?
What would you do if you found someone raping, or about to rape, your 4 year old daughter? Is there any justification for a crime of passion given certain, very specific circumstances?
And if this man were to be convicted of murder and do serious prison time, would that be a reasonable reflection of what society feels is really murder under these circumstances? Shouldn't the laws reflect what the majority of society believes? If you put this situation to a vote, nationwide, how do you think it would go: justifiable or not justifiable, given the circumstances? | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 4:41:25 AM | New NRA/ALEC laws are designed to relieve the murderer of the proof of guilt, since the dead person cannot tell their side of the story. Pretty sure that the majority of society has not suspended belief in the concept of innocence until proven guilty. "He said/she said" testimonies to third party vigilantes will often end up messy with no due process. The new laws open the floodgates for vigilanteism.
On the other hand, I wish we had had laws like these when I was a kid and could have shot the evil stepfather when I had the chance and motive and put him out of his misery to the lives of many afterwards. Likewise the dumbsh*t methhead who brandished a knife at me over a pay dispute. A lot of people have had moments where homocide would have been easy and justified, but the laws and consequences restrained them to find a more civilized resolution. Folks who have never killed people tend to romanticize the act and fail to understand how the aftermath affects all involved.
There should be a jury trial in any case of homocide to winnow out the facts, emotions, sanity, and events that led to a death. In the case of the OP, there could be a perception of molestation that did not exist. We just had a prominent figure in our community tried in the court of public opinion over alleged molestation of his granddaughter. When all the facts came out with eyewitness accounts, it was found that he was merely being affectionate and appropriate in his love for his grand daughter. Someone with an agenda saw one thing, and others saw something else, including the child. If indeed the OP kid was actually molested, it hardly helps with long term healing to add on the PTSD of watching someone get murdered. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 5:58:20 AM | "Easily cleared as a crime of passion."
I don´t think that way.
A death was caused by the hit of passion but, was never intented.
I don´t know in English law the name for thoses cases but, I´m sure are considered.
Let´s say two people have a fight -not necesarily two boxers- and because a hit with a fist -not a letal weapon- the other person falls and broke his head or his neck resulting in death.
While the intention of the fight was certainly to inflict damage/pain/harm, whatever... never was intented as to provoque death injury.
And there is a specific homicide label for that circumstance (mostly applied on fights).
Again, I´m not sure if manslaughter, accidental, unitented, excusable... or the likes. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:11:57 AM | I'd hope that my dad would have reacted with rage "in the heat of passion" (that's what the term was created for, situations just like this) and done what was needed to protect me. We can theorize about this til the cows come home, but unless you're be IN that type of situation, you don't know how you'd react.
If you've never been in the situation, why are you theorising as to how you'd feel, or react as a child, or a child who'd survived paedophilia into adulthood?
If you look at that which you've written, its from the perspective of an adult, for your own benefit as an adult, who hasn't survived childhood abuse.
If we want adults to protect children, we need that to happen before the abuse takes place, not closing the stable door after the horse has bolted because it makes us feel less guilty about our children having been unprotected in the first place; not theorising about that which we might have wished had it happened to us in our childhoods without asking victims who actually experienced paedophilia, their perspective.
I'm not going to go into the details, but my (late) husband and I were attacked in our home, I hit the perp in the head a couple of times with a baseball bat until he fled. And yeah, you betcha, it'd have taken the whole police force to pry me off him, I'd still be whacking him in the head. So don't go telling me about calling the police, the baseball bat was closer than the damn phone! Anyone who wouldn't have done the same would need to go have their head examined.
So if the intruder hadn't fled, do you think you would have beaten him after her was incapacitated, unconscious and you would have beaten him to death? Are you saying you're capable of deliberately ending life and would be justified in doing so, rather than protecting yourself and family from immediate danger? Only this, like many other protestations I've heard sounds like bravado. I think as adults we fear paedophilia so much, we would rather posture than face the reality and actually look at what's happening, why its happening and how measures can be instituted to protect children before something happens. I think its about time society grew a pair regarding this subject, rather than pretending they have a pair already.
I know what it's like I'VE BEEN THERE have you?
(and no, I'm not going to explain how I know this.)
"Stringing up" pedophiles IS in the best interest of the needs of the children, because then that pedophile will NO LONGER PREY ON CHILDREN. Why is that so hard to understand.
There is another way of ensuring a paedophile can no longer prey on children, that being incarceration. The death penalty as I have already explained potentially increases the likelihood of children being permanently silenced. Why is that so hard to understand, Paul?
So let's examine (again) the difference between the two options, murder and incarceration.
