Posted on 06/13/2012 4:44:32 AM PDT by Haiku Guy
The case is headed to a grand jury but this guy’s more likely to land on Barbara Walters’s couch than in prison. I’d be surprised if there’s a GJ in America that would indict him; if there is, lord knows it’s not in Texas. Here’s the relevant statute in the state’s penal code. Not a close call:
(snip)
...Morally, this will be treated as justifiable homicide whether or not it’s technically self-defense by proxy — which, to be clear, I think it is here — and any jury would strain mightily to find that it qualified under the definition for the latter. Exit quotation: “He got what he well deserved.”
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
northeast is weird because of all the Royalists who after the Revolutionary War had to go to Canada have crept back in
JMHO
I don’t think there was a question as to what the perp was doing. The sheriff said that the father tried to get the man to STOP what he was doing, but the father was unable to get the perp to stop.
There was a clear and present danger to his daughter, that the father took steps to stop. In this case, it took killing a perp.
No one doubts that killing another human being is going to make you remorseful, if you are a decent human being.
But when you have no choice, you have to act. And this father was justified in what he did.
His daughter’s horror at what happened to her will be tempered by the fact that her father was her protector and savior, as any father should be.
It has been said that if you kill an intruder and he falls out the window you better drag him back inside before calling the police. With all the antigun laws in the NE there will be a new unspoken rule soon ...
... if you kill an intruder and he falls out the window you better drag him out to your car, throw him in the trunk, drive to Texas ... THEN call the police.
I think it very unlikely that they can find even one person in Texas who would vote for conviction on any charges.
He protected his little girl. Period. Case dismissed.
Well you have the basic story down but your facts are completely wrong.
Baton Rouge La, in 1984, Jody Plauché, then an 11 year old boy, was taking karate lessons from one Jeffrey Doucet, a pedophile, who was 25 at the time. The boy was eventually kidnapped by Doucet and taken to a motel in California. The police launched a nationwide search to find the boy.
Doucet was found after making a collect call to his mother and taken into custody. Jody was returned to his family while Doucet was extradited to La to face a ton of charges.
Leon “Gary” Plauché, Jody’s father, learned the time and airlines that Doucet would be arriving at the Baton Rouge airport from a police officer on the Baton Rouge PD. He arrived early, pretended to be part of the crowd and when the Doucet was being escorted off the plane, Plauche’ put a bullet into his head. One less pedophile walked the earth.
Plauche’ was indicted by a Grand Jury on 1st degree murder charges and went to trial. The charges were eventually dropped down to manslaughter to which Plauche’ pled “no contest”. The jury found him guilty and sentenced him to 10 years suspended and 5 years probation.
Yes, Plauche’ was found “guilty” and he was sentenced. He did not get off scott free as many people thought he should have been. His plea on “no contest” probably had something to do with that although the jury could have simply pulled an OJ and through nullification let Plauche’s completely off.
His son Jody has written extensively about his childhood, the molestation and kidnapping and his father’s case. A quick google search on his name will bring you more information than I have posted on here as well as a book Jody Plauche’s wrote about the case. He has his own website (where I believe he’s some sort of radio personality now) at http://www.jodyplauche.com/
Many people here knew he would be identified as Mexican. I don’t know how you all knew, but you were obviously right.
I would say to cue laraza but surely even they would not enter this situation and claim a hate crime?
Surely not. On the other hand, I really wish they would since it would qualify as probably the biggest blunder they could possibly make.
Bring it.
Like they say, doing the right thing can be the worst feeling imaginable. I believe the kill was 100% just, and even if the courts agree, this man is probably in for a grueling emotional process. However long it takes, I hope he will come to accept that killing the perp really was the best thing he could have done in that moment, and that there is no personal flaw, no sin he could possibly have committed in his lifetime that would take away his right to defend his daughter by whatever means necessary.
If, God forbid, I was in his situation, I would have intended to kill the guy. Imagine walking in and seeing someone hurting your baby, scarring her for life? I would be in an utter blind rage and would WANT to kill that guy. Maybe later I may regret that I get caught, but I would not regret hurting the man who hurt one hair on my kid’s head.
I’ve got to say—vigilante justice is not desirable. It causes a lot of problems.
That being said, if I was a mother I would be very hard-pressed not to eviscerate someone who molested my daughter.
As it is I have an extremely strong protective instinct for children. If I was a man (and scientifically men are more likely to act before thinking things through), well...I would probably kill the guy without hesitation.
As for remorse, I know that soldiers feel remorse after their first kill. Does that mean that the enemy didn’t need to die?
The creep got what he deserved. It’s just a shame that the gov’t didn’t administer the justice...
Too bad Jerry Sandusky did’nt come to the same end!
It’s called the “He needed killin” defense in Texas
Well, I think we have a nominee for “Man Of The Year.” and “Father Of The Year” as well.
Hi Jeff...need to fix this.
FMCDH(BITS)
"Your honor, my daughter was in immediate danger and I feared for her life. I didn't intend to kill the guy. I was just trying to get his attention and protect my daughter."
It's Texas! Not only will he not be convicted of anything, he won't be indicted either. The only reason this case is being referred to a grand jury is so the grand jury can no bill it, and the father can be protected against a future district attorney trying to bring it to a grand jury.
I don’t see that he has anything to be remorseful about. By exterminating this vermin, he has probably saved some other child’s life down the road. I congratulate him for what he did.
Of course he is, he is a normal human being!
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.