Dad Shot Drunk Driver Who Killed His Sons, found not Guilty

[LOES]

 

Well why'd he drive drunk in the first place, there's no reason whatsoever to endanger the lives of others just because he wanted to get tipsy. May be really bad to say but good riddance, I have no f*cks to give to those who are selfish

 

Because people aren't in their normal state of mind, so when you're drunk, you do dumb stuff.

 

 

 

Yes, who wouldn't? They specifically have a law for situations like this: 'Heat of Passion'

 

 

Yeah I see your point, but it's to me it's like:

 

Sorry I cheated on you, I was drunk so I should be excused because I didn't really cheat on you.

 

No, you chose to cheat and put yourself in that position, don't try and blame alcohol because many people get drunk and don't cheat.

 

Applies to drunk drivers as well IMO. If you are known to be blackout drunk, what should you or should you not do?

Edited August 29, 2014 by LOES

[im_stoned]

Well why'd he drive drunk in the first place, there's no reason whatsoever to endanger the lives of others just because he wanted to get tipsy. May be really bad to say but good riddance, I have no f*cks to give to those who are selfish

I agree those scum deserve to die a horrible slow painful death

 

If I'm able to do the right thing and be respectful of other peoples safety why can't these selfish f*cks ???

 

This whole '' everyone deserves justice'' is bullsh*t !!!!!!!

 

Would you like to leave this earth at 12 years of age because some no hoper with nothing to live for killed you because he was selfish enough to endanger everyone on the roads life driving while drunk !

 

if their was any justice the government would of killed him so the poor dad didn't have too ! I bet if this went to court theyd let the drunk off !

 

YOU CAN NOT UNDER NO CURCUMSTANCES HAVE FAITH IN THE COURT SYSTEM IT REWARDS CRIMINALS AND PUINSHES THE INNOCENT BY DESIGN

 

I had to put that in caps because I can't stress it enough, vigilante justice all the way until the system is completely changed for the better

Edited August 29, 2014 by im_stoned

[I cucked Alex Jones]

Lay off the bud for a little while.

[Frank Brown]

Lay off the bud for a little while.

I think he has more issues than bud.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Vlynor

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

What he did wasn't right and he should've been found guilty if there was an adequate amount of evidence. Although I can sympathize with him. Watching a family member get murdered by some guy who made an incredibly stupid decision is probably hard to do, but it's no excuse for vigilante justice.

No he shouldn't of been found guilty, if two of my sons died because of some wreckless jackass, I'd probably kill him too.

[Niobium]

 

What he did wasn't right and he should've been found guilty if there was an adequate amount of evidence. Although I can sympathize with him. Watching a family member get murdered by some guy who made an incredibly stupid decision is probably hard to do, but it's no excuse for vigilante justice.

No he shouldn't of been found guilty, if two of my sons died because of some wreckless jackass, I'd probably kill him too.

yeah... honestly who the hell wouldn't?

[YA BOY DIRT]

yeah... honestly who the hell wouldn't?

Rational people.

[Moth]

 

yeah... honestly who the hell wouldn't?

Rational people.

 

No one is rational after seeing their two sons get murdered by a drunk driver.

[Frank Brown]

 

What he did wasn't right and he should've been found guilty if there was an adequate amount of evidence. Although I can sympathize with him. Watching a family member get murdered by some guy who made an incredibly stupid decision is probably hard to do, but it's no excuse for vigilante justice.

No he shouldn't of been found guilty, if two of my sons died because of some wreckless jackass, I'd probably kill him too.

 

 

Yeah, he should've. He wasn't defending anyone. He went home, grabbed his gun, and then killed him. I'd be a little more understanding if it was a heat-of-the-moment sorta deal, but it wasn't.

 

Like I said though, I sympathize with him, but I don't think he should get-off without consequence.

[Clem Fandango]

No guys, it turns out the drunk driver was black and Mr. Barajas was a white devil off duty police officer.

 

Get Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton on the phone.

Oh come on dude, get your head out of the sand. Eye witness testimony says an ordinary member of the community was standing with his hands up, shot six times by a police officer standing several feet away, and- seeing as how I have to fill out reams of paper work every time I fart at my supermarket job- of course the police didn't file an incident report or investigate in anyway.