Incarceration involves a legal process to ascertain whether an alleged perpetrator is guilty, or not, as is the accused's human right within our society. If we don't have this system of law, we are effectively agreeing to the mode of justice meted out in the kind of societies elsewhere in the world that we in the West are so highly critical of and kinda justify wars with.
So, an alleged perpetrator has to go through the stress of trial, public humiliation, fear of and potentially eventual imprisonment where they can't escape their vulnerability. There is the option that children who have been victims of the perpetrator may be able to confront him, or her upon reaching maturity, as part of their survival journey which may be invaluable.
What do we have instead? I'm guessing after one, or two thumps the perpetrator may have been disoriented, or unconscious, so the last thing this man may have done in life was have his dreams fulfilled. From my own near death experience, once pain becomes intolerable, your body floods with endorphins, the greatest high and most pleasant experience I've ever had. Dying isn't difficult, or unpleasant once you get over the pain threshold and initial fear, which may not have lasted all that long in this case. One paedophile given an easy way out, victims voice left ignored, (nay silenced) and adults feeling so much better and pleased with their moral superiority over everyone else, despite much room for debate to the contrary.
You also asked whether "he did commit this murder"........... uh..... murder is a legal conclusion........
You are correct, I should have more properly used the word "killing".
Lastly, there was nothing "ALLEGED" about the molestation.
But my use of the word 'alleged' was correct (thankyou bucsgirl) in the context of the OP which I did read thoroughly. While we're on the subject, the word is 'recidivist' not 'recitivist'.
The only irony here is that you seem to believe that a 4 year old could have taken control and had power again, IF the father had NOT given the pedophile what he deserved.... A four year old does not have the ability to form that complex of thought patterns.
Four year old sexual abuse victims grow up to be adult, which is the time when they are most able to resolve the adult consequences of their abuse. Its in the teenage and adult years where true understanding sets in and when re-empowerment is an important issue. Having had their abuser disappear of the face off the planet and not be able to confront them, or tell their story publicly (you can't legally and publicly accuse an abuser by name after they're dead as they are unable to defend themselves, you cannot name and shame) causes untold thwarting of emotional development, frustration and pain for many victims. You can't even write your autobiography without having to conceal the abusers identity and in doing so protect them.
In this case, how many children did this father take this right and avenue for healing, or expression from? What right did he have to do that, given future victims could have been protected from this alleged perpetrator in an alternative manner? How many victims will not have their day in court as adults and see justice done in their own control because of the actions of this man?
I guess you would have wanted the pedophile to have finished having his way with the four year old before the father stepped in...............
Brush up on your debate technique, Paul. You got a little emotional there...and sick.
We are all responsible for the societies in which we live. Paedophilia is an issue of power and control that is abused. If we accept that power and control can be abused in a vigilante manner, we create the society that perpetuates paedophilia. This is not how we protect children. This is how we actively endanger them because it makes us feel jolly good.
We need to address the underlying issues of how and why paedophilia thrives, not put a sticking plaster over a suppurating sore. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:29:40 AM | This is something like a case in Jamestown, California years ago. The mother of a boy who had been molested shot and killed the man who did it right in the courthouse, when he made the mistake of smirking at her. I don't remember what happened to her, but I don't think she was punished very severely. The boy later became a hulking thug and committed some kind of violent crime himself, I think.
I remember the case and that the mother went to jail. Here's how it ended:
Ellie Nesler, who sparked a national debate about vigilantism after killing her son's accused molester in a courtroom in 1993, has died of cancer. She was 56.
Nesler died Friday morning at UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento, according to hospital spokeswoman Phyllis Brown. She had battled breast cancer since 1994.
Nesler made headlines when she shot Daniel Driver five times in the head in a Tuolumne County courtroom during a break in his preliminary hearing for allegedly molesting four boys, including her then-6-year-old son William, at a Christian camp. Some hailed her for exacting her own justice, while others condemned her for taking the law into her own hands.
Nesler was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, but her 10-year sentence was later overturned because of jury misconduct. She cut a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to manslaughter and get out after serving three years because she had breast cancer.
The case became a 1999 TV movie, "Judgment Day: The Ellie Nesler Story," on the USA cable network.
After the shooting, the Nesler family remained entangled in the legal system. In 2002, Nesler was sentenced to six years in prison after pleading guilty to selling and possessing methamphetamine. Outside the courtroom, she maintained her innocence, saying she felt she couldn't get a fair trial in Tuolumne County.
She got an early release from a women's facility in Chowchilla in 2006.
