A sad story that ends the way they all should

• Steel Valley Football

  goosebumps;1196102 wrote:I thought you didn't know the law in Texas?
  
  /Lawyer'd

  The law exists. It's written and in place. It doesn't change based on mine or anyone else's knowledge about it.
  
  Anything else?
• Steel Valley Football

  rmolin73;1196101 wrote:Well in the fine state of Texas bat or blows to the head you walk. Look up the law before making a comment on the situation which is pretty much your opinion while you're complaigning about ours.

  Sorry, in Texas or any other state, cracking him once with a bat to stop a crime and cracking him 25 times are different things.
• sherm03

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196071 wrote:Again, no matter what crime he was committing, a citizen is not allowed to play judge/jury/hangman and end a life. That's why we have the process of law that exists.

  Incorrect. In most states, if there is someone that will not leave your home and is posing a threat to you or your family, you can play judge/jury/hangman and end their life and it is protected.
• rmolin73

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196109 wrote:Sorry, in Texas or any other state, cracking him once with a bat to stop a crime and cracking him 25 times are different things.

  Read the law I posted it.
• hasbeen

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196090 wrote:You don't know shit about me. If you think this doesn't make me sick then you're wrong. My daughter will be four in January.
  
  Your (and many others here) problem is you think your opinion should be the rule. Well, it's not. There has to be civilized law, no matter how awful the crime.
  
  This is just like the Roger Huerta case. Almost everyone here was all for beating down the guy who hit a girl. Except that's not how our legal system works. If it was, we may as well be living in Russia or some third-world country where "mob rules" apply; where they murder people in the street for the crimes they committ.
  
  Again, I'm for applying the law in this case; whatever that may be. I'm not versed on Texas law.

  What did I state that was opinion? If someone like you, whom believes in the black and white letter of the law, was on the jury, then the man would not walk. Unless you wouldn't act on what you post here?
• Steel Valley Football

  sherm03;1196113 wrote:Incorrect. In most states, if there is someone that will not leave your home and is posing a threat to you or your family, you can play judge/jury/hangman and end their life and it is protected.

  You added a specific variable. I was speaking in general.
• FatHobbit

  

  Good for him. I agree with others, if I was on the jury he would walk.
• sherm03

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196120 wrote:You added a specific variable. I was speaking in general.

  I would say that this specific case fits that variable pretty well.
• Steel Valley Football

  pnhasbeen;1196119 wrote:What did I state that was opinion? If someone like you, whom believes in the black and white letter of the law, was on the jury, then the man would not walk. Unless you wouldn't act on what you post here?

  Your opinion on the severity/gruesomeness of the crime. States can not allow vigilantism based on severity/gruesomeness of the crime. Your posts suggest they should because this was such an abhorrent crime.
  
  What if they guy walked in on him shooting his load on his daughters face while she was sleeping? Can the he father kill him then? I just want to see where your mind frame is at.
• Steel Valley Football

  sherm03;1196123 wrote:I would say that this specific case fits that variable pretty well.

  
  The article did not say he broke into the home or that he would not leave the home. It didn't mention at all where the crime was committed. It just said he killed him in the home. It was 3:45pm so that's not an entirely clear example of what actually happened.
• hasbeen

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196124 wrote:Your opinion on the severity/gruesomeness of the crime. States can not allow vigilantism based on severity/gruesomeness of the crime. Your posts suggest they should because this was such an abhorrent crime.
  
  What if they guy walked in on him shooting his load on his daughters face while she was sleeping? Can the he father kill him then? I just want to see where your mind frame is at.

  I haven't stated my opinion on severity/gruesomeness of the crime. Nor do my posts suggest that states should allow vigilantism. My only posts thus far on this thread are "I'd do the same damn thing", "Unless the guy is like SVF." and "What did I state that was opinion? If someone like you, whom believes in the black and white letter of the law, was on the jury, then the man would not walk. Unless you wouldn't act on what you post here?."
  
  If I walked in on some guy doing those types of things to my daughter, I would do damage to him. Possibly kill him. I would be hard pressed to send a man to jail for reacting to something like that concerning his daughter. That is where my mind frame is at.
• fan_from_texas

  sherm03;1196113 wrote:Incorrect. In most states, if there is someone that will not leave your home and is posing a threat to you or your family, you can play judge/jury/hangman and end their life and it is protected.

  
  True, but if the first hit to the head removed the threat (by knocking him unconscious), you can't keep beating them until they die. The first hit or two may be legal, but beating him to death isn't protected.
  
  The bigger issue is that the guy is dead and can't tell his side of the story. What if they were feuding and the guy used this as an excuse to off his enemy? Stranger things have happened.
• sherm03

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196129 wrote:The article did not say he broke into the home or that he would not leave the home. It didn't mention at all where the crime was committed. It just said he killed him in the home. It was 3:45pm so that's not an entirely clear example of what actually happened.

  Oh really?
  

  Sheriff Micah Harmon said the death occurred about 3:45 p.m. in a residence along County Road 302 near Shiner....
  
  Harmon said the resident of the home caught the Gonzales man attempting to molest his daughter and attempted to stop him. In the process, Harmon said, the resident physically struck the Gonzales man in the head several times, killing him.

  Sure seems to me like he came home to find a man in his house molesting his daughter. I would say that at that point the man is not welcome and the resident can go ahead and "play judge/jury/executioner" based on the law.
• rmolin73

  

  pnhasbeen;1196131 wrote:I haven't stated my opinion on severity/gruesomeness of the crime. Nor do my posts suggest that states should allow vigilantism. My only posts thus far on this thread are "I'd do the same damn thing", "Unless the guy is like SVF." and "What did I state that was opinion? If someone like you, whom believes in the black and white letter of the law, was on the jury, then the man would not walk. Unless you wouldn't act on what you post here?."
  
