Replies

"The manager of the rink testified very convincingly that, in spite of her screams for him to stop, Junta kept pounding Costin, bouncing his head off the ice. That's manslaughter."

That was manslaughter THIS time. Have you ever tried to stop a fight? I have, but it's risky, and the combatants are beyond verbal instruction.

"How could you possibly think that Costin deserved to die? Does that mean that it's ok in your world to kill anyone who acts like an aggressive dope?"

You arrived at this... how?

"If "wise" fathers tell their kids not to "pick" fights that they can't win, instead of don't "pick" fights period, does that mean that "wise" fathers tell their kids it's ok to "pick" a fight as long as you know how it will turn out?"

Wow. You read a lot more than I typed.

"My old man, a bantam-weight, (and a former FBI SA who knew how to fight) taught me (6'1'' - 205) not to pick fights at all. You fight when forced to. I've had my share but never threw the first punch and never threw a punch after things were under control."

Your dad was/is wise. You and I apparently behave similarly.

" Both of these guys were out of control. Both were wrong. But, in no way did Consit have it (death) coming to him."

I'll half agree here. Dose the Junta family need to be without a father for ten years because his trial became a movie of the week?

" Both of these guys were out of control. Both were wrong. But, in no way did Consit have it (death) coming to him."

I'll half agree here. Dose the Junta family need to be without a father for ten years because his trial became a movie of the week?

Half agree? Three parts to the statement. Please explain!

You started off by saying that Costin, the little guy, "had it coming". Since he ended up dead what else could you have meant but that he deserved to die? There's only one way to read it.

I've broken up plenty of fights, both while LEO and afterwards. You're right, it is difficult. In the context of this story though that is besides the point. The point of law is that Junta continued to pound "the little guy" long after he had him under control. That is what the jury heard. That is what makes it manslaughter. That is why Junta is in prison.

The question of whether or not his kids deserve to be without their dad for ten years is irrelevant. The prisons are full of dads who are paying the price for their criminal actions. The real question is; Does Junta deserve to be in prison? The answer is yes.

You and I were probably raised with the same sense of ethic and justice. Something about this case seems to be touching an emotional, rather than an objective nerve with you. We all experience this over certain issues. This is understandable. The law however is clear.

Dose the Junta family need to be without a father for ten years because his trial became a movie of the week?

What a weasling approach you take to this. The only one who punished Junta's family was Junta. I don't think that Ted Bundy's mother needed to be permanently without a son, but Ted did that to her, not the state of Florida. For a violent felon like Junta, his lack of self-control requires that he be removed from society. This is unfortunate for his family. Perhaps after Mrs. Junta divorces him, she will choose a cooler head for her next husband.