- Joined
- Jul 4, 2011
- Messages
- 33,024
- Reaction score
- 14,666
- Location
- Near Seattle
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
(CNN) -- A Texas father caught a man sexually assaulting his 4-year-old daughter and punched him in the head repeatedly, killing him, authorities said.The father was casually acquainted with the alleged abuser, said Lavaca County Sheriff Micah Harmon.Neither has been publicly identified.The girl was left inside the family's house during the social gathering, while other members of her family were tending to horses, the sheriff said.The alleged abuser was known for his horse-grooming abilities, Harmon said.
According to the sheriff "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person." I believe using lethal force in defense of the 3rd person is legal in Texas and many other states.
Texas Penal Code - Section 9.33. Defense Of Third Person - Texas Attorney Resources - Texas Laws
§ 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in
using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his
intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.
According to the sheriff "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person." I believe using lethal force in defense of the 3rd person is legal in Texas and many other states.
Texas Penal Code - Section 9.33. Defense Of Third Person - Texas Attorney Resources - Texas Laws
§ 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in
using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his
intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.
What he did was nothing compared to what I would do to someone who hurt one of my babies.
According to the sheriff "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person." I believe using lethal force in defense of the 3rd person is legal in Texas and many other states.
Texas Penal Code - Section 9.33. Defense Of Third Person - Texas Attorney Resources - Texas Laws
§ 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in
using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his
intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.
What he did was nothing compared to what I would do to someone who hurt one of my babies.
I'm with you there sister.
I'd make the bastard wish he'd never been born.
Can't fault the guy for what he did.
It's hard to fault him. But at the same time, if you go to prison for killing the abuser, you can't be involved with your child's healing process personally or on a daily basis. I think it's normal for a parent to want to harm somebody whom harms their child. But when the parent is in prison, I think it's equally normal that they wish they weren't there. They probably wish they were with their child protecting them or even calming them down at 2 am when they have nightmares.
It is a good point and speaks to human falibility.
Logically you're right.
Emotionally of course we get overwhelmed.
That's the baseline, yes, but it doesn't necessarily cover what this guy did. Once he got to the point where his daughter is no longer in physical danger he didn't really have any legally defensible right to continue to beat the guy. Don't get me wrong, the guy deserved a beating, but it wasn't necessarily lawful.
Sheriff: Father kills man sexually abusing his daughter - CNN.com
Damn. Hard to blame the guy. But I have to wonder if he will eventually get charged. Being that it is Texas, I would guess not.
punched him in the head repeatedly, killing him, authorities said.
Child rapists face 20 years of extraordinary torture in prison.
No doubt. My heart totally goes out to the guy. I'd probably do the same thing in that situation and I hope he doesn't face legal repercussions for doing it. And realistically, I'm sure he won't. Or, at most, he'll get a slap on the wrist. But as you point out, SheWolf is right. We shouldn't idealize this guy, we should sympathize with him and prepare ourselves to do better if, god forbid, we're ever in that situation. Pulling the guy off, beating him to within an inch of his life, but not past that point, and making sure he faces the full consequences of the law would ultimately be a better outcome. Frankly, it'd probably be worse for him that way. Child rapists face 20 years of extraordinary torture in prison. Maybe that's even a fate worse than death. Say what you will about inmates, they make sure guys like that get what's coming to them and then some.
That's the baseline, yes, but it doesn't necessarily cover what this guy did. Once he got to the point where his daughter is no longer in physical danger he didn't really have any legally defensible right to continue to beat the guy. Don't get me wrong, the guy deserved a beating, but it wasn't necessarily lawful.
Well, we don't really know what happened. There are people who fall, bump there head on a wood floor in just the right place, and just die. For all we know the guy just landed a strong enough blow in the right place. Or, possibly, he beat the piss out of the guy for an hour. That's an option too.
But either way, there's a problem with siding with the technical wording of the law here. In the moment, when someone is raping your daughter, or your partner, or you, or trying to kill you, or whatever else, when the hell do you know they're no longer a threat? When do you know someone capable of that much evil is no longer a threat?
As far as I'm concerned, I'm not willing to take that chance until they're no longer showing any ability to move. And I think anyone with an intact sense of fight or flight would think the same. In reality, the "no longer able to move" standard is where a lot of people stop, because it's the only time it makes sense to stop.
All this legalise is great in the theoretical, but in real life, how do you say to someone who's just been violently attacked, or watched someone they love who is defenseless get attacked, "you really should have stopped once he was no longer actively raping her?"
You don't, because that's insane. If someone like that is still standing, or in any way capable of standing or even crawling, they're still a threat to anyone with half an ounce of sense in their head. He could have attacked the father. He could have taken the girl hostage. These are all things he could still do when he was no longer actively raping her, and therefore "not an immediate threat."
You can say that doesn't hold up in law, and maybe in a technical sense that's true, but in reality people frequently face no charges for doing something that's technically illegal because the law frankly makes no sense in the real world, with the way real people are wired to behave in these situations, with the way predators are in the real world.
Someone who is capable of raping a 4-year-old is capable of just about anything, and you'd have to be an idiot or just as big of a psycho yourself to stop short of "no longer capable of moving." People know that, even if the law doesn't.
Telling someone they should stop shy of well and truly laying someone out is telling them that they should sacrifice their own safety or those of their loved ones in order to mitigate the risk of harm to a violent predator. Talk about having ones priorities mixed up.
I read about a somebody sentenced to prison for doing this very thing. He killed the abuser after the abuser was not convicted based on insufficient evidence, so that might make a difference... but it's hard to tell.
I read about a somebody sentenced to prison for doing this very thing. He killed the abuser after the abuser was not convicted based on insufficient evidence, so that might make a difference... but it's hard to tell.
A Texas father caught a man sexually assaulting his 4-year-old
Wouldn't someone sexually abusing a girl count as sexual assault?Defense of a third person applies everywhere if it is the only way to save the life of a third person. But, it gets a lot trickier if the third person's life isn't in immediate peril. Some states only allow you to respond with deadly force if there is a threat to life or limb. Some places you can use deadly force to prevent the sexual assault of yourself or a third person if there is no other way to stop it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?