Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Father charged in murder of man who killed his 2 sons
Click2Houston ^ | Feb 11 2013 | n/a

Posted on 02/12/2013 6:51:08 AM PST by Nickname

BRAZORIA COUNTY, Texas -

A Brazoria County grand jury has indicted a father for the murder of another man.

According to investigators, David Barajas shot and killed a drunk driver who hit and killed his two young sons.

(Excerpt) Read more at click2houston.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: drunkdriving; dui; dwi
An update to this story:

Fatal shooting of driver after 2 boys killed in wreck remains a mystery

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2971921/posts

1 posted on 02/12/2013 6:51:16 AM PST by Nickname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nickname

It is very possible he could get off light in some parts of Texas


2 posted on 02/12/2013 6:53:46 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

This article has a little more detail:

Grieving father charged in shooting death of driver

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/21111145/2013/02/11/grieving-father-charged

“No one recovered a gun at the site of the crash, but people reported hearing gunshots fired after the accident.

Brazoria County investigators interviewed several witnesses who were present at the accident scene. Those witnesses said they observed David Barajas walk away from the accident site to his home and return to the area before approaching Banda’s car when the gunshots were fired.”


3 posted on 02/12/2013 6:55:11 AM PST by Nickname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

If I were on the Jury I would refuse to convict.


4 posted on 02/12/2013 6:55:30 AM PST by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

This is the only kind of honor killing that should be allowed.


5 posted on 02/12/2013 7:00:17 AM PST by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

If I were his lawyer, I’d de,amd a jury trial.


6 posted on 02/12/2013 7:03:30 AM PST by pleasedontzotme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

While the grand jury was probably right to indict, the trial jury is the appropriate place for his lawyers to achieve justice. I know I’d have a hard time convicting the father in this case.


7 posted on 02/12/2013 7:06:05 AM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

If the father did shoot the driver, there is no avoiding the fact that that is murder. However, I don’t think he’ll be convicted because any jury would see this as a case of “temporary insanity” on the part of a parent who has just seen his two sons killed by a drunk driver.

I’m not saying I believe in the temporary insanity excuse per se, but if there is such a thing, this would be an instance of it.

I think they will have a very tough time finding a jury to convict this father with anything more than a couple of years in prison or possibly just some time in a medical/mental rehab facility.

Did he take the law into his own hands? Yes, but I’m not sure too many of us would not have done the same thing.


8 posted on 02/12/2013 7:07:20 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

Alright, so this wasn’t some months-later vigilante justice. The dad watched his kids killed right in front of him by an obviously drunk guy, walked straight to his house, got the gun and shot the dude right there.

So no premeditation. Temporary insanity. This changes the whole story.


9 posted on 02/12/2013 7:08:11 AM PST by Marie ("The last time Democrats gloated this hard after a health care victory, they lost 60 House seats.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

If I were on the jury, nullification would definitely be on the table!


10 posted on 02/12/2013 7:08:39 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (It's not "GUN CONTROL"! It's "PEOPLE CONTROL"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I cannot imagine the unbearable grief he felt, seeing his sons killed and probably holding their lifeless bodies at the side of the road.

I hope this family is spared further torment.


11 posted on 02/12/2013 7:09:56 AM PST by Nickname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pleasedontzotme

Locally here in Austin (the city of Autism) they are seeing it different. They are faulting the dad for being careless having his kids pushing a truck on a dark road. Bad choice on dad’s part but the driver was drunk and never hit his brakes or tried to evade the truck. I cannot say I would not have done the same except I would not have had to walk home to get the weapon.

We have too many Yankees, foreigners, and California nuts here that refuse to assimilate and want to make us just like where they came.


12 posted on 02/12/2013 7:10:05 AM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
While the grand jury was probably right to indict, the trial jury is the appropriate place for his lawyers to achieve justice. I know I’d have a hard time convicting the father in this case.

Sounds like a ready made case for jury nullification.

13 posted on 02/12/2013 7:10:27 AM PST by Ron H. (Hussein Obama, the 21st century American Balkanizer - 'Yes I Can')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

I think that could happen too!


14 posted on 02/12/2013 7:11:18 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

Don’t drink and drive. Because fathers of kids killed by drunk drivers might cap your ass.


15 posted on 02/12/2013 7:13:04 AM PST by coloradan (The US has become a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

A Latino driving drunk and killing someone? No way.


16 posted on 02/12/2013 7:14:34 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Since we don’t really have a law that provides a satisfactory outcome in such cases, he didn’t take the law into his own hands.


17 posted on 02/12/2013 7:18:34 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

If I ended up on the jury, my vote would be time served.


18 posted on 02/12/2013 7:18:49 AM PST by red-dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname
A house near mine has this sign up on a tree:

Speed Limit 30
If you hurt one of my children speeding
You won't need a lawyer

We need more of this - much more.

Wish I could be on the jury.

