Dad Who Beat His Daughter’s Molester To Death Won’t Face Charges

[T.Horton]

There is a system of justice in place in all civilised countries whereby the accused gets the right to have his day in court and be convicted by a jury. We could go back to summary hangings I suppose but I fail to see how that would be beneficial to society.

Like I say I'm unfamiliar with this case. Did the father chance upon the crime in progress? Or did he find out about it and take matters into his own hands? There's a huge difference with regards to employing self defense laws. I'm a parent too, but I'm detached enough to be aware that justice is not best served by angry and vengeful fathers.

This is central for me: Was he defending his child? Or was he punishing the transgressor?

correction - the link http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1587724.html

[T.Horton]

"he came across a man attempting to molest his child"

[StarshipTrooper]

There is a system of justice in place in all civilised countries whereby the accused gets the right to have his day in court and be convicted by a jury. We could go back to summary hangings I suppose but I fail to see how that would be beneficial to society.

Like I say I'm unfamiliar with this case. Did the father chance upon the crime in progress? Or did he find out about it and take matters into his own hands? There's a huge difference with regards to employing self defense laws. I'm a parent too, but I'm detached enough to be aware that justice is not best served by angry and vengeful fathers.

This is central for me: Was he defending his child? Or was he punishing the transgressor?

Where I'm from if you catch a burglar in your home you are within your rights to fill him with lead and you won't be prosecuted so long as he's in your home.

Poet

[T.Horton]

The man was in the process of touching his child? Have you all gone bat shit crazy? What was he supposed to do then? Please enlighten me as to what the correct, law abiding response should have been?

I am absolutely baffled.

you're not baffled, you're clueless. nobody - NOBODY has said or implied that he should not have beaten the attacker to death. NOBODY. even i said that i would do the EXACT same thing. and now a couple or few of us are saying that AFTER THE FACT the law has to play it's role to decide whether or not the man, who is now dead, was murdered. and you are having trouble with it. calling names, circular arguments, the whole bit.

pmsl at this stupidity.

[Kris Silver]

Without the evidence, just agreeing with beating a man to death for this is still, ultimately, wrong and also inhumane. Christ know's I'd come close, but life for life is one thing, it's just not so simple and often carries on with revenge, on and on.

With the details of his remorse, it sounds like the right decision entirely. He clearly didn't want to kill him, and given the extreme circumstances understandably lost control. He realised that and behaved in a way which still demonstrated strong appreciation for any human life, that alone for what he'd witnessed, is enough.

[$ LegenD $]

absolutely shocked anyone would think this guy should be prosecuted.....nothing can compare seeing your daughter about to or being raped....nothing...not wife cheating or any other reason you gave...sorry bud your way off on that one....

[T.Horton]

the fact that people just don't get it is kind of comical to me.

[Terrel]

the fact that people just don't get it is kind of comical to me.

I can't believe I got what you were saying

[-jose-]

the fact that people just don't get it is kind of comical to me.

what I don't get is that you as a parent yourself thinks he should be prosecuted...

[Terrel]

what I don't get is that you as a parent yourself thinks he should be prosecuted...

He wouldn't be charged with anything. He would walk away an innocent man.

No record, no stain or mark.