Dad beats, shoots and paralyzes Teen daughters lover

The Morning News of Northwest Arkansas ^ | 8-2-07 | Robin Mero

[IIntense]

The gun?

His daughter, also behind the locked door, could have taken that bullet. In his insane moment, he may not even have considered that. Or he has X-ray vision?

He behaved stupidly and he will pay the price.

[IIntense]

What if it had been his daughter he paralyzed or killed? Or was he going after both of them?

Sorry. I somewhat echoed your opinion on the subject. I had not read your post when I commented.

Anyway, we're thinking alike on this parent's reaction. This man acted stupidly and insanely, IMO. More could be said but I'll leave it there.

[BurbankKarl]

I had a father shoot at me with his .38!

[IIntense]

...you can't beat them with a pool cue and then shoot them.

You have sized up the common sense reality of this kind of behavior. That should be the first consideration in such situations, but for many reasons, we don't all have or use it.

The father, in this case, surely had reason to be outraged...at his own child and the young man. I tend to believe he was not a thinking, reasonable person to begin with or he would have found a much better way to handle the problem.

[Future Snake Eater]

I understand that the politically correct thing to do is say, "gosh, shooting a boy you find in your daughter's closet is overreaction." But....

There's no "politically correct" and there's no "but." This kid is paralyzed for life due to the ridiculous rampage of this guy. Should he have been beaten up? Sure, why not? It's not permanent, and he won't forget it. Shooting and paralyzing him is waaaay overkill for the youthful indiscretions of two consenting people (yeah, so she's not legally an adult--his paralysis overcomes the semantics of the legalities in my mind).

[IIntense]

...no man wants his daughters doing what he once wanted other men's daughters to do.

If you are a guy, Coronal, I can't thank you enough for your honest and accurate statement. If you are a woman, you know how it goes.

It's funny, in some way. When their granddaughters enter the teen years, just imagine grandparents hearing some sons-in-law saying, in various words, "No guy better EVER touch my little girl!"

Now you know how we felt, big guy! Suck it up!

[IIntense]

You do NOT shoot a 17 year old kid for this type of thing, PERIOD.

Just want you to know, piytar, that I wholeheartedly agree with you. No question about it...YOU ARE RIGHT!

While these teenagers had no business being in the girl's bedroom, the father's actions were far worse.

Maybe he was hiding because the Dad is a nutjob.

This doesn't excuse those kids, BUT, if the father is found to be a "nutjob", the next thing we'll be reading is that he has plead insanity, maybe on the advice of an attorney.

[Kozak]

I’m more of a “baseball bat to the knees” kind of dad.
Won’t kill you, but you will remember every step you take after....

[dmz]

The Father was not even accused of attacking his daughter he was defending her from a sexual predator...
____________

You make it extremely easy for yourself. You dismiss the story at the link because it comes from the MSM. That frees you up to invent your own facts so as to fit your own preconceived notions. Very nicely done.

Ridiculous and exceedingly transparent, but nicely done all the same. You will likely convince all those, and they are many, who don’t read the story either (or discount it for whatever reasons they may have).

Must be great to be able to make up your own facts every time you read/hear a news report.

[Verloona Ti]

The thing that stands out for me is this : The girl was so terrified of her father that she chose to barricade herself in with her BF. God only knows what that man put her through for the first 17 years of her life, to make her too afraid to come out to argue or plead with him. Did she believe that her father was perfectly capable of deliberately shooting her, if she was outside the room????

This is not "love", neither is it a father defending his child, it is possessiveness mixed with rage. The father didn't care if he hit his daughter-he probably felt at least at that moment in time that she deserved whatever she got for defying him.