 

The same department that tear gassed protesters in a residential neighbourhood (children were hit, for f*ck's sake, it's probably hard enough for an adult to be hit with that stuff), threatened to kill journalists and activists while pointing assault rifles at them, covered up the shooting of a woman by confiscating evidence but not investigating, has a history of encouragement of racial profiling from the top brass, beat an innocent black man in a cell and charged him with destruction of property damage for getting blood on their uniforms, and is 94% white despite Ferguson being a black majority town.

 

How you can have all that explained to you multiple times, and still bend over backwards to defend the police is beyond me. Actually I guess it's because the police are all that stand between you and being cannibalised by slacked jawed pikeys, but this isn't happening in your city. It's happening in a black majority, politically unstable city where the police force has a sordid history of racism and apparent fetish for military hardware.

[YA BOY DIRT]

No one is rational after seeing their two sons get murdered by a drunk driver.

 

There are people who know how to keep a level head in extreme situations. The father of the victims is not one of them. Instead of thinking to call the police, or f*ck, even get the guy's information since he was there for so long, his first reaction is to shoot another person. He had enough time to go back home and look for a gun, but he couldn't use that time to take some deep breaths and calm down or call for help. Shooting the man still isn't gonna bring his sons back. That's a pain he will live with for the rest of his life.

 

The drunk driver committed involuntary manslaughter and was murdered shortly after. The father committed second-degree murder and walked away punishment free. We glorify it because we think he "did the right thing" when no, all he did was act out of fury. Everyone here saying the father enacted "real justice" is just high on seeing their darker fantasies coming to life.

Edited August 29, 2014 by DirtSPP

[Finn 7 five 11]

Not enough evidence to convict him, if he did do it, he should have a Reduced sentence, in my opinion.

Edited August 29, 2014 by •¿F¡ññ4L¡ƒ£?•

[Graven]

2 innocent died and the scumbag spirit got a new host.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Slave Boy

[Fuzzknuckles]

An eye for an eye?

 

What is this, the f*cking dark ages? We have justices systems for a reason, and this isn't the reason. Though to be fair, the reason for most justice systems seems to be to allow justice to be miscarried at every turn.

 

And to anyone that thinks the drunk driver murdered those kids, you're a f*cking idiot. It's manslaughter, it's not murder. Murder is pre-meditated, this wasn't. This was an accident (an avoidable one), but the father should NOT have committed murder as revenge for the manslaughter.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Fuzzknuckles

[Doc Rikowski]

He should not have but he chose to.

As a member of a civilized society I can judge his act as wrong, as a father I understand it and forgive it.

In my opinion an eye for an eye is wrong when it is legally carried by a State but it is understandable on a subjective and personal point of view.

Basically you kill my kids I kill you and I have no problem in facing jail.

Also if you drink and drive you are putting yourself in the position to harm yourself and others.

So it is not an accident, it is you deciding to play Russian roulette with your car.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Doc Rikowski

[Fuzzknuckles]

He should not have but he chose to.

As a member of a civilized society I can judge his act as wrong, as a father I understand it and forgive it.

In my opinion an eye for an eye is wrong when it is legally carried by a State but it is understandable on a subjective and personal point of view.

Basically you kill my kids I kill you and I have no problem in facing jail.

Also if you drink and drive you are putting yourself in the position to harm yourself and others.

So it is not an accident, it is you deciding to play Russian roulette with your car.

"I acknowledge the law when it suits me"

 

And this is why our justice systems are useless.

[Doc Rikowski]

The justice system is not useless. Not everyone would have reacted as that father and not every similar case would end with a not guilty verdict.

[GN 92]

Human rights can suck my dick

 

He did the right thing, i'd do the same.

 

Poor children, rip.

Edited August 29, 2014 by BOSS 302

[sivispacem]

Hypothetical question. If the driver had been sober but on the phone, did they deserve it too? What about if the cause was the mechanical failure due vehicle being in poor condition because of their lax maintenance? What about if the driver had a medical episode because they failed to take medication? Adjusting the radio? Blinded by the sun? Stoned? Fell asleep at the wheel?

 

In each of these cases the driver's incompetence or negligence is the cause of two deaths, so practically speaking it isn't really different from the actual situation at hand. So does the killer deserve violent retribution in these cases? If so, why? If not, how are they different from being hit by a drunk driver?

[Kampioen]

If there's not enough evidence to prove it then he should be acquitted, it's a simple as that. If there had been enough evidence then he should have been found guilty. Revenge is not a legal reason to kill someone. It doesn't matter if he deserves it or not, that's up to a court to decide.

 

edit: Having said that, I do think it's understandable and I may have even done the same. But that doesn't make it right.

Edited August 29, 2014 by CenMan

[Doc Rikowski]

I guess we'll never know what the reaction of the father would have been in the cases mentioned above.

What my reaction would be? I don't know. But in the heat of the moment I might have killed the guy anyway if I had the chance to. No matter what caused the accident.

[Raavi]

He had means, opportunity and motive. People have been convicted with much less (circumstantial) evidence presented against them. Cold blooded murder is inexcusable regardless of the motive. His acquittal is a travesty of justice.

[Kampioen]

He had means, opportunity and motive. People have been convicted with much less evidence presented against them. Cold blooded murder is inexcusable regardless of the motive. His acquittal is a travesty of justice.

 

All of those things are useful for identifying suspects and necessary to convict them, but by themselves they don't prove that he did it. If there is no real proof then you can't convict him. From what I read in the news story in the OP it seems very likely that he did it, but if you want to have a justice system where innocent people don't get convicted, unfortunately that also means that guilty people are sometimes not convicted. It's more of a failure of the investigation than of the court.

 

One thing I want to add, having a jury of civilians decide on someone's fate is something I have never understood about the US. Who in their right mind leaves this up to a group of people with no legal background? As far as I know they can very well be idiots, they just can't be insane.

[Raavi]

Not so much "failure of investigation" as failure of the human element of investigation i.e investigators sympathising with the suspect. Then convincing a jury of peers who all have families, likely children of their own to pass a not guilty verdict in a case like this is not exactly rocket science. There might even have been some sympathising from the prosecutors camp, which will be especially obvious if they do not appeal this verdict. Like I said, a travesty of justice.

[Fuzzknuckles]

The justice system is not useless. Not everyone would have reacted as that father and not every similar case would end with a not guilty verdict.

I disagree. In countries where you can't just go out, get a gun and shoot someone, this would not have happened. Or at least would have been hugely less likely to happen.

 

Access to firearms made this possible.

[Fireman]

Question is wast here really no proof, or is it a conspiracy, people who take revenge normally don't cover their tracks very well.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

I can't believe the fools that are saying they'd be rational after their two and only f*cking sons died. I couldn't let some dumbass irresponsible motherf*cker do that to my children and get away with it. He'd have to go. There is no bringing those kids back after something like that. They're gone forever. Imagine if it happened to your parents or siblings. Or to your own children especially. So stop saying sh*t like you're holier than thou.

[Raavi]

I can't believe the fools that are saying they'd be rational after their two and only f*cking sons died. I couldn't let some dumbass irresponsible motherf*cker do that to my children and get away with it.

 

Thing is though, he wouldn't. He would have been convicted of DUI vehicular homicide and would've been sentenced to 20 some years in some godforsaken hell hole in Texas that is to pass as a prison. That would've been punishment, the only thing killing him did was set him free.

 

There is no bringing those kids back after something like that. They're gone forever.

 

Exactly. Killing the person responsible is not is going to change that.

[GunWrath]

Setting him in prison isn't exactly helping either. Taxpayers will pay every thing for that man. He'll get 3 meals a day, free dental care, you name it, he'll have it. It's best that he just rot in the f*cking ground.

[GTA3Rockstar]

 

No one is rational after seeing their two sons get murdered by a drunk driver.

 

There are people who know how to keep a level head in extreme situations. The father of the victims is not one of them. Instead of thinking to call the police, or f*ck, even get the guy's information since he was there for so long, his first reaction is to shoot another person. He had enough time to go back home and look for a gun, but he couldn't use that time to take some deep breaths and calm down or call for help. Shooting the man still isn't gonna bring his sons back. That's a pain he will live with for the rest of his life.

 

The drunk driver committed involuntary manslaughter and was murdered shortly after. The father committed second-degree murder and walked away punishment free. We glorify it because we think he "did the right thing" when no, all he did was act out of fury. Everyone here saying the father enacted "real justice" is just high on seeing their darker fantasies coming to life.

 

 

That's easier said than done. For one, you have never been in a situation like that and for two, who wouldn't think irrationally when something like that happens? You'd be naive to think otherwise.

 

 

Though, you're right. There are tons of people who are rational thinkers -- and I'm sure he was -- but when something that severe happens, they change. Which is why they have the 'Heat of Passion' law: lesser punishment, if found guilty.

Edited August 29, 2014 by GTA3Rockstar