Meanwhile, her son got into legal troubles of his own and was convicted of first-degree murder in 2005 for stomping to death a man hired to clean the family's property in Sonora. The 23-year-old said he believed David Davis was letting people pick through the family's belongings.
William Nesler killed Davis less than an hour after he was released from a 30-day sentence for an earlier assault on him. He is serving a 25-year-to-life sentence.
Prison officials allowed William Nesler to speak with his mother on the phone until she became too ill Christmas night, said Terry Thornton, spokeswoman for the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
"He knew she was very ill, and he knew her death was impending," Thornton said.
William Nesler has asked for a temporary leave to attend the funeral, and the request is being reviewed by prison officials, Thornton said
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,473685,00.html#ixzz1yAkYi3nU
This update is interesting; I was not familiar with what happened to the son. Her vigilantism was done with forethought. The case of the father in the OP is somewhat different because of the moment of rage. A crime of passion. I don't know if there are legal grounds to get off a murder charge based on a crime of passion defense.
I am against vigilantism and against vague laws about self defence....but it can be very tricky determining when self defense ends and becomes murder. As we will see in the Zimmerman case.
However, in this case, I am just wondering about the situation of the father. It was not premeditated; he may not have realized his punches would end in death. Though it was posted it takes a lot to beat someone to death, one punch to the head can kill, I believe, depending where it lands and with what force. I think it's unintentional manslaughter. jmo | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:36:19 AM | @ jac
If you are a professional... I´ll leave you with the therapy... after I kick his As "until death do us part". | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:52:46 AM |
Lastly, there was nothing "ALLEGED" about the molestation
You clearly are either clueless or you are claiming that you personally witnessed the alleged molestation. And yes, ALL crimes are alleged until they are proven. It's called 'America'. You should try it.
If I ever kill someone because I don't like them, I want you on my jury. I'll tell you the guy was molesting my daughter and you will of course automatically believe me and acquit me, because people NEVER lie to cover their asses, right??
Here's yer sign...... | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 7:01:00 AM | So if the intruder hadn't fled, do you think you would have beaten him after her was incapacitated, unconscious and you would have beaten him to death? Are you saying you're capable of deliberately ending life and would be justified in doing so, rather than protecting yourself and family from immediate danger? Only this, like many other protestations I've heard sounds like bravado.
That case was obviously very very different from the case presented in the OP. That is why rights to a trial by a jury of peers is in the U.S. Constitution/amendments.
When an intruder enters the home and attacks the residents, it IS a life-threatening event when residents ARE in fear for their life and any/all force IS justified against the aggressive intruder..
Almost every state has justifiable homicide laws also covering that particular circumstance and many police officers will advise homeowners to make sure the violent intruder IS inside the home before shooting him dead.
There have been a few cases of mistaken identity where the "intruder" turned out to be another resident or have other reason to be there,
but those have to be adjudicated on their specific evidential facts and circumstances.. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 7:05:47 AM | | It's too bad this pervert couldn't get a proper lynching, as a warning to other child molesters. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 8:39:38 AM | And if this man were to be convicted of murder and do serious prison time, would that be a reasonable reflection of what society feels is really murder under these circumstances?
I don't know, but that would certainly reflect what the jurors in his case thought was really murder. And in a criminal trial, only their opinion counts.
Shouldn't the laws reflect what the majority of society believes?
If they don't, the majority can change them so they do.
Is there any justification for a crime of passion given certain, very specific circumstances?
Of course there is. But assuming the prosecutors think this man committed some crime, I don't see how anyone here can know if the circumstances needed to justify that crime exist.
If you put this situation to a vote, nationwide, how do you think it would go: justifiable or not justifiable, given the circumstances?
Most crimes are strictly matters of state law. Those laws are made by the majority in *each state.* What people in other states think about them isn't relevant. In any event, they don't know the circumstances in enough detail to make an intelligent judgment about which laws were violated, if any.
The case of the father in the OP is somewhat different because of the moment of rage. A crime of passion. I don't know if there are legal grounds to get off a murder charge based on a crime of passion defense.
I don't know of any states where a killer can go free if the facts show he acted in the heat of passion. When that can be proven, its usual effect is to make it impossible to prove first-degree murder. As a rule, not much time is needed to form intent--there are cases where it was a little as a couple seconds. And facts that would prove the intent needed for a certain crime in one state might not prove it in another.
Defense of another may justify killing someone, but there's always the question why the killer couldn't have defended them by doing something less drastic--say incapacitating the person and holding him for the police.
