TEXAS DAD BEATS HIS DAUGHTER’S MOLESTER TO DEATH

[Marilyn. 340]

do you think he could claim temporary insanity?

[Darnell 8,478]

"copped for the old meat and two veg"

I understand the rest but this I can't figure out. An English euphemism? It comes at a fairly critical juncture of your story!

there were testicles and a #######...instead of a ####### .

Edited June 13, 2012 by Darnell

[Darnell 8,478]

do you think he could claim temporary insanity?

i think 'justifiable homicide' label will get bandied about, soonish.

[Karee 4,190]

Sure, if a prosecutor is able to get the grand jury to indict the father. Usually a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich, but If is a mighty big word in Texas, in this case. I think a prosecutor would have a tough time getting a conviction from a jury of 12 Texans.

This guy will never see the inside of a courtroom in Texas. IF the prosecutor takes it to a grand jury ( and that in itself is a big IF) the grand jury will more than likely "no bill" this guy.

[Darnell 8,478]

Karee - agree.

[Danno 1,228]

People people people,

There were two partied wronged here.

1. The child who was assaulted.

2. All of us ... because there was no video for us to enjoy.

[Captain Oates 911]

And Victoria.

And San Antonio.

And Dallas.

And Austin.

And Lubbock.

so let's see -what has happened? An unwanted demographic is wiped off the face of the earth, and the Church gets some money. Win Win, IMO.

That has to be the most un-american statement ever seen on VJ.

What the founding fathers would have made of what became of their country in only 200 years I cannot imagine

So much altruism and hope for the future and respect for the law - squandered in a mess of hate and savagery.

It's ironic that the people who deny evolution are those who are closest to the most savage of the animals

The existence of such hatred and violent thought and nazi sentiment, is why I will never again go West of the Mississippi or South of the Mason-Dixon line

They make the Congo look civilized

[Darnell 8,478]

Thanks for the heads up - we won't be looking out for ya, when a drug-popping illegal alien attacks the next citizen here in the Lone Star State, as you'll be far from the Borders. Thanks for that - one less person to worry about.

What the founding fathers would have made of what became of their country in only 200 years I cannot imagine

Oh - that's easy - their #1 complaint would be ---- WHAT? You outlawed dueling? How do you expect to maintain civil order? That was the one thing that kept gentlemen as gentlemen..

Edited June 13, 2012 by Darnell

[Leatherneck 693]

This guy will never see the inside of a courtroom in Texas. IF the prosecutor takes it to a grand jury ( and that in itself is a big IF) the grand jury will more than likely "no bill" this guy.

I have faith that Texas will bury this case just as the perp will also become worm food soon.

I mean, we are talking about Texas, the home of Joe Horn.

[Karee 4,190]

I just saw them interviewing people in the town where this occurred here on the DFW news. One of them said they should give the father a medal. There's no way this guy goes anywhere near a courtroom. The father is the one that actually called the cops.

They did a poll on the news. 88% said said the father should walk. 2% said he should be indicted. And this is Dallas. I assume the results in that county would be closer to 100$ to 0%.

[Captain Oates 911]

I just saw them interviewing people in the town where this occurred here on the DFW news. One of them said they should give the father a medal. There's no way this guy goes anywhere near a courtroom. The father is the one that actually called the cops.

They did a poll on the news. 88% said said the father should walk. 2% said he should be indicted. And this is Dallas. I assume the results in that county would be closer to 100$ to 0%.

Luckily, justice is dispensed according to the law, and not according to polls and local opinion and lynch mobs - even in the South

From what I have heard, the defense of 'provocation' will be allowed under the law and the case will not be brought

Unfortunately, under-educated country boys may then embark on vengeance missions in subsequent and much different cases, and they will be surprised when they are jailed for pre-meditated assault or homicide which they feel is justified whether legal or not.

As John Adams said "A mob is still a mob, even if it's on your side"

However, he was a Yankee and wanted to to stay in the Union

[Karee 4,190]

Luckily, justice is dispensed according to the law, and not according to polls and local opinion and lynch mobs - even in the South

From what I have heard, the defense of 'provocation' will be allowed under the law and the case will not be brought

Unfortunately, under-educated country boys may then embark on vengeance missions in subsequent and much different cases, and they will be surprised when they are jailed for pre-meditated assault or homicide which they feel is justified whether legal or not.

As John Adams said "A mob is still a mob, even if it's on your side"

However, he was a Yankee and wanted to to stay in the Union

Google is your friend. John Adams died in 1826. Civil War started in 1861. I think you're referring to the Boston Massacre.

In Texas a DA brings the evidence in front of a grand jury. They then decide if there is enough eveidence to indict. In other states they use a preliminary hearing in front of a judge to see if there is enough evidence to move forward. In either case, this goes nowhere. Even if this happened in San Francisco, this case would go nowhere.

