Justifiable homicide?

[Sir Brian]

http://www.parentsociety.com/news-2/father-kills-man-who-killed-his-kids/?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=teaser&utm_content=090112-IO5&utm_campaign=OBAH#comment-32696

Here is a case of justifiable homicide plan and simple. IMO this father could possibly be morally wrong IF he had waited weeks or months later to extract vengeance, but by killing the killer of his sons immediately after it happened is certainly justifiable.

[Thorsteinn]

He was right.

[Lord Dane]

http://www.parentsociety.com/news-2/father-kills-man-who-killed-his-kids/?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=teaser&utm_content=090112-IO5&utm_campaign=OBAH#comment-32696

Here is a case of justifiable homicide plan and simple. IMO this father could possibly be morally wrong IF he had waited weeks or months later to extract vengeance, but by killing the killer of his sons immediately after it happened is certainly justifiable.

He might get sympathy from jurors and a lighter sentence but the charge will still be 'homicide' in this case Brian (and 'not justified'). Not familiar with the laws of this state but he may have grounds for a 'temporary insanity defense' on the basis of his psychological trauma/emotional grief from the sudden impact of his children's death(s). This is a death resulting from exacting revenge. The pre-mediation (state of mind; conscious awareness) component may not be there to satisfy 1st degree murder being it was a sudden reaction but 2nd degree homicide is a definite possibility. It seems more like a 'vigilante justice' case even if there are understandable circumstances that explain his actions. 'Revenge killing' can not be justified as 'self-defense'. None of the components exist from what I can see or read but I do not have all the facts. He will get charged, more likely a conviction, but juries are funny.... technicalities happen all the time.

The deceased has a history of felonious drunk driving and continues to do so, causing the obvious harm he did is tragic, and if he survived, he should be charged with two counts of vehicular homicide or manslaughter (whatever the state equivalent) in addition to drunk driving. However, who is to say he didn't have a medical emergency causing the accident while driving. There a lot of mitigating circumstances that might be brought up and none of them will justify murder. Self-defense will not fly in this case. It's just going to fall on this poor guy instead. My sympathy goes out to his family but we are accountable for our actions. 

[Sir Brian]

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Regardless of how the letter of the law would interpret the situation, he took the life of the person who took the lives of his sons through the other person’s irresponsible actions. Short of being held down and having the alcohol poured down his throat the drunk driver has no mitigating circumstance to rationalize the wrong decision to drive after drinking which is reinforced even more so with his history of multiple DUIs.

I sympathize for the father of those boys and his family but the waste of flesh his exterminated gets none.

We are at all times accountable for our actions. This is a case of the drunk driver paid the consequences in full for his foolishness.

[Lord Dane]

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Regardless of how the letter of the law would interpret the situation, he took the life of the person who took the lives of his sons through the other person’s irresponsible actions. Short of being held down and having the alcohol poured down his throat the drunk driver has no mitigating circumstance to rationalize the wrong decision to drive after drinking which is reinforced even more so with his history of multiple DUIs.

I sympathize for the father of those boys and his family but the waste of flesh his exterminated gets none.

We are at all times accountable for our actions. This is a case of the drunk driver paid the consequences in full for his foolishness.

Agreed. If this were medieval times, I would see the allowance for this man's right to enact revenge for his loss with good cause. However, this time doesn't allow for those actions. Good riddance to the drunk a**hole but it will not satisfy the legal system nor impune him from actions the other man takes. Personally, we agree. Professionally, I cannot. Murder cannot be sanctioned by either but can be defended as reasonable if circumstances exist to justify the act.

[Sir James A]

The guy who was driving drunk was under age. I have zero tolerance or compassion for that. My cousin was drunk, underage, and flipped and totalled his SUV. Didn't shed a tear or think anything other than "f'ing idiot, welcome to karma". And the father killed the guy before cops even arrived on the scene - that should be a stretch to say "premeditated". It's not as if he dug around to find out his address, staked out his house and waited for him to leave then chased him into a guardrail. I'd question that, but in the heat of the moment, when your own child dies right next to you - as far as I'm concerned, unleash hell on the killer. Single gunshot to the head, or 50 stab wounds, given the circumstances, I wouldn't blink an eye at either.

Funny thing about juries, is they can agree that he's not guilty, and let him walk away. I can almost guarantee anybody sitting on that jury with children would have to be mentally unstable to say that they would not do something similar to someone who just killed their child (or children) right in front of them. The article says the father and his sons were pushing the truck ... picture yourself pushing a vehicle with your child, when somebody plows into them and kills them right next to you. And the other goes to the hospital and dies.

That kind of traumatic experience will be with the father until the day he dies.

[Lord Dane]

Pre-meditation (in legalize) means planned or intended mind-set to kill the person; this one based on an impulsive & spontaneous reaction. It fits more a 'manslaughter' charge category. But like I said, I feel 'no' remorse for the drunk A**HOLE as he got what he deserves. However, the father must still be charged even though his loss is regrettable and actions understandable. It still does not qualify for 'justifiable' homicide or 'self-defense'. Temporary insanity defense is the way I see that one going. Jury will be very sympathetic.

[Sir Edward]

Yeah, in the eyes of the law, no one is allowed to be an executioner after the fact. If he had shot the guy to prevent him from killing his sons, it would be justifiable homicide. As much as we might think it's justifiable, legally it is not, because the driver is entitled to due process. Otherwise we have "mob justice".

Now, had he gotten out of the car, and threatened to kill the survivors, then it becomes an act of defense to kill the guy.

Now having said all of that, there's something called "jury nullification". The jury can still let him go based on the circumstances.

[Sir William]

I get the father's grief, but it might not be enough to let him walk.  Juries are funky- they don't always make the 'right' decision.  But what's right?

Let me present another view; your son, a good kid, makes good grades, but has a substance abuse problem you're unaware of- despite him having been caught out there before.  But its your kid, you love him, right?

Now, he's gone and done something really, really stupid that ended up killing someone else; the father of that someone else just murdered your son - vengeance for the death of his own. 

By your own admission, at least for some of you on here, you would have killed the offendor yourselves, for revenge.  I get that feeling, I do.  Which would also mean that you should understand if the father of the drunk driver sought this man out and killed him- for having prematurely ended his son's life.  Vengeance knows no reason, it has no faculties with which to make informed decisions- it is emotionally driven; as such most people understand it viscerally, even though their minds might tell them it is wrong, in the heat of the moment you have a split second when a choice is made; some would have you believe that they 'had no choice' or 'it just happened'- all this is bullshit.  The choice was made in the heat of the moment; sad thing is, he could kill everyone else on the face of the planet and it still wouldn't bring his sons back to life, and I doubt it'd make him feel any better for having done so.  Not to mention, what if the drunk driver's parents feel the need for retribution?  As a parent, I can tell you- I get where this guy came from, but the same might be said for the other father.  If I was that other father, I couldn't promise you that I wouldn't return the favor- despite what my kid might've done, you don't have the right to take their life.  If you take it upon yourself to make that decision, you could also open yourself to action in kind- and you'd have to accept it seeing as you took the first step down this road.

I have to say some of these responses are a bit disappointing- I expect knee jerk reactions from the rabble, but you fellows are smarter than that.  Sir Brian, what if it were your son or daughter who got drunk at a party and had an accident like this one?  Would you really stand by after someone killed your daughter- spur of the moment, righteous anger, deserved vengeance...would that truly apply?

Revenge is never lawfully justified- and it serves no purpose but to cause more heartache; the parents of the drunk driver lost their son who I assume they loved...and the father of those kids, who has already lost so much may now also lose his freedom...who wins, eh?  Who benefits from all of this?