19 posted on 02/12/2013 7:21:45 AM PST by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

This father may have invented a new charge; “Criminal Justifiable Homicide”. I certainly understand his actions.


20 posted on 02/12/2013 7:23:13 AM PST by muir_redwoods (Don't fire until you see the blue of their helmets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

As much as I feel for the father, I cannot abandon the concept of rule of law. It one man can extract his own justice in a case like this, where, exactly do we draw the line?

Christopher Dorner, for instance, has taken it on himself to right what he perceived to be an injustice. I recognize that the cases are not at all comparable, but where would you have us draw the line?


21 posted on 02/12/2013 7:24:48 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (What word begins with "O" and ends in economic collapse?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

Not guilty. Justifiable homicide.

(Although the state should reimburse him the cost of the bullets)


22 posted on 02/12/2013 7:26:25 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

I’ve always felt death was the appropriate punishment for drunk drivers who kill.


23 posted on 02/12/2013 7:29:16 AM PST by TheDon (Criminalizing self defense contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nickname
He did what any father should do. Legal or not to watch two of your sons die at the hands of a goddamn drunk is to much for any reasonable person to handle. It is a case of temporary insanity and in my opinion justifiable homicide.The drunk would have been given a sentence of a few years and probation and most likely would be back on the streets drunk again. There is a difference between legality and justice. In this case I believe the father delivered justice....just not justice within the law . He should serve some type of community service and be left to grieve for his sons.
24 posted on 02/12/2013 7:37:14 AM PST by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John O
The father saved The State of Texas a lot of money.
25 posted on 02/12/2013 7:37:45 AM PST by TYVets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

re: “Since we don’t really have a law that provides a satisfactory outcome in such cases, he didn’t take the law into his own hands.”

We DON’T have a law that provides a satisfactory outcome in such cases?? What does that mean?

I am totally empathetic to this father, and would have no problem letting him off with a very light sentence or medical/mental probation for awhile, but there is no doubt, assuming he did shoot the driver, that if he did so, he committed some degree of murder - we do have laws against murder - right? He did decide that the driver should die, he shot him, so, the father did take the law into his own hands in delivering what he thought was the appropriate sentence.

I think that’s the very definition of “taking the law into one’s own hands”.


26 posted on 02/12/2013 7:40:26 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd
Sorry, does not compute. The man's children were murdered in front of him. There is no law that provides a satisfactory outcome to that.
27 posted on 02/12/2013 7:47:08 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Dorner murdered a man's child and called him up and taunted him. Mr. Kwan would certainly be justified in flensing Dorner and serving him up as a treat for his pitbulls ~ something like that.

There's no law that provides a satisfactory outcome to Mr. Kwan. Same thing here.

28 posted on 02/12/2013 7:52:10 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
There is no law that provides a satisfactory outcome to that.

I agree. In the past, someone said that if you want to murder someone, do it with a car. The resulting sentences will always be light.

29 posted on 02/12/2013 8:02:38 AM PST by aimhigh ( Guns do not kill people. Abortion kills people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

If you see this as a matter of rule of law instead of justice, I can only assume that you living in Massachusetts has distorted your common sense.


30 posted on 02/12/2013 8:02:51 AM PST by Shimmer1 (No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
Jeremiah 39:6 ~ King of Babylon slays Zedekiah's children in front of him and then he is blinded. So the last thing he saw was murder ~ the folks who put the Bible together definitely thought of it as a horrible thing to happen, and back in the day those old boys were pretty rough. We give a drunk driver a couple of years, tops, for murdering a family.

There continues to be a place for drawing and quartering in our world.

31 posted on 02/12/2013 8:19:54 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

The father murdered the man who killed his sons.
His sentence, one day suspended.


32 posted on 02/12/2013 8:21:50 AM PST by svcw (Why is one cell on another planet considered life, and in the womb it is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

Austin’s out of state libs need to be sent back to wherever they came from. They’re ruining TX. And to think Perry trotted himself to CA to bring in more. He’ll never again get my vote.

As for the father, he did what needed to be done. I’m betting this wasn’t the first time this guy drove drunk. Wonder how many times a lib judge has done nothing but slap his wrists on previous DUIs. Those judges have blood on their hands and should be made to step down.


33 posted on 02/12/2013 8:42:31 AM PST by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

If the prosecutor goes for a murder conviction he’s making a big mistake. At most I might vote guilty for manslaughter and then recommend probation. If murder was the only choice I would have no choice but to vote not guilty.


34 posted on 02/12/2013 8:52:43 AM PST by ChuckHam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

I have a friend who is closely associated with the Brazoria County DA office. She says that the opinions expressed within the office are quite close to many of the opinions shared here. They are not at all confident that a jury will side with the prosecution on this one.

To that end, the consensus is to get convictions on lesser included charges and give Barajas probation.

I hope it turns out that way.


35 posted on 02/12/2013 9:01:05 AM PST by txeagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Possibly six months community service, giving talks to drivers convicted of DUI offenses on the repercussions of driving under the influence.


