Backhoes - Backhoe
Representativ
e image only.
Not exact model.
Unsurpassed in Safety!!
Variety of other size buckets and attachments available
Posted on 08/30/2006 3:14:40 AM PDT by Cagey
Edited on 08/30/2006 3:23:20 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The location was at the airport. A local TV newscrew was filming. The father waited until the entourage passed him, walked up from behind and shot the guy. The perp was the child's martial arts instructor , IIRC.
In fact, all professional law enforcement people, the police, judges, the lawyers, work for us and are our agents.
As agents, they have no power or authority that we do not originally have. They are our proxies. We still retain original authority.
"Asked about the alleged molestation, Sherman said, "That's the information he was acting on. Whether it is true or not, his actions are based on his belief that Barry molested his daughter."
---- ---- -----
He did society a favor. The man will never molest another child. Put me on the jury too.
----- -------
So, that's a good way to get away with murder, claim the victim was a child molester! Or a horse thief!
The murdering attorney must first prove the case of the molestation. Until that is done, I'm not joining the lynch mob.
Maybe justifiable isn't the correct word, but understandable at least. Not saying that he should walk away a free man, but assuming that there is no doubt the man molested his 2 yo girl, I don't see a long sentence in his future.
Sherman like Garregos is a slimy creep.
I believe that was the boy's father......I saw the video footage. Also, thought they were in an airport (with LEO's escorting the perp; think they had arrested him elsewhere??). Either way.....it was justice on the spot.
Oh.....and he got off. The jury saw his side, NO problem.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Do you recall what ever happened to the father in regards to any legal issues?
You sound like a criminal defense attorney!
If I remember the cops asked the father (grandfather?) "Why....why did you do it???"
in retrospect.....they must know why.
Looks like rightonline answered my question.
I gather you and I will get flamed on this thread. I tend to not believe lawyers and tend to believe the facts must come out in a case before you subject the accused to judgement.
Well, the accused can't defend himself and cannot be questioned by the authorities. Now the attorney has to prove his case. This should get interesting.
I'm almost positive it was the father that killed the karate instructor, not the GF. Either way, it was what I would have done.
Where do I send the donation for his defense?
Backhoes - Backhoe
Representative image only.
Not exact model.
Unsurpassed in Safety!!
Variety of other size buckets and attachments available
I think the added charge of burglary makes it an aggravated murder and they can then ask for the death penalty, or at least max of what that state allows.
Agree, it's manslaughter at least. It would be justifiable if he caught the man in the act, but since there was no immediate threat and he went out in search of the other man, it's not legally justifiable homicide.
OJ's case did not involve jury nullification. Jury nullification is when the jury returns a verdict of not guilty because they think that the law that was broken was an unjust law. I don't think anyone on the jury thought that it was unjust for the law to say that OJ wasn't allowed to murder Nicole.
Oh come on!! "He needed killing" has always been a valid defense.. Perfect time for jury Nullification.
Boy - what a difficult position. Prayers that REAL Justice is done. I don't condone killing folks without proof - like catching the perp in the act. BUT.... emotions run rather high for good reason in such a case.
I don't know that I could convict this guy unless there is a lot of evidence that the murder had nothing to do with the molestation....
Wrong. "Jury nullification" was the term used during the case to justify OJ being let off as a message to the justice system about its unfair general treatment and prosecution of blacks.
Whether or not the term was technically or legally precise as it applied to the jurors eventual action of acquitting, the fact is, that was the term bandied about as a reason they could acquit in spite of evidence of guilt.
The reason why most people are even aware of the term is due to the OJ trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.