Some posters have said the father is showing incestuous urges towards his daughter. I am more inclined to think that the father's actions can be described in terms of Van Vogt's Theory of the Right Man (scroll down to Oct 2004):

Essential here is that the "Right Man" must always have his way and is afraid of losing face above all... a conviction that they were always right, and a total inability to admit that they might ever be wrong...And if things don't exactly go his way, he may scare people into submission by breaking into outbursts of rage or downright violence...wild, insane jealousy. Most of us are subject to jealousy, since the notion that someone we care about prefers someone else is an assault on our amour propre. But the Right Man, whose self-esteem is like a constantly festering sore spot, flies into a frenzy at the thought, and becomes capable of murder...He feels he [is] justified in exploding, like an angry god. [...] he feels he is inflicting just punishment.... The Right Man hates losing face; if he suspects that his threats are not being taken seriously, he is capable of carrying them out, purely for the sake of appearances...What is so interesting here is the way the Right Man's violent emotion reinforces his sense of being justified, and his sense of justification increases his rage. The Right Man feels that his rage is a storm that has to be allowed to blow itself out, no matter what damage it causes. But this also means that he is the slave of an impulse he cannot control; his property, even the lives of those that he loves, are at the mercy of his emotions.

Be that as it may, I cannot believe there are people applauding the father. This is not the case of a violent criminal burglarizing the house late at night and adding rape to theft-the victim was invited over. Nor is the daughter a child-she is past the age of consent. There is no indication at this time that she has the mind of a child, which would make her actual age irrelevant. And as others have pointed out, the father seems to have "entrapped" the two teens, having his friend keep a look out-he WANTED an excuse to become violent, otherwise, why didn't he go to the police and ask for a restraining order forbidding the young man to go within a certain distance of his house? Simply because he was too embarrassed to admit to the cops that his daughter was deliberately choosing to disobey him?

There will be a criminal trial, and the father may well be found guilty . There will also be a civil trial (much easier to prosecute), and much of the man's assets may be seized to pay his victim's medical and rehabilitation expenses. As the young man was not hurt accidentally but as a result of the father's deliberate action, I don't think homeowner's insurance will pick up the tab. So the wife may be left destitute, depending on what Arkansas law is re: community property, what property is solely in her name, etc. If the young woman wanted to go to college, I hope her grades will get her a scholarship or she can pay her own way. But everything right now is pure speculation-the trial will bring out the truth (hopefully). And I hope reports that the young man has regained some feeling below the waist are true.

[WLR]

Brother,

The story you refer to states that the Father was attacked when he discovered the sexual predator hiding in a closet..

The Father was defending himself after being physically attacked...That he used a pool cue only suggests to me he grabbed the first improvised weapon that was handy.

Nothing in the world wrong with that unless you want to argue he should have arrived in the first place armed with a firearm.

The Father was unable to overcome the resistance of his assailant who was attacking him in is own home in front of his daughter. So he retreated to arm himself..

The Father withdrew from the situation only to return to find the punk had barricaded the door with the Fathers Daughter behind..

What in the heck would you do at that point?

Assume all is going swimmingly?

If you were any kind of Father or Man you would press the attack because you have no idea what is going thru the mind of your assailant. Does the Assailant intend to murder the daughter to protect himself from anyone testifying against him in the attack on the Father? No? And you would know that HOW?.. Is the Assailant now also armed with a knife or gun.. You do not know... All you do know is in spite of your verbal warnings for him to not come to your home.. He was in your home apparently having sex with your daughter in her room and upon being caught hiding in a closet physically attacked you..

“Lover” How romantic Romeo & Juliet written with the intent to engender sympathy for the Punk

(As was most of the Article)

“Kicked him in the Shins” was meant to sound like some 10 year old... like it is nothing.. The Father was ATTACKED in his own HOME!!!

I am 6’ 245lbs if I kick someone in the shins while they are flat footed they will fall on the ground even if well trained.. It is a viable form of attack which will cause most people excruciating pain and even temporary debilitation. It is also a deliberate act not a shove or a push in an effort to escape but an attack. One must make the conscious decision to attack the shins and carry it out. Further it is a prelude to more deadly attacks at more vital organs or parts of the Body..

The door being barricaded by the Sexual Predator rather than him taking the opportunity to escape demonstrates:

A. The punk was still capable of resistance.
B. The punk chose to continue the engagement rather than retreat.

Now People can fantasize all they want about their wisdom and mental state during a Physical Confrontation.. But unless they have been in them routinely as adults it is foolishness. When you are fighting men not other boys in a High School it’s for real and the results are for keeps..

Being a particularly low form of quasi-human you can count on the Prosecutor identifying with the “poor boy’s plight” kindred dark serpent spirits and all that.

Just how would the Dad know thru a closed door that in fact the Daughter was not being threated, already bloody, or dying behind that door when he returned armed?

