Father kills man who molested his daughter - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

oldschoolcalgary · 08-30-2006, 07:25 PM

Hoz and I are in rare agree here too -

If the process of law and due course failed, and this neighbour had been proved to have molested the daughter, yet let go, then perhaps I could justify it.

It was an allegation-but it wasn't substantiated....and the guy was an officer of the court; he should have known better than to act so rashly...

nfotiu · 08-30-2006, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nehkara

While I understand your point I must ask, what is the point of locking away a 29-year-old father who protected his daughter until his daughter is also 29?

It's not like he will be a serial killer or is likely to re-offend.

I think he will likely plead temporary insanity and win.

I don't know that I agree with that. I don't think that most people go over and stab someone to death in the heat of the moment. That is an extreme and violent action. The first thing I would think of, if it is me is my child and her well being. If handled correctly, a 2 year old girl would most likely recover physically and mentally from such an incident, whereas his action of killing his neighbour absolutely destroys his child's life, is completely selfish, and helps no one. He's no hero, and belongs in prison.

I don't want to live in a society where it is okay for everyone to be cop/judge/jury/executioner.

pepper24 · 08-30-2006, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nehkara

I hope this guy is not found guilty. I personally find his reaction understandable and anyone who molests a 2 year old should have bad things happen to them.

Plus, he should be with his daughter.

If he did it I can understand the rage but isn't it innocent until proven guilty?

holycow! · 08-30-2006, 09:42 PM

"A Time To Kill"

RougeUnderoos · 08-30-2006, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayems

You think a 2 year old is capable of conjuring up such a story? Then telling her mother?

Who knows what a two year old is capable of conjuring up? It's not like a two-year-old is incapable of lying, and it's not like a two-year-old speaks perfect English and can't be misunderstood, or might have the tendency to repeat things she's heard.

And if it is true, how did she get into such a situation where she was with this guy without her parents around in the first place? While we're all clapping him on the back for killing this guy and getting himself locked up for 25 years, maybe someone else should be slapping him in the face for letting it happen.

As for the insanity plea, I'm no lawyer, but I think that one is for the movies. If it went down like the story says, his goose is, and should be, cooked.

CrusaderPi · 08-30-2006, 09:58 PM

I can't imagine what I'd do if someone molested my 2 year old. I do know, however, that I don't feel an once of remorse that this dude is dead.

Jayems · 08-30-2006, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Who knows what a two year old is capable of conjuring up? It's not like a two-year-old is incapable of lying, and it's not like a two-year-old speaks perfect English and can't be misunderstood, or might have the tendency to repeat things she's heard.

No, but a two year old lying seems to be more geared towards "Did you eat the cookies?" ... "no."

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

And if it is true, how did she get into such a situation where she was with this guy without her parents around in the first place?

Couldn't agree more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

As for the insanity plea, I'm no lawyer, but I think that one is for the movies. If it went down like the story says, his goose is, and should be, cooked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanit...orary_insanity

Quote:

Temporary insanity

The notion of temporary insanity argues that a defendant was insane, but is now sane. A defendant found to have been temporarily insane will often be released without any requirements of psychiatric treatment. This defence was first used by U.S. Congressman Daniel Sickles of New York in 1859 after he had killed his wife's lover, Philip Barton Key, but was most used during the 1940s and 1950s. Since then, it has not been as successful.

pepper24 · 08-30-2006, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

I can't imagine what I'd do if someone molested my 2 year old. I do know, however, that I don't feel an once of remorse that this dude is dead.

You believe in guilty until they prove their innocence?

Resolute 14 · 08-30-2006, 10:18 PM

The only problem here is that the alleged molester hadnt had his day in court yet.

Anyone that kills a convicted child mosester deserves a medal and a parade.

JiriHrdina · 08-30-2006, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I'm just going to toss this idea out there,

the point of putting someone in jail is two-fold is it not? (lawyers and law students correct me on this one)

Either:

a) to reform the criminal into a functioning member of society; or
b) to remove them from society because they are a threat to the social well being

I don't believe the father would really fall into either category. Wouldn't another form of punishment be more fitting? Fine? Community Service? I dunno, just something to debate and talk about really.

Sure and with that form of punishment dolled out we might as well just legalize vigilante justice.

Gotta punish murder no matter what the case.

Azure · 08-30-2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pepper24

You believe in guilty until they prove their innocence?