  If I walked in on some guy doing those types of things to my daughter, I would do damage to him. Possibly kill him. I would be hard pressed to send a man to jail for reacting to something like that concerning his daughter. That is where my mind frame is at.

  Don't waste your breath arguing with him the law pretty much spells it out. But of course he wants to disagree with everyone here and then whine about how the "oc" is against him.
• sportchampps

  I don't think I would be able to stop after 1-2 blows. I would expect manslaughter with the lightest sentence possible from the judge. I would also declare tempoary insanity by seeing that happen.
• martyirish

  

  I say good for him.
  He is a hero in my opinion
• justincredible

  

  sportchampps;1196166 wrote:I don't think I would be able to stop after 1-2 blows. I would expect manslaughter with the lightest sentence possible from the judge. I would also declare tempoary insanity by seeing that happen.

  This is what I'm thinking. I can't think of many situations that would cause someone to go insane quicker than walking in on someone molesting their child.
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  justincredible;1196331 wrote:This is what I'm thinking. I can't think of many situations that would cause someone to go insane quicker than walking in on someone molesting their child.

  Definitely curb stomp worthy
• Steel Valley Football

  sherm03;1196137 wrote:Oh really?
  
  
  
  Sure seems to me like he came home to find a man in his house molesting his daughter. I would say that at that point the man is not welcome and the resident can go ahead and "play judge/jury/executioner" based on the law.

  
  Sheriff Micah Harmon said the death occurred about 3:45 p.m. in a residence along County Road 302 near Shiner....
  
  Harmon said the resident of the home caught the Gonzales man attempting to molest his daughter and attempted to stop him. In the process, Harmon said, the resident physically struck the Gonzales man in the head several times, killing him.
  
  That is pure speculation on your part, which is why you wrote "seems". The article isn't at all definitive nor clear on how it all happened.
  
  Based on the italicized above, could any other scenario have happened other than the man breaking into the house at 3:45 in the afternoon? Its not clear as to who else was home. It's not clear at all where he found them. It's not clear whether or not there was a struggle. It's not clear if he knew the man or not. It's especially not clear, like I said, how he killed him. I'm not sold that he didn't stop the attack then pound him multiple times on the head, which killed him. Like I posted above, and like FFT confirmed, this makes a difference.
• Steel Valley Football

  justincredible;1196331 wrote:This is what I'm thinking. I can't think of many situations that would cause someone to go insane quicker than walking in on someone molesting their child.

  
  Except, when people admit prior they would probably kill a man for said act (like on a message board), it's a bit hard to then claim a defense that involves your actions being beyond your control.
• Devils Advocate

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196358 wrote:Sheriff Micah Harmon said the death occurred about 3:45 p.m. in a residence along County Road 302 near Shiner....
  
  Harmon said the resident of the home caught the Gonzales man attempting to molest his daughter and attempted to stop him. In the process, Harmon said, the resident physically struck the Gonzales man in the head several times, killing him.
  
  That is pure speculation on your part, which is why you wrote "seems". The article isn't at all definitive nor clear on how it all happened.
  
  Based on the italicized above, could any other scenario have happened other than the man breaking into the house at 3:45 in the afternoon? Its not clear as to who else was home. It's not clear at all where he found them. It's not clear whether or not there was a struggle. It's not clear if he knew the man or not. It's especially not clear, like I said, how he killed him. I'm not sold that he didn't stop the attack then pound him multiple times on the head, which killed him. Like I posted above, and like FFT confirmed, this makes a difference.

  First they have to get an inditement. second, they will have to find a jury to convict.
  
  I predict neither will happen.
• sherm03

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196358 wrote:Sheriff Micah Harmon said the death occurred about 3:45 p.m. in a residence along County Road 302 near Shiner....
  
  Harmon said the resident of the home caught the Gonzales man attempting to molest his daughter and attempted to stop him. In the process, Harmon said, the resident physically struck the Gonzales man in the head several times, killing him.
  
  That is pure speculation on your part, which is why you wrote "seems". The article isn't at all definitive nor clear on how it all happened.
  
  Based on the italicized above, could any other scenario have happened other than the man breaking into the house at 3:45 in the afternoon? Its not clear as to who else was home. It's not clear at all where he found them. It's not clear whether or not there was a struggle. It's not clear if he knew the man or not. It's especially not clear, like I said, how he killed him. I'm not sold that he didn't stop the attack then pound him multiple times on the head, which killed him. Like I posted above, and like FFT confirmed, this makes a difference.

  It is clear that when he was caught molesting the man's daughter, he was no longer welcome in the home (regardless of the circumstances that brought him into the house in the first place) and was posing an immediate threat to the man's family. With those two factors, I'm not voting guilty in that jury room.
• Steel Valley Football

  rmolin73;1196138 wrote:Don't waste your breath arguing with him the law pretty much spells it out. But of course he wants to disagree with everyone here and then whine about how the "oc" is against him.

  Post the law please.
• GOONx19

  

  The fact of the matter is, unless there is another witness, the defense will write the story. He walks.
• justincredible

  

  Steel Valley Football;1196364 wrote:Except, when people admit prior they would probably kill a man for said act (like on a message board), it's a bit hard to then claim a defense that involves your actions being beyond your control.

  The admittance of "probably killing a man" is based on walking in on that situation and snapping I.E. going temporarily insane. Previously stating what you'd "probably" do has no bearing on that. It's not like we're all premeditating a murder here.