As Member of the “Second to None” I would expect that you would know all this and suspect you do.. Perhaps you are just lobbing softballs over the plate so I can make my points? Thanks.

W

[no dems]

He was 19 and she was 17. In some states, that’s jail bait. But, the punishment dad doled out was more than a little excessive.

[lookihaveaswordinmybelly]

Man, if I were caught with a girl in that situation, I’d probably get the crap beat outta me by her father, then if I managed to get home I would be hacked to pieces, shot, then have my remains thrown into the fire by my Dad, lol.

But, however, on a more serious note, he shoulda stopped at the stick, and at the very least, forced the door open and shot him in the leg.

[LACat]

Dude read the article...The boyfriend is 19 years old, the daughter is 17. Also, the dad was firing warning shots!!! Too bad the ADULT Boyfriend was in the path of the bullet. I think if a regular dad found their teenage, underage daughter with an adult man, they would be upset too!!

[IIntense]

I think if a regular dad found their teenage, underage daughter with an adult man, they would be upset too!!

How do you define "upset"? Does anyone go through a week of their life without being "upset" at some occurrence? This father had every reason to be furious, assuming he is a normal family man. I assure you he is not the only parent who has suffered outrage over their child's choice of a boyfriend, which is the subject here.

Despite the law's definition of an adult, I've passed through those years myself and observed many others, including my own children at 17 and 19 years old. Whether you want to believe it or not, they do not meet the qualifications to be called an "adult". The majority of them simply don't.

These teenagers may have believed they knew what love is but they don't know crap. A worthwhile "man" doesn't sneak into his girlfriend's bedroom, and she doesn't invite him to do so.

As the story goes so far, her father (and maybe her mother?) saw this relationship as bad for their daughter.

Even with all this negative stuff going on, which the parents had to deal with, the dad let his common sense (assuming he had it) fly out the window. He and his wife could have sought other ways to put a stop to this relationship. But I acknowledge, it's tough and parents don't always win.

Yet, one better think 10, 20 times before introducing a pistol into a situation like this. Who in their RIGHT MIND tells himself he's willing to go to prison and shoots anyway?

[LACat]

You and I both know that hindsight is always 20/20. We can both say we would have done this or that. However, the truth of the matter is, unless you were there at that exact moment in time, with all the history, that was between the boyfriend and dad, we BOTH don’t know what we would have done. Per the article, it seems the dad had came to an agreement with the boyfriend, yet the boyfriend broke the agreement. So, it does seem that the dad did try to work things out prior to the shooting episode. (-and-I still believe that he did NOT mean to wound his daughter or the boyfriend with the gun) IIntense, I am not saying it is okay to shoot anyone, only that in an intense situation, you and I both don’t know what we would have done. Of course be that as it may, maybe a few people can learn from this man’s and boyfriend’s situation (an advantage that the accused dad did not have).

[traumer]

Are they all cousins... ?

[traumer]

Are they all cousins... ?

[piytar]

That he used a pool cue only suggests to me he grabbed the first improvised weapon that was handy.

That right there blows your entire contrived analysis right out the window. The father CAME INTO THE ROOM WITH THE POOL STICK. ("Upon arrival, he got a pool stick from the garage to defend himself, court documents state" -- the "too defend himself" is clearly a self-serving statement given the ambush nature of the entire event.)

The dolt walked into the room with the intent of beating the snot out of the BF (frankly, I'm OK with that). He found the BF in the closet and started beating on him. OK, you are on the ground in a closet (for whatever reason) and someone starts beating you in the head with a pool stick. What are you going to do? That's right, cover up and KICK at the attacker. In that case, the attacker would NOT be entitled to go get a gun and try to blow you away.

I REALLY cannot understand the way some of you are misreading the facts. Frankly, it smacks of cognitive dissonance that I encounter oftent on the left: You have a PRE-CONCEIVED emotional position, and facts to the contrary -- even from the father's version of the story -- just don't register.

Then again, we are all human and interpret things from our own emotional context, so maybe I shouldn't be surprised to see that here on FR. Still am, though...

[piytar]

Also, the dad was firing warning shots!!!

NO, the dad CLAIMED to have fired warning shots -- one of which just happened to be at waist level. Sorry, doesn't sound like any warning shot through a door that I've ever heard of...