[Lord Dane]

Which is why I support justice through the law. I won't tolerate eye for eye justice by vigilante acts or revenge killings. I will be sensibility in these matters bc that is why I do this for a living. I do know better. Wisdom comes from acting prudently. You can not take back actions with permanent consequences and think I'm sorry is going to cut it.

[Sir Brian]

Sir Brian, what if it were your son or daughter who got drunk at a party and had an accident like this one?  Would you really stand by after someone killed your daughter- spur of the moment, righteous anger, deserved vengeance...would that truly apply?

Well Sir William if you insist to inject me into such a hypothetical tragedy we should get some of the applicable details straight.

I have only a daughter who is married with a daughter of her own. I do have nieces and nephews that could fall within the criteria of the drunken driver story and have had another nephew twelve years ago OD on heroin after a long and difficult struggle to stay clean; he is also the older half-brother of my nephew who is currently struggling with drug addiction as well. I also have several in-laws who are alcoholics/drug addicts or recovering alcoholics/drug addicts so I am acutely aware of the pain, loss and anxiety of loved ones subjugated by drugs and alcohol. Therefore I assure you all that I would feel the same way about my own child as I do towards my nephews and various in-laws with their substance abuse problems, that they simply are the walking dead. They are destroying their lives and as far as I’m concerned are untrustworthy until they get their ‘problem’ under control.

Also the ‘anxiety’ I referred to earlier is the anxiety of getting the news that they had killed themselves and/or someone else while under the influence because I consider as such being totally irresponsible behavior leaving them no excuse. IF my daughter was to kill someone because of her habitual irresponsibility I would of course grieve for her and her victim(s) but would not hold it against someone who took her life because of her own misconduct, most especially if it happened as it probably did in the story as an exceptionally strong emotional reaction.

If I were to cause another to die because of my irresponsibility then I consider my own life forfeit. That is the core principle I hold myself and everyone to regardless if they are a stranger or a beloved family member. So I think it is regrettable that I’ve disappointed you however these sentiments I’ve conveyed are an integral part of my beliefs and sometimes you have to stand alone with them and as such at the end of the day your disappointment or anyone else's for that matter is irrelevant to me if it means I must abandon or compromise on them.

Which is why I support justice through the law. I won't tolerate eye for eye justice by vigilante acts or revenge killings. I will be sensibility in these matters bc that is why I do this for a living. I do know better. Wisdom comes from acting prudently. You can not take back actions with permanent consequences and think I'm sorry is going to cut it.

And if it was me in the situation as that father I would not offer an apology or an explanation beyond the simple statement of he killed my boys. – Which in accordance to my beliefs, correlates to living and dying if necessary, by the other edge of that proverbial sword. 

[Sir Steven T.]

Sir Brian, well said.
I am responsible for the actions of myself and my children until they reach adulthood, and even then to some degree afterwards. I have a son and a daughter and I will do everything in my power to raise them in safety and with understanding that there are consequences to ones actions. Lawyers play games with the truth, they warp and bend it, in my opinion they are often the prime anti-knight, as they will not lie, but are often called upon to defend those whome they know are guilty. In this case, I might have done the same as this grief stricken father. This man attacked his family, destroyed his future, and killed his family. This is not an "accident", when he chose to arm himself with a vehicle and aim it at this mans family it was premeditated. However, the father has to face the consequences of his actions as well, he should stand trial. The truth is this man will be haunted for the rest of his days with the pain of his loss, and the image of taking another mans ife, justified or not it will haunt him. I do not believe any of us are morally qualified to really understand the hell that this man is in. Although there are some who have seen that dark abyss and suffered in thier lives similar losses that have given them a glimpse. Perhaps they, and they alone have the ability to understand what it means to travel through that hell and how to come back.

[Sir James A]

Sir Brian, sorry to hear about the loss of your nephew. I agree with you on the self-destruction.

