No charge for Texas dad who killed daughter's rapist

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
Since that happened 'in hot blood', as a response to the attack itself rather than a revenge attack some time afterwards, then I agree that it makes sense to handle it that way. Although this was Texas, it's quite possible that, had the same thing happened in Massechusetts, the outcome might have been different.
 

Badger

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2011
Messages
617
Location
Wolverhampton
He was also clearly upset by what he'd done and did not intend to kill the man based on what he said on the phone. "Come on! This guy is going to die on me! I don't know what to do!"

Clearly did not intend to kill, merely to stop his five year old daughter's rape.

And then we have Britain where you can't even harm an armed burglar :v
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,026
He was also clearly upset by what he'd done and did not intend to kill the man based on what he said on the phone. "Come on! This guy is going to die on me! I don't know what to do!"

Clearly did not intend to kill, merely to stop his five year old daughter's rape.
That explains why I agree with the outcome.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
24,326
Location
Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
And then we have Britain where you can't even harm an armed burglar :v
FFS - this AGAIN!!!!!!!!

I don’t know where this idea comes from. The legislation is quite clear. You may use reasonable force to protect yourself and your family.

What it does not allow you to do is have carte blanch to maim or kill anyone who enters your property.

As for the father in Texas, there is every chance the decision would be the same in this country.
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,480
Location
Birmingham
FFS - this AGAIN!!!!!!!!

I don’t know where this idea comes from. The legislation is quite clear. You may use reasonable force to protect yourself and your family.
Quite. Alas, the facts never overcome hysteria.

I'm guessing they had physical evidence to prove he was raping the daughter (at five it could not be consensual anyway) otherwise the father has basically beaten him to death.

Given my limited command of the facts I am pleased with the outcome.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
Quite often, people are judged more on intent than on their actions. If he had hunted the attacker down afterwards and killed him in cold-blooded revenge, then I imagine things would have been judged very differently. It's hard to apply absolutes in difficult circumstances. Whatever your position on the taking of human life, context and intent are important.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
This reminds of the case in the US where a pensioner, in self-defense, shot at and killed a youth who was viciously beating him, some of the posters on the student room would have had the poor guy locked up for murder! If you're physically attacked (to the point of feeling life danger) in most US states and legally carrying a firearm then "shooting to kill" is seen as reasonable force and you're not allowed to fire warning shots.

www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=361536
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,026
That's how it reads to me.
He intended to stop his five year old daughter's rape. He used reasonable force. What else do you think he should have done? Watched an waited for the police to arrive? :roll:

The court has taken full account of the facts and has come to what I believe to be a sensible decision. Never did I say that it is "OK" to kill someone "just because you didn't mean it."
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
I do not know what the US "Grand Jury" does, or whether there is an equivalent in this country. But it sounds to me as if the man has actually gone through part of the judicial process, and, for me, that is important. I would not want the CPS in this country to be empowered (by precedent or otherwise) to say someone who admits to perpetrating a crime should not be charged with that crime simply because of intense sympathy with him (which I share). That would set a dangerous - and highly flexible - precedent. As we have already hinted in this thread there is a way of thinking that some crimes are acceptable because the victim "deserved it", but once you have admitted that, you can no longer safely draw a line.
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,480
Location
Birmingham
The fact that the girl in question was only five years of age and unable to defend herself is absolutely horrific and I wonder how many forum members would feel if they too had to face such an emotive situation.
Natural selections compels species to protect their young, sometimes to sacrifice themselves so the next generation may live on.

I couldn't say for sure but I'd probably have done the same thing. Of course the deceased is unable to defend himself so they'd have to rely on physical evidence to determine if anything happened which they probably did do.
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
...so they'd have to rely on physical evidence to determine if anything happened which they probably did do.
There was evidence which was conclusive.
I would probably have reacted in a similar way. Please don't get me wrong - it is how "the law" should treat it that concerns me.
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,847
Location
t'North
I do not know what the US "Grand Jury" does, or whether there is an equivalent in this country.
In simple terms, it decides whether there is a case to answer in law where a federal crime has been committed. The nearest equivalent in our system is the preliminary hearing before a magistrate to decide whether to pass a case to a higher court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committal_procedure
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,233
Having read the account my view would be as others have said what constitutes reasonable force ?

It could be argued that several blows was excessive , however bearing in mind the circumstances and the contrition he showed during the 911 call my view would be that the authorities were correct not to charge him.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
22,476
Location
Redcar
Having read the account my view would be as others have said what constitutes reasonable force ?
I'm not sure you can define it in isolation. To my mind you always have to define it within the context of the case that's being looked at. What is reasonable in one case might well not be in another.

(I'm no legal expert so the above is purely my own thoughts on the matter).
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,233
I'm not sure you can define it in isolation. To my mind you always have to define it within the context of the case that's being looked at. What is reasonable in one case might well not be in another.

(I'm no legal expert so the above is purely my own thoughts on the matter).
Agreed thats why I qualified what I meant below.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,370
Location
Llanelli
I'm not sure you can define it in isolation. To my mind you always have to define it within the context of the case that's being looked at. What is reasonable in one case might well not be in another.
Agreed, each case must be judged on its merits. This is where many people go wrong; they read a short article or watch a brief news report and then decide whether something is right or wrong, even though there may be relevant facts which have not been mentioned.
 

NY Yankee

On Moderation
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
He was also clearly upset by what he'd done and did not intend to kill the man based on what he said on the phone. "Come on! This guy is going to die on me! I don't know what to do!"

Clearly did not intend to kill, merely to stop his five year old daughter's rape.

And then we have Britain where you can't even harm an armed burglar :v
In Britain, a 5 year old girl wouldn't have been raped in the first place.

I obviously heard about this, but decided not to post it because it was a heinous crime.
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
In Britain, a 5 year old girl wouldn't have been raped in the first place.
I'm sorry, that is nonsense. This sort of crime could have happened anywhere in the world. Just last month Britain had a case of teenage girls being groomed for sex by older men, in Plymouth we've had a paedophile ring busted in a nursery, in North London we had 2-year old Baby Peter (although that wasn't sexual). Britain has had more than it's fair share (for want of a better phrase) of sickening crimes against youngsters.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
4,228
Location
Nottingham
I wouldnt be so sure Yankee, we have our fair share of sickos.

With reasonable force, is that force as described by newtons laws of motion, F=MA? And if so is it a numerical value?
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,764
Location
Essex
Reasonable force is so heavily based on the exact situation that it simply can't be defined. It can be anything from gently prodding someone to lethal force if the situation dictates.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top