Realize that many people here are also parents, and feel the emotion that this story generates.

You don't have to agree with them, but God knows what me and you would do in the same situation.

Jake · 08-30-2006, 10:44 PM

^ your avator of the Boondock Saints is some what appropriate in this thread...

I don't think one can trust a 2 year old in such serious matters. A mind so young can be unpredictable. Either way he should be put in prison for a long time. Murder can not go unpunished.

Azure · 08-30-2006, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake

^ your avator of the Boondock Saints is some what appropriate in this thread...

I don't think one can trust a 2 year old in such serious matters. A mind so young can be unpredictable. Either way he should be put in prison for a long time. Murder can not go unpunished.

Yeah. Good thing I don't agree with vigilante justice.

But I seriously think an insanity plea can win in court. I'm sure the father was acting on emotions.

RougeUnderoos · 08-30-2006, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayems

No, but a two year old lying seems to be more geared towards "Did you eat the cookies?" ... "no."

Maybe, but they can lie about things a little more sophisticated than cookies, and they do repeat things they've heard. They don't speak all that well either. We are talking about a person who was born in 2004 after all.

If the dead guy did what is alleged then good riddance, but the whole thing is pretty strange and not as cut and dried as some of us are making it out to be.

Azure · 08-31-2006, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Maybe, but they can lie about things a little more sophisticated than cookies, and they do repeat things they've heard. They don't speak all that well either. We are talking about a person who was born in 2004 after all.

If the dead guy did what is alleged then good riddance, but the whole thing is pretty strange and not as cut and dried as some of us are making it out to be.

You 'might' be right. But would a 2 year old even realize what the man was doing, 'if' he was molesting her?

And how would she explain something like that to her parents?

FireFly · 08-31-2006, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah. Good thing I don't agree with vigilante justice.

But I seriously think an insanity plea can win in court. I'm sure the father was acting on emotions.

I have emotions but that doesn't mean I'm insane. I'm torn on this one... On the one hand, the guy is likely not a danger to society unless his daughter goes around tellin ghim that every second person molested her. As a lawyer, he may have seen too many molesters get off and decided (with the aid of emotion) that that was not going to happen to his daughter.

On the other hand, you can't let the guy walk free. What does that say? If you have a good enough excuse, the price for a life is x dollars or x number of hours of community service? Does the fine or hours go up or down if you kill someone that sold acid to your kid? I would assume it goes up if the person rapes a family member... No. It doesn't work like that. The guy's life, if he did molest the child, cannot have a price tag put on it or you're going to start putting a price tag on all lives. This is what life in prison is for. You take a life, it costs you yours. A life for a life, like an ye for an eye.

And again, then I go back to the fact that I don't think the guy deserves life in prison. I couldn't be on a jury in this case. I'd say guilty and let him walk.

FireFly · 08-31-2006, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

You 'might' be right. But would a 2 year old even realize what the man was doing, 'if' he was molesting her?

And how would she explain something like that to her parents?

So and so touched me.... two year olds know their body parts. (If they're taught them I suppose, but they can learn to name them, or point to them.) A two year old is more than capable of saying "so and so touched me here".

Also, as a victim of child molestation, I can tell you that you would be amazed at what a child realizes is right and wrong. I didn't read the article but it's likely she knew the perpetrator and trusted him. It's likely the parents trusted him. For those of you who said 'where were her parents and why would they leave her in his care,' do you really think it's that easy to spot a molester?

He may have been 'playing a game' and when her mom asked what she did that day, she said 'we played a game where so and so touched me here and then I touched him back' or whatever.

If the little girl is lucky she will never remember what happened that day.

Nehkara · 08-31-2006, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

I couldn't be on a jury in this case. I'd say guilty and let him walk.

I've been thinking about this case all day. I think that is what I would do, if given the option. He's obviously guilty but doesn't really deserve to do a lot of jailtime.

Coolsurfer79 · 08-31-2006, 04:22 AM

Too many questions left unanswered by this article. For example how exactly did the assailant get access to the child. You don't leave 2 year olds unattented do you?

icarus · 08-31-2006, 06:44 AM

A lot of things in this thread make me scratch my head and continue to wonder whether the presumption of innocence truly is a core Canadian value.

But anyway here is a case for you all to chew on as you consider this issue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Stone

And if any of you can find an online version of R. v. Rabey (SCC, 1980) that would make good reading too.