Posted on 06/12/2006 11:48:18 AM PDT by Brian Mosely
LOL
I happen to believe that our government doesn't need to wack men over the head with socialist liberal laws and regulations which arbitrarily and capriciously removes freedom.
Most of us stand and take it. Ocassionally some act alone and fight back, and most of those become crazier than a bag of hammars.
Who do I identify with?
Those who crave freedom, even if they go around the bend,madder tan hatters, shoot their wife and take a hit at a judge.
And you know what? The more our court systems and municipality evolve more towards a socialst model which disregards freedom and justice, the more such tragedies there will be.
So run far and fast Mack, I hope you make it, but like most, your insanity will have you killing yourself with your own gun, unless you run so hard and fast you run beyond your own insanity.
By the way, I sort of admire abolitionist John Brown too, and he was definitely a basket case.
LOL
In other words, you're desperately trying to excuse this guy's conduct, even as you admit that there's no evidence to support the excuses you're trying to make.
I am not excusing his conduct. I do not have that capacity, thats between him and God.
I am just wishing him good luck in escaping the "justice" which is so hot on his trail.
So what ball team do you cheer for? Or do you think there is a hiiden moral defect that might be revealed in answering that question?
I have been a life long Yankess fan.
Used to trade Whitey Ford and Micky Mantle cards.
There is an unfortunate tendency that the people who would have the most justification for this sort of conduct are those least likely to engage in it; a judge is more apt to face reprisals for justly punishing someone than from unjustly punishing someone.
Saying that a person's actions might be morally justifiable if certain conditions applied does not imply that the actions were morally justifiable. Rather, it means that to show the acts were unjustifiable one should show that the conditions did not apply. Unless the judge and wife were both extremely corrupt, such proof should not be hard to come by.
Interesting how you claim such intimate and detailed knowledge of how Mr. Mack is in the right on this one, and how you're rooting for him.
Oh, you meant the judge. I think the POI looks like Officer Muldoon - Car 54, where are you?
Just this little thing about though shall not kill. I haven't found any clauses of "except for family court judges" Redirect that anger to the polls.
But be forewarned that there are consequences to thinking. In some cases, your kind of thinking leads to the madhouse, the prison house, or the grave.
Moreover, your publishing this thinking may push some unstable person over the edge, because like it or not you are giving them a justification for evil.
Nobody should advocate, support, or publicly state admiration for a murderer who has killed the mother of his babies. . . . just because you think (without any actual knowledge) that he was a victim of "socialist liberal laws and regulations".
That is actually socialist/communist thinking: the end justifies the means. NOTHING justifies cold blooded murder. NOTHING.
Unfortunately, the litigant who has lost a court case is the very last person who can make a rational analysis of the reasons he lost. Even the lawyer (who is a professional and not personally involved) has a hard time doing that.
Introspection is almost impossible when a litigant has been "up" for trial - rehearsing all his testimony and the wrongs and grievances. (That's true of any lawsuit - for example, personal injury plaintiffs never "get well" until they've gotten rid of all the litigation baggage. A lawsuit will actually retard recovery from injuries - not because of malingering, but because the plaintiff is rehearsing and concentrating on the severity of his injuries day in and day out. It's a very self-destructive mode of thinking.)
The problem is, just about everybody who loses thinks they were screwed. And they point to the judge, or the jury, or their lawyer was no good, or the witnesses were bribed . . . just go down the cellblock row at any state prison, and you will hear the same complaints over and over again.
Waiting for your update.....
Darren is still on the lam. They think he rented a silver Ford with California plates last week and fled in that.
The murder vic in the apartment is the ex-wife Charla. Darren killed her that morning, then drove over to the parking garage in downtown Reno and shot the judge.
His company credit card was used at the Sacramento airport, but they're saying that it could have been anyone associated with his business and they're checking on that now.
Here's how they tied the judge shooting to Mack: Darren called a friend over to the ex-wife's apartment in the morning, asking him to pick up their daughter there and take her over to grandma's house. The friend drove over to the ex's apartment and Mack asked him to wait upstairs with the girl while he talked to the ex-wife (Charla) in the garage. The friend said that Mack went into the garage and a few moments later he heard the dog barking frantically. Soon afterwards, Mack sprinted past the friend with a towel wrapped around his hand, and the friend's dog followed, his muzzle and chest covered in blood. The friend freaked and left the house with the girl. When he left, Charla's SUV was parked in the driveway.
