Actually, there IS a law against having sex with a minor. While being close in age is a defense against prosecution, that doesn’t make it legal.
Bottom line, the situation sucks all around but I’d give the father benefit of doubt under castle doctrine. It IS the father’s castle and he did disrupt illegal activity in his home involving his minor daughter.
Not guilty.
Dad was a pretty good shot. From the looks of the photos, he had a greater chance of hitting his “little” 250# “flower” than that skinny guy taking a self photo with his phone.
I’m backing the Dad in this case. (Good shooten!)
Actually, the father did not interrupt illegal activity. They were fully clothed and not engaging in relations. The boy was hiding under the bed, for goodness sakes. Again, the boy was invited in by the daughter, so no reasonable person is going to claim he was an intruder or a trespasser.
So if it the father's castle and the father does not like any of his kids' friends, by your theory, the father can shoot anyone he doesn't like that is in house. You are trying so hard to justify murder that you have become ridiculous, if not downright immoral in your reasoning.