• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Your thoughts, senario

0

0V3RC10CK3D

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
144
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

I was thinking about a scenario earlier and I would like your thoughts on it.

Lets say there's a man that was mugged and the mugger killed his wife and child or other family member.

Mugger is caught later and taken to court, but not convicted for evidence reasons but as far as the man is concerned he is 100% sure that this is the person. Man shoots the mugger either in the courtroom or shortly after the verdict.

(kind of like Christian bale in batman or Gerard Butler in law abiding citizen)

What do you think of this man? Is it justifiable? Would you do the same? Obviously you get caught and go to jail, etc, but...

I'm not sure if I'd glorify this man, but I could see where he's coming from.
 
G

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

I understand, but I do not agree. Poetic justice, but then the victim is no better than the perp. If you believe in the Constitution for yourself, you must believe in it for others, even murderers. God will repay, in the end.
 
HeesBonafide

HeesBonafide

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
152
Location
, ,
imported post

I understand, but I do not agree. Poetic justice, but then the victim is no better than the perp. If you believe in the Constitution for yourself, you must believe in it for others, even murderers. God will repay, in the end.



I agree. Revenge is NOT part of our legal system, just our own ego and emotions... the same logic that gun grabbers use to take away our 2nd Amemdment rights.
 
Ajetpilot

Ajetpilot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
imported post

911Boss wrote:
He would probably end up dead, just not in the court room....
Click to expand...

We are all going to end up dead; it's just a matter of time.

Now, if the guy was older, and he didn't have that many years of freedomto lose, he might figure it was worth it to avenge the murder of his family. He might even go to his grave with a smile on his face, hypothetically of course.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

While it might sound like appropriate "justice" it kind of denies the party of one of his constitutional rights. The one of Due Process. Isn't it a bit hypocritical to shout out our indignation when one of the rights WE believe in is infringed yet consider denying another of the enumerated rights to another.

This type of justice is somewhat a cornerstone of a social order we reject here in this country. That of the militant muslims.

The bad guy in this scenario got off because of issues with the evidence. If those responsible for investigating, arresting, and prosecuting had done their job correctly this would not have been an issue. Sadly the bad guy gets to go free but for some reason they always seem to get their just rewards, eventually.

All that said, if I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to convict.
 
O

oldkim

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
375
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

Legally he's guilty. This was clearly not self defense.

Morally.... that's up to the jurors. Just depends on how and why (the circumstances) and what his attorney's and Prosecutor's do.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Although I sympathize with this man and he did what he thought would "equal" his loss. And I believe the perp got what he deserved.

I also believe in something that has been going astray in our system. That is that it is better to let one guilty man go for the sake of justice and liberty than to imprison innocent men on the all too common "circumstantial evidence".

Some comments about our justice system it has definitely changed from since the founding fathers. Lynch mobs, posse's, duels etc. were often commonly accepted ways of dishing out justice. We didn't even have police forces until well after the constitution around the 1850's I believe. Other than Sheriffs and town constables (who were often drafted or elected and served without pay).

Initiation and investigation of criminal cases was the nearly exclusive province of private persons.
 
OrangeIsTrouble

OrangeIsTrouble

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
1,398
Location
Tukwila, WA, ,
imported post

Machoduck wrote:
Jury nullification, which voting not guilty would be, sort of, is certainly part of our constitutional republic.

MD
Click to expand...

+1

And to David.Car
LOL!

(Since I don't know how to do multiple quotes without typing it in)


Also, this reminds me of the movie Shooter, at the end when the AG Russert said something about, it's not the wild west no more, can't clean up the streets with a gun, but sometimes that's exactly what's needed.

Not saying anything, it just reminds me of that.
 
FMCDH

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

amlevin wrote:
While it might sound like appropriate "justice" it kind of denies the party of one of his constitutional rights. The one of Due Process. Isn't it a bit hypocritical to shout out our indignation when one of the rights WE believe in is infringed yet consider denying another of the enumerated rights to another.

This type of justice is somewhat a cornerstone of a social order we reject here in this country. That of the militant muslims.

The bad guy in this scenario got off because of issues with the evidence. If those responsible for investigating, arresting, and prosecuting had done their job correctly this would not have been an issue. Sadly the bad guy gets to go free but for some reason they always seem to get their just rewards, eventually.

All that said, if I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to convict.
Click to expand...
+1, but I add...

We each have to follow our convictions, and if this person thought they were so 100% correct that they needed to take the law into their own hands to see "justice" done,the way that THEY wanted it done, then let that be on them.

HE then gets HIS day in court, and he can live with his satisfied convictions in prison or freedom, for the rest of his life, however long that may be.

If you break a law, no matter how right you may believe you are, you should be willing and prepared to suffer the consequence of your choices.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
amlevin wrote:
While it might sound like appropriate "justice" it kind of denies the party of one of his constitutional rights. The one of Due Process. Isn't it a bit hypocritical to shout out our indignation when one of the rights WE believe in is infringed yet consider denying another of the enumerated rights to another.

This type of justice is somewhat a cornerstone of a social order we reject here in this country. That of the militant muslims.

The bad guy in this scenario got off because of issues with the evidence. If those responsible for investigating, arresting, and prosecuting had done their job correctly this would not have been an issue. Sadly the bad guy gets to go free but for some reason they always seem to get their just rewards, eventually.

All that said, if I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to convict.
Click to expand...
+1, but I add...

We each have to follow our convictions, and if this person thought they were so 100% correct that they needed to take the law into their own hands to see "justice" done,the way that THEY wanted it done, then let that be on them.

HE then gets HIS day in court, and he can live with his satisfied convictions in prison or freedom, for the rest of his life, however long that may be.

If you break a law, no matter how right you may believe you are, you should be willing and prepared to suffer the consequence of your choices.
Click to expand...

This is sort of the same scenario that played out in real life several years ago. Does anyone else remember the California mother that brought a gun into court, walked up behind the guy on trial for molesting (or raping)her son, and shot him in the back of the head. She was tried and convicted, I just don't remember if it was 1st Degree Homicide or Manslaughter.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Trigger Dr wrote:
Would you shoot O.J.?
Click to expand...

Difficult to answer. Yes, No, Maybe, yes again, let me think, why not, well no, maybe yes. Can't really make up my mind. Maybe I'll decide before he gets out of jail but then again, why waste the ammo.

Why can't we just forget OJ. Ignoring him is a blow to his ego. Let him become a meaningless old man in prison. When he gets out everyone should be saying OJ Who?
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

amlevin wrote:
Trigger Dr wrote:
Would you shoot O.J.?
Click to expand...

Difficult to answer. Yes, No, Maybe, yes again, let me think, why not, well no, maybe yes. Can't really make up my mind. Maybe I'll decide before he gets out of jail but then again, why waste the ammo.

Why can't we just forget OJ. Ignoring him is a blow to his ego. Let him become a meaningless old man in prison. When he gets out everyone should be saying OJ Who?
Click to expand...
If I caught him in the act of slicing peoples throats. He got the verdict he should have in that trial, I think he is guilty as sin, but it was all circumstantial. If this was someone without all his money they would have been found guilty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top