Posted on 08/02/2007 10:03:39 AM PDT by Serious Capitalist
This was his daughter’s boyfriend, not a stranger who broke into the house.
The father knew who he was.
The young man was hiding in a closet, not assaulting anyone. He offered to leave on his own. The father instigated ALL of the violence.
All he had to do was call the sheriff. The boy wold have learned his lesson and would have a life.
How will this father protect his daughter when he is in prison? The father was very foolish and now many lives have been ruined.
We should learn from his mistake instead of defending it.
“I suppose there is a certain irony about the boyfriend probably ending up with no feeling below the waist .... he certainly won’t be in a position to mess with anyone else’s little girl again.”
Not necessarily true.
Yep, although the "stick whoopin'" itself would probably rate an attempted murder charge.
Only fathers of daughters are allowed on this jury.
____________
I’m a father of 2 daughters, and if what we have heard is most of the story, the best the dad could hope for would be a hung jury. I’d vote to convict.
Daughter was of the age of consent, invited the guy in, and was fully a party to everything that happened.
I can understand the ass-whoopin’, but shooting a gun through a door shows incredible reckless disregard for life, and I do mean his daughter’s life.
GUILTY!
If he cared about his daughter, he wouldn’t have shot through a closed door. Instead, his only concern was himself and the idea that HIS daughter was having sex.
As far as I am concerned, anyone who is in my house without my permission or without a warrant is an intruder.
According to one site, it's 14: http://moraloutrage.net/staticpages/index.php?page=Arkansas
Some other sites say 16 or 17. You can go to the Arkansas code here http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/data/ar_code.asp and look at 5-14-103 (rape) and 5-14-110 (sexual indecency with a child) -- looks like its 14 (or "less than 15"). In any case, this was NOT statutory rape (assuming sexual conduct occurred).
That would work if it would have stopped at the beating. Leaving to get a gun, and then blindly shooting through a door makes it premeditated.
Mark
If some guy had just beaten me with a pool cue and said he was going to get his gun, I’d be out da window in a flash, regardless of my injuries.
(Unless the pool cue is what broke my back and paralyzed me, naturally. But in this case, it sounds like the bullet did that work.)
I can’t believe anyone would defend the moronic actions of this father, but I’ve been proven wrong once again.
Another true story from my reporting days. I covered the trial of a man who tried to kill his daughter not only because she was sleeping with a guy, but also because he didn’t want anybody screwing her other than himself, which he had been doing for five years. This inbred wounded his daughter and her boyfriend, but killed another couple with them.
If you can't see your target and aim to hit it, but you fire anyway, you're firing blindly. You have no idea what's in the path of the bullet!
Mark
I think crime of passion still applies... depending on how long it took him to get the gun. There has to be a “cooling off” period to get to attempted murder. At least in Oklahoma that’s the law. He’s guilty of a lot of things..... but I don’t know if attempted murder is one of them.
Ugh..... it's a vile world we live in.
If you really mean that, I hope you are not married and have no children or roommates. If you do, and they invite someone in, and you shoot them as an intruder, we will be reading about you here on Free Republic...
I was thinking the same thing. It doesn't sound like he really cared about his daughter's welfare. It sounds more like it was a control issue.
I didn't realize kicking in the shins was a capital offense.
He could certainly revoke the permission his daughter had given the guy to be in the house, but that would not give him a legal right even to eject the guy by force if he were prepared to go peacefully.
Apparently in Arkansas, the girl was of age, so there was no crime in their sin (so to speak), so the law cannot punish either the boy or the girl for having sex with each other.
Mr. Judge-and-Jury Reed however, assaulted a citizen about his legitimate business in a place he was (until the assault) legally entitled to be, and then got a gun and shot him (and could have killed or wounded his daughter and anyone else who might have been downrange. Time for Daddy Reed to go to a place where he'll be the meat the boys are fighting over. Clever lad, that.
I addressed the facts.
This was his daughters boyfriend, not a stranger who broke into the house. The father knew who he was.
My neighbor's drug addict brother is someone I know very well. He is definitely not a stranger to me. If I find him in my house, I will still consider him an intruder, despite our mutual familiarity.
The young man was hiding in a closet, not assaulting anyone.
He is reported to have kicked the father.
He offered to leave on his own. The father instigated ALL of the violence.
That's actually a question, not a settled fact.
All he had to do was call the sheriff. The boy wold have learned his lesson and would have a life.
According the legal experts here, he would have been outside of his rights to do so, since apparently one's minor children are allowed to invite anyone they feel like into one's home without the homeowner having any choice in the matter.
How will this father protect his daughter when he is in prison? The father was very foolish and now many lives have been ruined.
Absolutely true.
We should learn from his mistake instead of defending it.
I agree.
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.