36 posted on 02/12/2013 9:13:48 AM PST by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Vigilante justice takes place when a justice system is broken. The justice system doesn’t want to take these drunks and throw the book at them.

When you enact vigilante justice, don’t get caught.


37 posted on 02/12/2013 10:08:31 AM PST by snowstorm12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
As much as I feel for the father, I cannot abandon the concept of rule of law. It one man can extract his own justice in a case like this, where, exactly do we draw the line?

His two sons were 11 and 12 years old, and they were killed in front of him.

I think an awful lot of people would draw the line somewhere beyond this guy and somewhere this side of Dorner.

38 posted on 02/12/2013 10:21:02 AM PST by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Nickname
The movie "Anatomy of a Murder" comes to mind.

I think this case argues even more strongly for an outcome which recognizes that "normal" behavior may include killing a drunk driver who murders one's children. There would be good justification for believing that the courts would let the murderous drunk off lightly and that the situation could occur again.

There's a possible problem if the children were exposed to an unreasonable danger which might have resulted in their deaths from even a sober driver.

I wonder what the father thought the consequences of his action would be? I'm guessing that he gave it no thought at all.

39 posted on 02/12/2013 11:09:19 AM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

As an emotional response, I agree 100%. Intellectually, a civil society cannot permit this kind of vengance. Civilization requires we restrain our impulses, even when our impulses fully justified and lead to a morally satisfactory conclusion.

This is actually a failure of government to perform its minimal duties. The victim, the driver, indusputably had a long record of reckless and/or drunk driving. If he had paid a price proportionate to the risk he represented initially, this would never have happened, and such incidents would be far more rare.

Currently, irresponsible, reckless and criminal behavior is far too lightly punished in America these days. I understand why some citizens want to take the law into their own hands.


40 posted on 02/12/2013 11:20:17 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (What word begins with "O" and ends in economic collapse?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

re: “The man’s children were murdered in front of him. There is no law that provides a satisfactory outcome to that.”

Look, I’m not trying to argue with you. You say the man’s sons were “murdered” in front of him. Therefore it sounds like you believe someone who kills someone else while driving intoxicated is the same thing as premeditated murder in the first degree and should be given the death penalty.

We are also assuming that the father knew beyond a reasonable doubt the the driver who killed his sons was drunk - the coroner’s report indicated intoxication, but that came out later - what if the driver hadn’t been intoxicated? Who decides that? A witness or family member on the scene?

And, it sounds like you believe that immediate family members of the “murdered” family member have the right to kill the person who killed that family member right then and there - no test to see if the guilty person is intoxicated, no trial, no judge, no jury, just carry out the sentence of death right on the spot after the accident?

How is that not taking the law into one’s own hand?

You say, “There is no law that provides a satisfactory outcome to that.” What kind of a law would you think would provide a satisfactory outcome? Just curious.

And, don’t get me wrong - if the driver was intoxicated and everthing happened just as it says in the story, I have no empathy for the drunk driver, and if the father is charged with murder in the second degree or for manslaughter - I would acquit him or give him the lightest possible sentence allowable.

However, I still think, even though emotionally I’m wanting to completely justify what the father did - it still seems wrong to just decide on one’s own what happened, what the circumstances were, decide innocence or guilt on the spot, and carry out a sentence whatever one feels is appropriate.


41 posted on 02/12/2013 2:19:44 PM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Unbelievable ~ you think there’s a possibility of a law that will give something like this a better outcome?


42 posted on 02/12/2013 2:49:58 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

re: “Unbelievable ~ you think there’s a possibility of a law that will give something like this a better outcome?”

No, I think that’s what you believe. You said the father did not take the law into his own hands because there was no law that related to what happened in this case.

You said, and I quote, “Since we don’t really have a law that provides a satisfactory outcome in such cases, he didn’t take the law into his own hands.”

What I want to know from YOU is - what kind of law WOULD be satisfactory to YOU in such cases.

And, you keep dodging the question - Please explain how what this father did was NOT taking the law into his own hands? He acted as judge, juror, and executioner.


43 posted on 02/12/2013 4:54:51 PM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

“satisfactory’ does not mean ‘related’ ~


44 posted on 02/12/2013 6:21:49 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Nickname

If I was on the jury, no way would I vote to convict.
Case closed.


45 posted on 02/12/2013 6:26:42 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

re: ““satisfactory’ does not mean ‘related’ ~”

Ok. Whatever you say.


46 posted on 02/13/2013 6:36:30 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: duffee

Like!


47 posted on 02/13/2013 12:25:01 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: snowstorm12
Vigilante justice takes place when a justice system is broken.

 

Yep. And why did that fool drive cross country from Texas to Delaware to kill 2 and injure others before killing himself? Two words: Family Court. Another failure of our justice system.

Story....

48 posted on 02/13/2013 12:31:43 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson