Posted on 09/06/2005 7:50:10 AM PDT by SmithL
BELLINGHAM, Wash. - A man turned himself in to authorities in the killing of two convicted child rapists, saying he picked the victims from a sheriff's Web site, police said.
Michael Anthony Mullen, 36, called 911 on Monday to claim responsibility for the killings, and officers who talked to him said he gave information that only the killer would know, according to a police news release. He was jailed for investigation of two counts of first-degree murder.
Hank Eisses, 49, and Victor Vasquez, 68, were found shot to death at their apartment Aug. 27. They were both classified as Level III sex offenders, considered the type most likely to reoffend. Sex offenders in Washington are required to register with local authorities, and the information is provided on the Web.
Mullen told authorities he targeted at least one of the two men after checking the county sheriff's Web site July 13, according to the police statement.
The bodies of Eisses and Vasquez were found by a roommate, also a sex offender. He said a man wearing a blue jumpsuit and a cap that said FBI on it came to their home, told them he was an FBI agent and said one of them was on a "hit list" on an Internet site, police said.
The roommate said he left while the "FBI" visitor was still there and found the bodies when he returned about four hours later.
Days after the killings, The Bellingham Herald received an unsigned letter claiming responsibility for the killings. Police notified convicted Level 3 sex offenders in the area as a precaution, but said the letter was vague and could be a hoax.
Yep, the ACLU will now argue that the sex offender website puts the child molesters in danger. As if anyone besides the ACLU and the child molesters give a tinker's damn.
"They were both classified as Level III sex offenders, considered the type most likely to reoffend."
And they let these maggots out of jail??
Indeed it is. Do you know just how many crazy/evil people are out there? If you condone first degree murder, that is exactly what it will come to in the end. The strong preying on the weak.
Exactly the point. By pulling random names off an offender website, he does way more harm than good. The list could very well disappear.
If he targeted an offender that had harassed a child of his. All bets would be off. As it stands, he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, it is my opinion that the man is mentally troubled and wanted to grab his 15 minutes.
M
Okay, tinfoil hat time... Maybe he's a fanatical ACLU-type, who's out to discredit Megan's Law? A suicide confesser? Stranger things have happened.
No. That's an easy one.
do we expose our children to rapists?
No, that's easy too.
Do we get a third choice in here somewhere?
Actually, probably many other choices. One possibility that springs to mind is to elect people who make logical decisions instead of voting blindly for whoever brings the bacon home or belongs to a certain party.
And the reason it's broken?...:
The ACLU.
Hatcheting up ACLU plague rats, is covered under the
'Good Samaritan Law' too... :o)
Yes. However, did you know you can end up on a sex offender registry because you took a leak in public? We need to parry the list down to the real sex offenders. And those should never be let out of jail, thusly the lists would no longer need to be there.
Yes. We vote for representatives who promise to change legislation so that child rapist receive longer sentences (life).
On another note. If this man's child had been abused and the "victims" here were the perpetrators. I doubt I would make the same statement.
It might have made more sense to murder the people who made it possible for these slime balls to be out and about.
And no, I'm not advocating murdering anyone.
No "scumbag" involved other than the two that were
exterminated...no "people" were killed.
Yes, what he did was wrong. I agree. But let's treat him the same way we treat them men who rape children. Let him out with an overworked probation officer to keep tabs on him and keep "forgiving" his backsliding. Around the time he's on his 1000th victim, we'll get serious. That is the way they treat monsters who molest children - sometimes thousands of children.
But on a more serious note, I do agree with you that it's wrong for this man to have killed the monsters. The state should have done it. A mandatory death penalty for anyone who rapes a child should be the absolute minimum. If the state was doing it's job this citizen would not have been pushed into a life of crime. ( Well, if he gets out soon enough, a "life of crime".... I would hate to see the system finally work - and this man only get one chance to commit his brand of crime. Opps, sorry, I mean I would hate to see him not have a chance to be rehabilitated and released after he had paid his debt to society)
By those lights half the folks on this forum would technically be sex offenders.
I cheer when the bad guys get sent to hell.
This type of vigilante action needs to be more creative and involve entrapping the criminal.
If an explosive device could be made and placed in a knapsack or something that only a sex offender would open or access in the process of re-committing a sex crime again then his own actions would be what killed him. Now I don't have the answers but as we all know these plots exist in various movies including one with Mel Gibson I saw recently. Mel laid the traps that the bad guys fell into in the process of trying to kill him.
"They come home every day after work and they turn on the news. You know what they see? They see rapists, and murderers and child molestors. They're all getting out of prison. And everywhere, everyone thinks the same thing: that someone should just go kill [them]."
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.