Posted on 01/11/2002 8:45:19 AM PST by wardaddy
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:07:16 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
CAMBRIDGE - The Reading father accused of savagely beating to death another man over rough play at their sons' hockey practice was a ''gentle giant'' who rightfully defended himself when the other father attacked him twice, his lawyer said yesterday during closing arguments in Thomas Junta's manslaughter trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Considering the lack of skill (IMHO) of that female prosecutor, I wonder ????????
No. Sorry. It doesn't. That blood vessel in the neck was what killed him. Hemorraging in the brain will cause enough pressure to mangle the grey matter pretty good (saw that from my brief, thankfully, stint as an EMT). Not much more pressure required than banging a leg into a table hard enough to bruise.
Seven pounds of pressure to snap a neck. Eight to drive the bridge of a nose back into the frontal lobes. Forty to snap the xiphoid process back into the diaphgram. A pound to squish an eyeball.
Costin got hit with a "Golden B-B" style punch after jumping a guy much larger than him. Slap this guy on the wrist and let him go.
Clinton provided DIRECT contradiction to testimony about his perjury, which turned out to be all lies.
There is no doubt that the 'gentle giant' deliberately took the life of the man he had pinned to the ice. It's just unfortunate they can't properly punish him for the murder he committed.
Here is the scoop. Junta was worried that his kid hadn't followed him out. He went back in to see what was keeping his kid in there, worried about the kids who had been beating him up on the ice.
As he came through the doors and into the rink, Costin was to his side (right, I'm pretty sure). Costin circled around and jumped him from behind. Junta saw Costa raise his arm out of the corner of his eye, didn't know but thought he might have had something in his hand, and ducked down.
As Junta ducked, Costin's punch and the weight of Costin's body against Junta's left shoulder pushed Junta down on his bad knees, with them bent under him in sort of a frog position, with most of his weight on his right thigh.
Costin grabbed Junta's left wrist and wouldn't let go. Somehow Junta got over, and got his leg on top of Costa, who was lunging and kicking at him with his skates. Junta at this point gave him three punches, but did not slam his head against the floor.
Junta was trying to get Costin to quit trying to punch him, and the whole fight only took about 5 seconds...
One of the prosecution witnesses, Ron Carr, (think that is his name) basically supported Junta's version, which surprised the prosecution.
One of the children who witnessed the fight also supported Junta's version. Junta's son did as well, but I discounted his testimony, and I think, but am not sure, that the other kid was not one of the kids Junta took to the rink that day.
I hope Junta gets off with time served, because I do not think he was doing anything but defending himself, and was in a very difficult position. He couldn't remove himself (retreat) for two reasons. He has terrible knees that have both had surgery, and when one is heavy, on the ground, and has bad knees, one just doesn't hop to one's feet and run away.
Costin wouldn't let go of his wrist, making his escape from Costin and the kicking hockey skates difficult, if not impossible.
That is how I see it, anyway.
This evidence came out where it mattered: at trial.
A criminal trial such as this one is an event's oral recreation--not its physical reconstruction. An oral recreation can be carried out only by the living; the silent dead are at a distinct disadvantage.
We know there is evidence that the dead man had some violence in his past. We know this because the rules permit an accused man to present such evidence. The same rules generally prevent the same kind of evidence to be presented concerning the the accused man.
One man is dead, and his killer will likely see very little jail time. The jury has spoken. It's time to move on. Only a fool would more into this verdict than that. Only a fool would cheer for the killer. There is nothing to cheer about in this sorry case at all.
Defense of ones self or of ones family is more than a right, it is an obligation and a duty owed to the gift of life.
"There exists a law, not written down anywhere, but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading but by derivation and absorption and adoption from nature itself; a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right. When weapons reduce them to silence, the laws no longer expect one to await their pronouncements. For people who decide to wait for these will have to wait for justice, too, and meanwhile they must suffer injustice first. Indeed, even the wisdom of the law itself, by a sort of tacit implication, permits self-defence, because it does not actually forbid men to kill; what it does, instead, is to forbid thebearing of a weapon with the intention to kill. When, therefore, an inquiry passes beyond the mere question of the weapon and starts to consider the motive, a man who has used arms in self-defence is not regarded as haveing carried them with a homicidal aim."
"Civilized people are taught by logic, barbarians by necessity, communities by tradition; and the lesson is inculcated even in wild beasts by nature itself. They learn that they have to defend their own bodies and persons and lives from violence of any and every kind by all the means within their power."..................................Marcus Tullius Cicero, during the final years of the Roman Republic
To meet force with only like force is a good way to get yourself killed. And I know in Texas, that is not the case.
regards.
I saw about 80 percent of the testimony, and it appears to me that he did just that.
This statement doesn't hold water. It is possible to kill a man with one punch. It all depends on where and how the punch lands. Hitting a person just using the weight of your arms may not do any damage. But the same punch with the weight of the shoulder and body behind it can cause a great deal of damage.
I guess Costin was a little dog, trying to keep up with the big dogs!
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.