Posted on 01/20/2007 12:19:26 PM PST by jmc1969
He saved my life, daughter says Judge accepts jury's call for 10-year term
A tearful Jadah Walker said yesterday her father, Kim Walker, will always be her hero after a jury found him guilty of second-degree murder in the shooting death of her drug-dealer boyfriend.
The verdict, which the defence plans to appeal, comes with a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment.
But Justice Jennifer Pritchard made Walker eligible for parole in a decade, the minimum time allowed, as recommended by the eight-woman, four-man jury.
James Hayward, 24, bled to death from five gunshot wounds on March 17, 2003, after Walker shot him in front of Jadah and four other witnesses.
During the nine-day trial, the defence portrayed Walker as a despairing father trying to rescue his then-16-year-old daughter from a life-threatening drug addiction.
After he was taken into custody yesterday, for the first time since being released on bail shortly after the shooting, a distraught Jadah Walker, now 20, said her father had saved her life.
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
Sounds like justifiable homicide to me!
The father should get some award.
Why is killing a drug dealer a bad thing???
He should be named Father of the Year.
Her boyfriend was 24, she was...16? For that reason alone, this sounds like justice to me.
Kim Walker deserves a Presidential pardon, and he shouldn't have to wait for the end of Bush's term to get it.
"You were a desperate man," she said. "In saving your daughter, you wrongfully and unnecessarily took the life of another human being."
seems to me this scenario is better than the vice versa one..lose a daughter and let the scumbag live..
this happened in canada..
Well, here was the key part that I wanted to find out about (just the excerpted part related to just the shooting circumstances and not the rest of the story) --
LOL! Why hold a friggin' trial!
But... Drugs are a victimless crime. I always ask the fools who advocate drug legalization(almost to a one, drug abusers themselves) "Which of your children would you surrender to drugs"???
You said -- "Sounds like justifiable homicide to me!"
It does *not* -- when you read the key parts about the shooting itself. That's -- in no way -- justifiable homicide. That's frontier justice which simply is not allowed under the law. Her life was not in direct and imminent danger. She went back to this guy *on her own*. And furthermore, this dad's life was not in direct and imminent danger either. No way...
Regards,
Star Traveler
Because the drug dealer was a democratic voter!!
Yes it does :-)
That's frontier justice which simply is not allowed under the law.
Depends on the jurisdiction.
Her life was not in direct and imminent danger. She went back to this guy *on her own*.
She is 16, underaged.
And furthermore, this dad's life was not in direct and imminent danger either.
His daughter's life was in danger just by being with that slimeball.
2nd degree homicide generally means the murderer was driven from a reasonable person, to a completely unreasonable person by the actions of the decedent(s).
You asked -- "Why is killing a drug dealer a bad thing???"
Well, that's easy. Only the police can do that and only if they are under threat.
Now, I believe that the U.S. should make the southern border a military zone and build a double-fence -- so that anyone found in the middle of it is shot on sight (of course, with the requisite warnings to that effect). But, not be shot on sight -- outside of that particular area.
I'll guarantee you, that if you come to Portland, I'll be able to point out several drug dealers -- and I'll help you find a gun. There are a few guns shops around and a gun show or two. And *you* do the shooting of the drug dealers and see what happens...
Regards,
Star Traveler
P.S. -- There was a time when I was managing an apartment building in Portland where there was a lot of drug activity in the surrounding block or two. It was a secure building and I would throw people out if they were found inside. The drug dealers knew me and when they saw me walk outside -- they melted into the background -- because I would call the police on them *every single time* I saw them around. About half the time the police came someone would get arrested.
However, after a while of doing this, I got word back that they were getting ready to "do a number" on me. So, I was warned by several people. So..., I went down to the local shooting range, got a Glock, took some shots and brought back a couple of targets back to the office. I put them up on the wall and said to people who came in to the office -- "Look at that. Those are pretty good shot patterns I've got there. I just went out practicing recently and did that!"
The word got around that I was carrying -- and I was. Anyone that was going to try something with me was going to have to contend with that ole Glock. So, things "died down" after a while and went back to normal.
In the U.S. (this happened in Canada, folks) what would happen if:
1) the father obtained an order of protection to keep the 24 year old away from his daughter and..
2) then shot him next time he was near?
?? any ideas? (I have a few.. but I am trying to think realistically- not cynically)
Not to me... if his daughter was a junkie, he should have put her in treatment... not gun down her dealer.
When were you elected judge. The poster was saying it tonge-in-check so to speak, and if he was on a jury in the good old USA he could have legally made the same decision.
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.