• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Husband charged with beating wife's would-be rapist to death

HonestJoe said:
I agree. You don't try a case on "lucky" outcomes either. You try a case on actions and motives. He attacked a man with a level of violence that directly led to his death. There are a whole load of questions a court should be asking of him; Why he attacked, why he used that level of force, what information he had about the identity and conduct of that man. Those are the kind of thing that should determine whether his actions were legitimate or not.

So getting it right is all that counts, how you reach the decision is irrelevant? If I kill a random stranger on the street because I think they look at me funny but they turn out to be an on-the-run murderer, my attack becomes OK?
Click to expand...

I already commented on the appropriate actions and settlement. I stated earlier that circumstances would required a no contest plea agreement to a lesser charge with a sentence of probation with an opportunity for expungement.
 
Winchester said:
Would your answer be the same if he attacked the wrong guy in the hallway?
Click to expand...
Did he (and the answer obviously is, no...he didnt)? So your continue pretense of argument built on 'what if' is rather silly.
 
VanceMack said:
Did he (and the answer obviously is, no...he didnt)? So your continue pretense of argument built on 'what if' is rather silly.
Click to expand...

No it's not silly. It appears the guy made an assumption and acted on it. He could have been wrong and that is the crime.
 
Winchester said:
No it's not silly. It appears the guy made an assumption and acted on it. He could have been wrong and that is the crime.
Click to expand...
No...if there was a crime it was the actual incident of assault...not choices. How do you know the woman didnt tell him on the the phone what the guy looked like and was wearing?

It is completely silly to debate the 'what if' when considering appropriate criminal charges.
 
VanceMack said:
No...if there was a crime it was the actual incident of assault...not choices. How do you know the woman didnt tell him on the the phone what the guy looked like and was wearing?

It is completely silly to debate the 'what if' when considering appropriate criminal charges.
Click to expand...

Exactly. "What if the rapist killed everyone" "What if aliens did it". Has nothing to do with what actually happened. It's people who disagree with your stance, trying to discredit the facts.
 
11Bravo said:
Exactly. "What if the rapist killed everyone" "What if aliens did it". Has nothing to do with what actually happened. It's people who disagree with your stance, trying to discredit the facts.
Click to expand...

What actually happened was he assaulted and killed a guy in the hallway. And I was asking Bodhistvadda if he'd feel differently about buying the guy a beer and only charging him with simple assault if the wrong guy was killed. Then Vance jumped in.

Anyway the point I was trying to narrow down is where a crime occurs hypothetically. Assuming a guy assaulted and killed another man in the hallway, is his belief that this was the perpetrator enough to get him a pass on murder? Sure it turns out he got the right guy, but he didn't know that for sure as he didn't see the guy committing the crime.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Ok but no double standards, if you are ok with this then you need to be ok with the cops offing citizens left and right.
Click to expand...



Nay nay.


Cops are professionals, and held to a different standard. They also are agents of Government, and constitute a Power collectively which must be kept in check.


The individual citizen is not nearly so much of a threat as police run amuck.


You're also ignoring that I said I'd need to look at the details and carefully consider the matter before I could say for certain as to my position... that's hardly comparable to "cops offing citizens left and right".
 
iguanaman said:
Why wouldn't the women call 911 if she was afraid of being raped? There is something wrong with this story and the only one who knows the truth is dead.
Click to expand...

I don't know...maybe 17 minute police response times?
 
VanceMack said:
I don't know...maybe 17 minute police response times?
Click to expand...

LOL How do you know the response times in her area? And she could have called both her husband and the police so that is a fail. There is more to this story.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL How do you know the response times in her area? And she could have called both her husband and the police so that is a fail. There is more to this story.
Click to expand...
The only thing that is is clear is that you have a desperate need and desire for there to be more to the story.
 
Winchester said:
Would your answer be the same if he attacked the wrong guy in the hallway?
Click to expand...

Nope. But I take into account the circumstances that lead to the attack.

If he attacked an innocent person he would be charged with aggravated murder in the 1st degree and be on death row.
 
Winchester said:
What actually happened was he assaulted and killed a guy in the hallway. And I was asking Bodhistvadda if he'd feel differently about buying the guy a beer and only charging him with simple assault if the wrong guy was killed. Then Vance jumped in.

Anyway the point I was trying to narrow down is where a crime occurs hypothetically. Assuming a guy assaulted and killed another man in the hallway, is his belief that this was the perpetrator enough to get him a pass on murder? Sure it turns out he got the right guy, but he didn't know that for sure as he didn't see the guy committing the crime.
Click to expand...

Does Bodhistvadda mean something or was that just a wierd mistake to my name?
 
Winchester said:
No it's not silly. It appears the guy made an assumption and acted on it. He could have been wrong and that is the crime.
Click to expand...

I was working on the assumption that the woman gave the man the rapists description. What are the odds that this was the only guy in the building or the first that the husband encountered?
 
Captain Adverse said:
This was not an act of self-defense.

It was an act of retaliation.

In the first instance a person is protected by the affirmative defense their life and limb were in danger.

In the second case, no such defense exists. Instead, the person should be faced with at least some level of Manslaughter charge charge depending on whether it was negligent (car accident), or non-negligent as in this case. It could also be Second Degree Murder if he had come armed with willful intent to cause mayhem leading to a death.

From the video it is clear that the man was coming prepared for mayhem after being called by his wife. She did not call the police, she called her husband. He attacked the person his wife alleged was trying to molest her. Since the facts are not clear and a person is dead, it is right and proper for a criminal trial to ensue.

I think the Prosecutor is bowing to public opinion rather than doing their job in charging him with such lesser offenses.
Click to expand...

Seems fair. I'd happily trade a few years to beat the literal living **** out of my daughter or wife's rapist or would-be rapist. The mother****er had my aluminum baseball bat shoved up his ass (sideways) coming from the moment the thought twinkled in his ****-for-brains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom