Sheriff: Father kills man sexually abusing his daughter

[DigitalFudge]

Story change


Now, the daughter didn't get sexually abused but was about to

Sheriff: Dad Kills Daughter's Alleged Rape Attacker

Authorities say a father beat to death a man who he said tried to sexually assault his 4-year-old daughter at their rural Texas farm.

Harmon says the victim was a 47-year-old man from Gonzales who appeared to have no prior criminal history. He says the man went to the property Saturday to help care for some horses.

The father's name is being withheld because of the ongoing investigation. Harmon says a grand jury will decide what, if any, charges the father will face.

So now he didn't even rape ha?

A mess

I'm going to stick with the idea that he did rape her only cuz I don't want to clock this father on the internet. Let me keep it cute.

 

[Kulindahr]

Are you high or something ? "Unleash our inner animal" ? So someone who is a homophobe and can't stand gay people is entitled to unleash his inner animal and kill any gay men he may encountered ? I'm very surprised by your very silly post here.

That you can make a comparison to homophobia tells me you don't understand the issue at all.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oakpope we do know the details as far as they have been reported and that is all we can discuss. If you want to invent details like a case of mistaken identity, fine.

The reality is the child will have already been examined by a doctor, and evidence of the sexual assault has already likely been collected and forwarded to police as part of their duty to investigate. It isn't a lynching mob that will establish the facts here but the authorities involved. Assuming the reporter has done his job, we know roughly what has occurred. In any case, we can discuss the principle that is relevant.

And the principle is, if you discover someone raping your child, do the first thing you can to stop the attack, without wasting any time to analyse the security interests of the attacker. If this means squeezing the attacker by the neck until you run out of adrenalin and the attacker is dead, do so. If a moment of reflection is possible to adjust tactics, restraining the attacker to face a trial, do so. But if the opportunity does not present itself or it simply does not occur to you that it might be safe to let go, you are blameless.

I have no idea what I would do in a situation like that. I have no skill or training at interpersonal combat. I've never been in a physical altercation with anyone. But I know if I were to have encountered someone doing that to my little sister, I would have attempted to do something definitive to break off the attack. I don't know what that would be, but a rational assessment of the attacker's interests is not my responsibility in that situation, and an estimate of a safe margin of restraint is beyond my expertise. Having never hit anyone how am I expected to know what is sufficient to merely knock someone unconscious as opposed to killing him? It's ridiculous to think I could or should try to make that assessment when in that split second the only duty is to protect the child. I'd try my best, whatever I could think of, and if the rapist lived he lived, if he died he died.

Well stated. I have a bit of a clue what I might do in a situation like that, since I faced a guy lifting the tops of sleeping bags of kids I was responsible for and peering in. The mental "attitude" or "set" or whatever was sharply different, one in which I didn't just act on impulse, but grabbed the most powerful deterrent I had available. Whether or not that was a good idea (in the view of some armchair ethicist) didn't even come to mind; all that I could think of was "what will stop this guy"? It was the urge to protect -- and they weren't even my own kids.

No parent in such a situation should be required to assess anything at all. but be allowed to end the threat to the child. If the best tool at hand is an ice axe, or a ski pole, or a brick, or a baseball bat, fine -- and whatever the parent does to stop the vile victimizer is not our business.

 

[Kulindahr]

I don't think his view is cruel. Rather, I feel he doesn't fully understand what happens to someone in that situation. It's almost an out of body experience. There's very little, if any, way he could have just stopped after the first few blows. It's similar when a police officer will discharge his entire magazine when one or two rounds would have sufficed.

That, too. I'll note that the police are trained to face extremely stressful situations, and still the "primal urge" takes over. Maybe a million years from now when humans have left the animal farther behind we can expect parents to be like Vulcans, cool and logical, in such situations. For now, the idea of punishing someone for dropping back to our ancestry in defense of children who are directly under attack is insulting.

 

[Kulindahr]

Story change


Now, the daughter didn't get sexually abused but was about to

Sheriff: Dad Kills Daughter's Alleged Rape Attacker

Whoa. A lot depends on what "was about to" means. Did the guy have the girl's panties down? Were his pants down?

Too many questions there. But they boil down to whether it was obvious what the man intended to do.

 

[refujiunderground]

Story change


Now, the daughter didn't get sexually abused but was about to

Sheriff: Dad Kills Daughter's Alleged Rape Attacker












So now he didn't even rape ha?

A mess

I'm going to stick with the idea that he did rape her only cuz I don't want to clock this father on the internet. Let me keep it cute.

remember this yesterday.

Roflmao you are the one with "Maybes" and hypothesizing making up scenarios about the rapist murdering the father and how I would do the same thing the father did but I am the one that "Doesn't know"



Are you high? Seriously.


I come @ you with quotes and facts while you reply with "Maybes"

quotes and facts from a news article that got the story from someone else that is unsure of the story of what transpired huh?

last time i remember, they were doing an investigation of the whole situation because the police were not sure about what happened exactly besides a man's child being raped by someone he paid to groom his horse and him beat him to the point where he died. you're just talking shit right now using an article that ain't even 100% reliable of what happened so shut the fuck up.

i admire your confidence though as if you are sure of yourself when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[fetaby]

remember this yesterday.

And? The release of more of the story does nothing to help with your arguments in this thread. Going off the idea that the rape did happen, you're accounts of the situation are still base and fucked.

Troll harder.

 

[DigitalFudge]

remember this yesterday.

You mean do I remember when I read you your rights and sent you away because you have no business discussing topics with adults?

Yeah I do *Adjusts Bow*

 

[shainski]

This is an incredibly old philosophy. As we preach constantly, we don't choose to be attracted to other men we "were born this way". The same can be said for those who are attracted to children. I in NO WAY condone the behaviour of pedophiles, it makes me sick to think about their actions. But the truth is simply this. Not every person who has this attraction act's on it. Saying that they can and will is like saying it's impossible to live a human life with out sexual contact, it can has and will continue to be done.

Abstaining is by all means the hardest thing these people deal with. We dehumanize these people by saying they're lesser then us that they're "Monsters", but are they really? No, they're considered "sick" just like we once were. There attraction is not sick, the actions that some take certainly are. We as a whole need to re-evaluate how we pass judgement as a society.

I know 99% of you will not agree with my statement and again I say I do not condone this kind of behavior. There is very little known as to what causes this attraction, the human brain is largely a medical mystery. Is death the best solution to any mental illness? No. Is rehabilitation an option? Not in every case, but as Humans we all deserve that chance to heal. I'm not saying release all the pedophiles into the world, that would be catastrophic as a VAST majority of CONVICTED sex offenders will commit an act of sexual assault again. Chemical and Physical castration in no way stops a sexual predator from being dangerous. I don't need a work penis to have sexual encounters, nor do any of us. Castration doesn't stop a person sexual urges so much as help suppress them. A castrated person still feels attraction, as it's not a strictly testosterone/estrogen hormone reaction.

Was the Father justified to physically remove this person from the situation? Yes. Was he justified to end his/her life? No, a life for this crime isn't justified in my eyes the Fathers actions were aggravated assault causing death. Can I blame him? No, nor can I imagine his emotional state at the time of the incident.

That's Just my $0.02.

But, you are, in effect, saying the pedophile can't choose to whom he is attracted, and that some find it possible to abstain from his desires - which implies that some find it impossible to abstain.

If it is true - that the pedophile cannot control his desires, then might not the same be said of the father? He, upon observing that his daughter was being harmed has his passion imflamed to the point that he, likewise, cannot control his rage.

Certainly the father should be charged with manslaughter (It certainly is not premeditated). But, i doubt that many would convict him. Didn't they used to call this a "crime of passion"?

 

[Telstra]

I was right all along. Some of you guys should be charged with supporting over the top violence.

 

[Kulindahr]

I was right all along. Some of you guys should be charged with supporting over the top violence.

There's nothing "over the top" when defending your children when they're being attacked. If there's "over the top" violence there, then I assume you think soldiers should be taught to not shoot to kill.

 

[pat grimshaw]

Whoa. A lot depends on what "was about to" means. Did the guy have the girl's panties down? Were his pants down?

Too many questions there. But they boil down to whether it was obvious what the man intended to do.

Yes! indeed.

 

[Telstra]

There's nothing "over the top" when defending your children when they're being attacked. If there's "over the top" violence there, then I assume you think soldiers should be taught to not shoot to kill.

Killing a man is not over the top violence? What is?
Burning him into ashes?

 

[bankside]

Murder is murder. Rape is rape. The death of a rapist as the inadvertent by-product of stopping the rape in progress is not murder.

I should add that a couple of posters have said "he had it coming to him." I don't agree with that. The death penalty is unethical, and any punishment would need to occur only after a trial. But the death of a rapist who is being removed from his victim is not punishment, but just a potential effect of the necessity to remove the rapist. It's like pouring salt on a leech. The primary goal is to get it to detach, not to kill the leech.

 

[pat grimshaw]

…Murder is Murder, Rape is Rape….

But was it Rape or Attempted Rape?

 

[Kulindahr]

Sure the same can be said for the Father but does that justify either persons actions? I know I said I was done with this topic but your question answers itself. Yes the same can be said but Murder is Murder, Rape is Rape.... two wrong's don't make a right. Plain fucking jane.

Killing in defense of one's self or another innocent is not murder -- it's defense. So there's only one wrong happening: the rape.

 

[Kulindahr]

Murder is murder. Rape is rape. The death of a rapist as the inadvertent by-product of stopping the rape in progress is not murder.

I should add that a couple of posters have said "he had it coming to him." I don't agree with that. The death penalty is unethical, and any punishment would need to occur only after a trial. But the death of a rapist who is being removed from his victim is not punishment, but just a potential effect of the necessity to remove the rapist. It's like pouring salt on a leech. The primary goal is to get it to detach, not to kill the leech.

Brilliantly put!

Besides that, anyone raping a child has already forfeited any claim on being treated as human.

 

[DigitalFudge]

How does someone prove that someone was "About to get raped"


Let's say the girl didn't actually get raped: The guy is claiming that he beat the man up to stop it from happening.


Are we simply taking his word on it? What proof is there that he can present?

Do four year olds take the stand?

 

[pat grimshaw]

How does someone prove … … …

Put down your pitchfork and let the forensic people in. Sis.

 

[pat grimshaw]

^ yes. Dig is special. But it'd be good to have some more evidence before making a hasty judgment.