I don't know much about British law, but I would take a guess and say it wouldn't go anywhere there either. Almost all people act spontaneously in cases like this. They don't pull out the book of the Texas penal code to see what the consequences might be if the bash in some guys brains that is (attempting) raping your 4 year old daughter.

I find it pretty shocking that anyone from any society or culture would have a problem with what this father of a 4 YEAR OLD did to this man.

[Danno 1,228]

Google is your friend. John Adams died in 1826. Civil War started in 1861. I think you're referring to the Boston Massacre.

Now don't let facts get in the way of his "hate all things Southern".

He must have his own personal DELIVERANCE experience which haunts him.

I'm bettin Ashude "has a purdy mouth."

[lierre 224]

If you were as competent a doctor as you would like to think you would know that nothing in the kid's medical exam can disprove that the abuse took place! I know what I am talking about. My credentials probably exceed yours!

Oh gee. You're pulling out credentials? The knowledge of medically determined physical abuse is very basic. I don't need to be decades away from graduation to know what that is.

So if she doesn't have a torn ####### = she wasn't assaulted?

Youcan be raped and omnly have mental scarrs.

I didn't say anything that you were implying. I simply stated that the news article didn't mention the results of a medical report and that we, as objective viewers, shouldn't jump to the conclusion that an abuse actually occurred.

This form of abuse, if what we read was true, is very simple and clear-cut. I hope you are not going to say this little girl was 'asking for it' or in any way was responsible for what happened!!

I never said that.

Victim blaming is never a good thing to do.

The specific age doesn't matter. What does is the Prof justified his urges towards young girls because he couldn't at 14 act on his adolescent wants towards his dead like aged crush. Same with the dead guy from the article (or any offender for that matter), a grey area is that the molestation was a result of a traumatic experience or mental handicap so we must understand why the 'victim' did what he did but we must think the father downright beastly for witnessing a heinous act between his child and an adult and not be able to restrain himself...according to Dr Ivy/Dan.

Hi aaydrian! I didn't say any of that.

Stop implicating me in your nasty thought experiment.

You walk in on a guy with his pecker in his hand and your daughter naked -- are you asking questions about what happened or what was about to happen... or do you immediately open a can of whoop azz and damn the questions? Let the police ask questions later, provided the perp can still talk.

Again, I will quote what you quoted:

"I am definitely against abuse and if it really happened the way it was reported (which is still crappy writing ugh), the offender deserved to be punished. But, killing is simply put... not for men with sane minds.

Some people think it's just so easy to kill someone when really you have to be psychologically "broken down" to be able to kill."

I see that you're in the military. Were you, from day one, able to immediately come to terms with the fact that you will aid or will directly kill another human being? It wasn't that easy, was it? That is what the last statement meant.

Again, people on here just love a "public lynching". I'm just saying this news is bad writing. They didn't have facts, testimonies, etc. And everyone just kept saying how the other guy deserved to be killed by another man's own bare hands. When we weren't even there and didn't truly know what happened.

[lierre 224]

That's not "black and white" enough for you? The fathers instinct was finely tuned.

Good for that small-time news agency... one more person who believes they have finely tuned reporting skills is good news.

if the imminent danger to the life and safety of his daughter has been abated, then the continued physical response against her assailant is likely to count against the father. If a prosecutor is able to show intent on the part of the father once the attacker was removed from the daughter, I can see a manslaughter charge being made to stick.

As I said, sometimes justice and the law don't follow the same path.

The law is there because, human beings cannot sometimes practice self-control.

I have a friend who has kind of gone through the same thing.

My friend married a man, who already had 2 daughters. His oldest daughter called him one night saying that she was being beat up by her boyfriend. The father, and my friends brother drove to the house, where one of them kicked in the door. The father hit this boy ( he was in his 20s I believe ) so bad that he had a blood clot in his brain. The boy survived, but had he died, the father was looking at manslaughter. He was tried, there is a law against vigilanty justice. There is a difference between stopping what is happening, and going to far.

Its like the spanking law ( all I can think of at this time ) where the first spank is for the child, the second is for the parent, and its called abuse.

My friends husband was wrong, although I can see how it happens. Alot of people were on his side, but the law is pretty straight forward. Right or wrong, the law is the law.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2010/11/11/16085076.html

In his case, they viewed the time he got the call, to driving there, his chance to cool down. If he had been there while it happened and he re acted, there may have been a different outcome. As it was, my friend bore him 4 children, the youngest being 5 at the time, so the judge had him do his time on weekends so that he could still provide for his family though the week.

I am sorry that such a thing happened to your friend. It was very rational of him to stop beating the boy. It was just perpetuating the abuse his step-daughter incurred.

I hope you can share that the abuser of his stepdaughter was punished by law.