Until yesterday, I had forgot about my other cousin back in Dec, when I heard an update. He "swerved to miss a deer" and ended up totaling his car in a ditch. And flew out the windshield because he didn't have his seatbelt on. Except, at the hospital, they suspected he was drinking/drunk. He was. And he got *really* lucky in that the officer messed up the statement/paperwork and charges were dropped. Now he's addicted to pain medication. Here's the thing - he's married, has two kids, and a grandkid on the way. He's old enough to know better!

I feel bad for his mother and father in law, because they gave him his first car when he married their daughter, and he totaled it the next day. They gave him another car about a year ago, and now he's totaled that one. He was just idiotic, and luckily didn't physically hurt anyone else. I don't feel an ounce of sympathy for him because it was all self-inflicted and by his own choices and actions. Just as the driver of that car chose to drink under age, that doesn't grant him any immunity that if he does something while drunk, that it won't get him killed ... legal or illegal, good grades or bad grades, good kid or bad kid.

Sir William, the difference with the driver's father coming back to kill the other father, is that it's months after the fact. That's certainly premeditated. The father of the children who died killed the guy right there on the spot before the police even arrived. Anyone who has the mental capacity to function at a normal level after watching one of their children die at the hands of somebody else, with another dying right next to them - should probably win an award, or they're completely and utterly disconnected from their children. If the driver had killed the children, and the father went and shot him at court, or sought him out after the fact, I'd have a very large issue with it and say he should be charged accordingly. The driver being shot before the police had even arrived seems like a knee-jerk reaction to someone murdering his child, and not an intricate plot to get revenge.

But as to who "wins"? Who benefits?

No one.

[Sir Brian]

Sir Brian, well said.
I am responsible for the actions of myself and my children until they reach adulthood, and even then to some degree afterwards. I have a son and a daughter and I will do everything in my power to raise them in safety and with understanding that there are consequences to ones actions. Lawyers play games with the truth, they warp and bend it, in my opinion they are often the prime anti-knight, as they will not lie, but are often called upon to defend those whome they know are guilty. In this case, I might have done the same as this grief stricken father. This man attacked his family, destroyed his future, and killed his family. This is not an "accident", when he chose to arm himself with a vehicle and aim it at this mans family it was premeditated. However, the father has to face the consequences of his actions as well, he should stand trial. The truth is this man will be haunted for the rest of his days with the pain of his loss, and the image of taking another mans ife, justified or not it will haunt him. I do not believe any of us are morally qualified to really understand the hell that this man is in. Although there are some who have seen that dark abyss and suffered in thier lives similar losses that have given them a glimpse. Perhaps they, and they alone have the ability to understand what it means to travel through that hell and how to come back.

Most assuredly so Sir Steven T.! As you have stated none knows how they will react in any given situation. I have often been surprised by my own composure whilst in the midst of various traumatic pitfalls in my life and attribute those moments of clarity and control to a higher power than myself. Yet I know the other darker half of my psyche and the full measure of my rage along with the residual, absolute apathy I am left with after that rage has burnt out which is the basis of me seeming cavalier about the father’s spontaneous retribution. Truly his hell and punishment will be carried with him until the end of his days, all the more reason in my impassive mindset that the drunk driver deserved his death all the more.

Well stated Sir James and it is my hope and prayer your cousin gains wisdom before it is too late.

[Lord Dane]

I offer my respects & prayers to those who suffer as such. Good men suffer while those who do evil will not always be punished justly or swiftly in our years, and sadly enough, in theirs either.... Good behavior should be rewarded and evil deeds be punished but it is not always so in this life.... Who judges what is good and evil?? Right and wrong?? Moral or immoral?? Who is good enough amongst men to judge?? And who is perfect enough to say they are just and righteous in what they do?? We all sin, we all suffer. We are all born, live, and die by the same will but not always under the same conditions. Although not always equal in life, we are made by the choices we make every day. Reflective of ideals, we are all judged in conscious by those thoughts and acts respectively by our own nature.