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.
Then go for a referendum. Grassroots organizations have pushed stuff past recalcitrant politicians for ages.
It's meant to point out the illogic, if not
outright hypocracy, of most self righteous
Democrats..particularly the Ghouls of 60's
Past, and their attempt to once again lord
their debunked "Social Justice" and much vaunted
but little evidenced "Moral Superiority"...HAH!
Well, there's two less vermin to harm the kids.
Yeah. It's worse. Rape of a child should carry a mandatory death penalty. Or worse...
The law also deals with other injuries the same way - if a person is permanently injured for life, the lawyers will sue for more than if the person dies. Ask any doctor who carries malpractice insurance.
As much as the visceral reaction is to give hime the keys to the city, we can't descend into vigilantiism.
We are a nation of laws. What if there was a mistake or a spelling error on the web site? A 100% innocent man could be dead because someone decided to short cut the process we all, as Americans, agree to follow.
Still has nothing to do with this subject.
You are right on the money. :-)
Only thing he did wrong in my opinion was to turn himself in.
I thought I as gonna get it from some folks -- might still happen :)
There is something called Justifiable Homicide
If our Leaders will not clean out the scum, someone has to do it.
The Guvmint don't want this trash to be killed in the streets? Simple solution, bring back the death penalty for rape and child molestation.
This kind of activity once got you a short drop and a sudden stop in this country.
It needs to come back
Makes no diff, you are still on the money. :-)
However, premeditated murder of two people taken from a website isn't.
I'm sorry, but this comment is too silly not to respond to... Taking a life is not an absolute. Taking a life in war to defend your country is not the same as taking the life of a serial killer. A policeman shooting a kidnapper isn't the same as a gang member hitting a rival drug dealer. You "get" the difference. Only liberals don't "get" this...
"However, premeditated murder of two people taken from a website isn't."
I find it very difficult to cry in my beer over the death of 2 scumbags that should be rotting on a tree as a message to the rest of the scumbags.
Sorry, but you will never convince me that these 2 convicted child rapists should not have been executed. I'm just sorry that a citizen felt the need to do it himself since the "System of Justice" wouldn't.
I bet the courts disagree. This guy is going down for first degree murder. I will not feel one bit of sympathy for him when he does.
Sure it does. You implied that all killing was murder.
It is my contention that all killings are not murder.
You imply there is something immoral in killing
dangerous ceatueres, to protect one's
self/kith&Kin/society...to dispatch a threat...
I wanted to know from where you based your "moral"
viewpoint. It surely isn't the Bible. The Bible is
repleate with the dispatching of the wicked. And not necessari;y by the "States" headsman.
Gee, i seem to remember from *my* history books, that it wasn't until *long* afte the US of A was formed, acheived it's independance, and beagn to expand, that the
*first* police Dept in *one* city was even formed...
What*ever* did we do about criminals and rapists,
without police and an oligarchical judiciary?....(/Sarcasm)
No I did not. Show me where I said such a thing.
It certainly wasn't anarchy...LOL!
Maybe it's good for molesters to be afraid and watching their backs and for the children to be free. If I had my way, there would be a mandatory death penalty for the rape of a child. It's time to change the laws...
I stand corrected on that point.
But the argument still holds. From what
source do you base your moral belief that
it was murder and not jstifiable execution?
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.