The friend returned later that morning to check on Charla and no one answered. The SUV was also missing. He left, but came back a while later and no one answered again. It was shortly after that the judge was shot, and the friend got very suspicious and called the cops and told them about the morning's events. That's when the police showed up at the apartment and discovered Charla's body in the garage. That's when they put two and two together and came up with Darren Mack.
Now for the randog insight:
Charla was dead by the time the friend arrived at the apartment. Darren wanted to kill his ex and setup an alibi to throw the cops off, so he calls the friend over to pick up his daughter. He acts like he's going into the garage to talk to his (dead) ex-wife, but he doesn't count on the dog following him into the garage. The dog sees the dead body and freaks, possibly recognizing Charla and trying to nuzzle her up, getting blood all over his muzzle and chest. Mack freaks--he's got a bloody dog on his hands with just minutes to clean the dog. Impossible. So he grabs a rag, wraps it around his hand to make it look like the dog bit him, and goes inside....
Mack had this whole thing planned from the beginning, from killing the ex-wife and judge to planting his vehicles around town and salting the judges car with explosives to keep the cops chasing their tails while he skipped town. What he didn't count on was his friend bringing his damn dog over to the ex's apartment and finding the body. If all had gone according to plan, Darren would have had a good day to get out of the country. As it is, the cops had his number by 3PM yesterday afternoon. Did he make it to a small airfield (there are plenty in the area) and get across the border in time? Dunno; gonna have to wait and see....
Great work.
Thanks again.
You are NO fun. ;^)
Bravo - I've been arguing this locally since yesterday but you state it so much better than I can.
The problem with these types who think they can plan the perfect crime is . . . they forget they have only planned one crime, while the police work hundreds of them.
I've known several of these sociopaths . . . think they're better and smarter than the police and that they can outwit them. But life on the lam is harder than they think . . . especially for somebody who's been a child of privilege. They usually don't have the street smarts to make this work.
And this is not somebody who "snapped" - this is a well planned revenge crime.
Wow, thanks for the report and your thoughts on it. I'd have probably fallen for the ruse of the ex-wife still being alive when the friend went to get the daughter - andfor the faux dog bite, too.
Sounds like this guy might have the means to disappear and stay disappeared for a while. His regular car is a Hummer, right? Let's see if he's a pilot. Nope, not listed. Aircraft owner? Not in his own name - would take me a while to find a company name or alias.
What was in Sacramento? A phone call or credit card? Private pilot by his same last name listed out of there, but doubt it pertains.
Ha ha - GMTA - I was off searching pilot and aircraft databases before I saw your post.
His company card was used at the Sac airport, but it was a card that any number of people could have used, so they're tracking that down. They didn't say if the card was used to buy an airline ticket, but it didn't sound like it. He's been dropping red herrings all over the place (two cars parked in various parts of town, salting the judges car with explosives), so he could have used the card in Sac to throw the authorities off again. I'll say one thing for him--he's a wiley cuss (except for that damn dog).
The crime was well planned (except for that damn dog), so I'm sure he had a bag full of cash and diamonds/jewels, and I (and the office guys) think he had a small plane with pilot ready for him somewhere. There are plenty of small airports in the area and he had ~4 hours until his name hit the airwaves.
FBOs won't rent a plane to total strangers, and they want things like ID and credit checks, etc. . . . that would be a paper trail a mile wide.
I don't know very many people who would keep their mouths shut about flying a murderer out of the country. Not even for a bag full of diamonds (if they're crooked enough to do that, they're crooked enough to keep the diamonds and squeal to the cops to keep their own neck out of a noose. "I didn't know anything about it til I heard it on the news the next day . . . What diamonds? I never saw any diamonds. He paid me $500 cash.")
It does sound like this was a very elaborate scheme.
Two problems with that. The more elaborate, the more likely something will go wrong ("that damned dog" . . . < g > ). And the more elaborate, the more likely he'll get the death penalty when caught and convicted. Premeditation and a depraved mind, you see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.