Edit below:
Child molesters and rapists should face the death penalty along with murders
I understand the sentiment, and in some extreme cases I might even agree. But it doesn't really matter, because for several decades now, death penalties for crimes other than murder have been unconstitutional. Rape used to be a capital crime in some states.
| |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 8:57:17 AM | It's too bad this pervert couldn't get a proper lynching, as a warning to other child molesters.
What he got was a much bigger deterrence than any trial could have done, It lets the diseased pieces of crap know if you do this that their life can be ended now.
Do you really think a trial scares them? They know they have a good chance of getting off and if not they will get out. They know they can do this again.
The father did what he should have done.
I have five grand children from 5 year old and down. Let someone come into my home and touch one of them in a inappropriate way I can promise they will need a body bag.
The people that think it is better for the child to be molested and will grow out of it..........Well that is just the sickest thing I ever heard.
Child molesters and rapists should face the death penalty along with murders. They have effectively ended their victims lives theirs should be ended also. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 9:27:28 AM | Hmmmm, I guess some are for vigilantism!
"The father did what he should have done"
You can't know that, you weren't there. It's just an emotional reaction to the story, it may make you feel good to say that, but bears no evidence on what happened.
"Let someone come into my home"
Again, I frankly don't understand, how someone has a casual acquaintence, who's background they probably no little of, around their children. He11, we read in these forums EVERYDAY, about single moms, who will not allow people they date, to meet their children, until they are both sure of who they are, and if they see a future with them.
"should face the death penalty"
Well then I suggest you leave the country, and start one of your own. Because the lawmakers have established the laws in each individual state, that governs punishment for all offenses. In most states, the death penalty is reserved for those guilty of premeditated murder. Or at least, those charges that deal with the death of another. As heinous as child molesters and rapists are, they did not commit murder or take a life.
What people are saying here, is their emotional response, to an emotionally charged issue. Like I said in an earlier post, the idea of a Charles Bronson character, taking lives, of random bad guys, may make you feel good. I doubt things or circumstances, are that cut and dry.
Let's be clear here, I am not advocating for child molesters, rapists or any criminal...I am advocating for the rule of law, that is supposed to govern us all. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 10:44:07 AM |
I'm sorry if my rhetoric or tone upsets you. My points are still valid. Why have laws, if we can dispose of them in times of passion?
have you heard of citizen arrest? Citizens in a free republic can act as civilian police and in the absent of state representatives thay can uphold the law in certain cirscuntances. What law do this father have to wait for to defend his child? I guess if you were in this dad's position you would let this criminal attack your child.
God gave us common sense and a conscience. No, we are not animals we are human beings, that is why that father acted they way he did. Because he is a human being. But like animals we have survival instics. God made man with survival instics, God made man with a soul to see bad and evil, not just written laws.
| |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 11:26:30 AM |
God gave us common sense and a conscience. No, we are not animals we are human beings, that is why that father acted they way he did. Because he is a human being. But like animals we have survival instics. God made man with survival instics, God made man with a soul to see bad and evil, not just written laws.
You are wasting your breath here these liberals would rather see child molesters to walk the streets than them face the justice they deserve.
And yes I would gladly end the life of anyone hurting my children or grandchildren....and I don't shoot at the body I'm taking out the head............hard for them to get up and attack again that way.
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6! | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 12:58:58 PM | "So if the intruder hadn't fled, do you think you would have beaten him after her was incapacitated, unconscious and you would have beaten him to death? Are you saying you're capable of deliberately ending life and would be justified in doing so, rather than protecting yourself and family from immediate danger? " I'm not going into further details, this isn't about my attack.....but HELL YEAH! I'd have whacked him with the bat until I was sure he stopped moving. No doubt about it, of course he attacked us in our bedroom in the middle of the night. I'd sleep just fine if I'd have taken his life.
The ONLY reason I even mentioned it because it is a first person experience and somewhat similar to the actual topic. I was hyped on adrenalin.....that's part of the instinct for self preservation but I'm not going to belabor and nit pit at every detail. You don't know how you'd react or what you would do, unless it HAS happened to you. That's the only point of me even mentioning it. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 1:44:53 PM | "I guess if you were in this position you would let this criminal atack your child"
Now answer me this, how can you quote one part of my post, but not have read the very first sentence? I said clearly I didn't know what my reaction would be. My hope would be to get this criminal off of her, yeah maybe hit him, subdue him, and hold him for the police. So he could stand trial.
So now lets deal with dirty harry:
"these liberals would rather see child molesters to walk the street"
Ok now show me one poster that even remotely said that? No one I have read advocated he go free, most of us have advocated for the legal system to do it's job. So who said they would want him to go free?
"I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
So then you advocate that you would deserve to be tried, but the criminal deserves death by vigilante justice...nice double standard, but hey I expect nothing other than that by the many posts I have read by you.
