Posted on 09/16/2007 5:32:12 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
Seconds after killing a 21-year-old father during a suspected home-invasion robbery on Friday, two suspects fired a bullet into the head of the man's 7-month-old son who was seated in a car seat, police said this weekend as they released new details on the case.
Investigators initially reported that the father, Sean Paul Aquitania, was killed inside a home after an attempted robbery and that his infant son, Sean Paul Aquitania Jr., was accidentally caught in the crossfire. But a more thorough investigation throughout the weekend determined that the son had been murdered execution-style in the car seat of his dad's Chevrolet Malibu.
"We are angered as law enforcement officers and disturbed as human beings that anyone could commit such an unconscionable act against an innocent child," said sheriff's spokesman Sgt. Tim Curran.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
He took his son on a home invasion with him?
Should have read it 3 more times....
He wasn’t the home invader.
The two men whom Aquitania had gone to visit were questioned by detectives but not taken into custody. Initially they were cooperative, Curran said. But detectives have grown frustrated with them and believe they know more than they are saying.
"We don't think they're telling us the whole story," Curran said.
They've offered little description of the two suspects -- one of whom reportedly was wearing a black, hooded sweat shirt, the other, a green shirt and a green Oakland A's hat.
Most of these home invasions tend to involve drugs or other illegal activities. If that was the case, the adult victim got what he deserved for dragging his child into that world.
This Sacramento Bee article makes it clear that the killers (not the slain father) were the home invaders.
But either way, the murder of this innocent baby is an outrage that calls for a quick, unceremonious hanging. Two of them.
Why in hell would they execute a 7 month old child whilst making a getaway, just for fun???
Outrage! Okay, I finally admit it... The Constitution is wrong... Cruel and unusual punishment should be allowed in some cases.
My guess is the Dad had been followed by the thugs to that house. He wasn’t there to “visit,” but to do some quick business while at the door, which is why he left the baby in the car instead of bringing him into the house. The killers wanted a piece of that business and helped themselves and left a message that no one was to conduct such business in that area without including them in the proceeds.
A vicious gang had a reason for this brutality. Shocking cruelty serves a purpose. Saddam and family knew this.
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.