Taking a life may look easy on the TV, it isn't so easy IRL, just look at some of the vets returning from wars who killed people, and see the emotional effect it has on them. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 3:47:04 PM | Paul - but there is one poster who seems to think that UNLESS the molestor is there for the victim to confront and do who knows what, that the victim will never be whole again. That, and other psycho babble
Paul. Please consider that the poster you allude to in your post above may also be a vicitm. Each victim of molestation or abuse of any kind will deal with related issues in their own way. Yes, being able to confront the molester might be useful to the victim. Also, it is possible that the victim would prefer that the one who committed a crime suffers in their own way, by being imprisoned.
I am not saying what is the best choice, because the viewpoint varies from the one person to the next, and one victim to the next. Having never been a victim, I have a limited understanding of the difficulty living life after abuse entails. So do you, unless you have been a victim. | |
|
7iron
| | Joined: 7/5/2008
Msg: 44 | |
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 4:20:59 PM | | FYI the Grand Jury met today and will not file any charges, he walks. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 5:25:14 PM |
My hope would be to get this criminal off of her, yeah maybe hit him,
That right there is easily enough to kill a person. You said earlier that it's really hard to kill someone by beating them to death but there are literally thousands of incidents where one punch and a head bouncing off the ground has killed someone.
FYI the Grand Jury met today and will not file any charges, he walks
Seems like he should have at least been tried. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 5:33:03 PM |
FYI the Grand Jury met today and will not file any charges, he walks
Seems like he should have at least been tried
Well that goes to show how much people know about our justice system. To be tried you have to be indited. That means a grand jury (normal people) are presented the FACTS of the case and they decide if any laws are broken.
This grand jury did NOT find he broke the law........So NO he should NOT have been sent to trial!
The justice system found he was justified in his actions. Like it or not that is the way our justice system works.
In my opinion this man is a great father and a great American. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 5:36:17 PM | We can sit and argue recidivism rates all day long, whether pedophilia, or meth addicts or crack addicts or any number of other issues.
The reason you find no logic, is you're not looking for any. My point AGAIN, is the laws we are governed by. Even my biggest critic on here, lurking in the background, knows the truth in what I say. If you don't like the laws with regard to pedifiles, THAN change them!
While you may not agree with the one poster, who advocates for finding the root cause, and changing that. Looking to find a long term answer, as opposed to simply trying to kill them off, seems a better idea to me. That way, you rid society of the scourge, and don't have to pay as much to incarcerate them. If doctors see this as a disease, we should be looking for the cause, NOT the effect, and fix the problem.
But lets be frank shall we. Like all things I rail about. This is the same, you guys post up "kill them all"..never once do any of you join groups or engage law makers to redefine laws governing their punishment. It's far easier to give vent to your emotional diatribes, than to work within the system to change the things that are problems. A simple typing motion on here, while you sit on your duff, hit send and off goes your responsibility to change the things that affect our society, ENDS!
Children are our most precious gift. That this guy let someone he barely knew around his 4 year old, without benefit of supervision, calls his actions into question BEFORE the event took it's tragic turn. But you guys would rather howl for the perverts blood than acknowledge that aspect of things...
Maybe it's my value of all human life that makes all of you dislike my approach, I don't know. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 5:49:01 PM |
If doctors see this as a disease, we should be looking for the cause, NOT the effect, and fix the problem.
The problem was he was breathing......The father fixed the problem.....Our justice system says he was justified.
That pretty much sums it up.
Maybe it's my value of all human life that makes all of you dislike my approach, I don't know.
Well I think many here doesn't consider a pedophile a HUMAN.........I have more consideration for a c0ckroach than I do them. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:15:46 PM | | Timing is important in cases like this. If the killer acted after he'd had a chance to cool off, it's harder to argue that he didn't premeditate the killing than if he acted the instant he witnessed whatever set him off. If someone leaves to get a weapon from his car or from another room, same thing. I don't know what evidence this grand jury was looking at, but apparently it thought the killing was not only unpremeditated, but was fully justifiable as defense of another person. | |
|
| Justifiable Homicide?
Posted: 6/19/2012 6:26:59 PM | Here's another thing. It takes a LONG time to beat someone to death with your bare hands. It's not an easy thing to do. At some point in time, it had to cross this guys mind, when the guy was beaten bloody and no longer resisting, to hold this suspect for the police, and he chose to kill him instead.(and no, I'm not going to explain how I know this.)
People have died from a single punch.Not to mention just how hard he would be throwing....
We can save the boo hoos for somebody that deserves it. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
