I'm with Clyde, this:

 

...said no evidence so far has led investigators to doubt his story.

There doesn't appear to be any reason other than what he told us," Harmon said

 

doesn't tell us much at all. With no physical evidence this gets a lot trickier of an issue.

Ok I have seen everyone's post and I have to ask what am I missing? The perp was trespassing inside the guys house correct? and allegedly attacking the 4 year old daughter correct? and the dad beat him to death.

 

If all this is correct, the perp trespassing inside the house is enough for the dad to beat him to death, what does it matter what the evidence shows he did to the daughter?

None of what we are arguing matters until there are more facts released. It's a preliminary story with very little detail that a news outlet ran with best they could because they knew it would draw the attention of the readers who react just like we have. Emotional tug at the heart.

Are you paying attention?

 

I said we can tell NOTHING from the statement. It can be interpreted many ways. That doesn't mean I do not believe them. I think they are rightfully being tight-lipped.

 

However, some on here read into it more than I do. That's been my stated point over and over and should be obvious.

 

There's only one logical way to interpret the statement. You're just choosing to ignore it.

I say that he did the right thing.....I feel I would do the same, and would serve whatever punishment handed to me as well. In protection of our families, we often sacrifice our own well being and happiness.

There's only one logical way to interpret the statement. You're just choosing to ignore it.

 

Now you've got me confused. What statement am I ignoring? The vague statement by the police? Hardly.

I say that he did the right thing.....I feel I would do the same, and would serve whatever punishment handed to me as well. In protection of our families, we often sacrifice our own well being and happiness.

 

Raise your hand if you don't agree with this.

 

No one will disagree. We all would.

Raise your hand if you don't agree with this.

 

No one will disagree. We all would.

 

I disagree. Unless he hit the guy will a one punch kill shot - a one hitter, quitter - there was no need to kill the man. I'm sure the decedant lost consciousness at some point. That's when you secure your kid, get away from the situation and call police.

The crime is heinous, and seemingly the decedant deserves what he got. But I'm not a killer and don't see the need for a human life to taken in this instance. But Southern laws are much different than up north. The guy may walk. Yes, the decedant is a sick man, but sexually assaulting anyone, much less a 4-year old is a sign of a sickness that needs cured. Jerry Sandusky is a sick man. What you all have cosigned was the death penalty for persons with a mental illness. It is what it is. I'm not for the death penalty, especially for persons with a mental illness. But most of you are consistent. You see no problem with Zimmerman killing a high school student that was accosted while he was minding his own business; and you have no issue with this dad killing a person with a mental illness.

I disagree. Unless he hit the guy will a one punch kill shot - a one hitter, quitter - there was no need to kill the man. I'm sure the decedant lost consciousness at some point. That's when you secure your kid, get away from the situation and call police.

The crime is heinous, and seemingly the decedant deserves what he got. But I'm not a killer and don't see the need for a human life to taken in this instance. But Southern laws are much different than up north. The guy may walk. Yes, the decedant is a sick man, but sexually assaulting anyone, much less a 4-year old is a sign of a sickness that needs cured. Jerry Sandusky is a sick man. What you all have cosigned was the death penalty for persons with a mental illness. It is what it is. I'm not for the death penalty, especially for persons with a mental illness. But most of you are consistent. You see no problem with Zimmerman killing a high school student that was accosted while he was minding his own business; and you have no issue with this dad killing a person with a mental illness.

 

You're making an assumption (as many are) as to when the guy went "out" and what happened subsequently. Maybe the dad's last punch knocked him out and ultimately killed him. You and I would both protect our child to a certain point and be doing so legally.

 

Your "no problem with Zimmerman..." comment is off-base. No one has made that claim. Like this situation there simply cannot be a rush to judgement based on the little we actually know.

^If by "sickness that needs cured", you mean becoming the catcher in a prison battery for the rest of their life, or being sent to meet their maker, we're in agreement. If not, then that's just absurd.

I disagree. Unless he hit the guy will a one punch kill shot - a one hitter, quitter - there was no need to kill the man. I'm sure the decedant lost consciousness at some point. That's when you secure your kid, get away from the situation and call police.

The crime is heinous, and seemingly the decedant deserves what he got. But I'm not a killer and don't see the need for a human life to taken in this instance. But Southern laws are much different than up north. The guy may walk. Yes, the decedant is a sick man, but sexually assaulting anyone, much less a 4-year old is a sign of a sickness that needs cured. Jerry Sandusky is a sick man. What you all have cosigned was the death penalty for persons with a mental illness. It is what it is. I'm not for the death penalty, especially for persons with a mental illness. But most of you are consistent. You see no problem with Zimmerman killing a high school student that was accosted while he was minding his own business; and you have no issue with this dad killing a person with a mental illness.

The only cure is death.

I disagree. Unless he hit the guy will a one punch kill shot - a one hitter, quitter - there was no need to kill the man. I'm sure the decedant lost consciousness at some point. That's when you secure your kid, get away from the situation and call police.

The crime is heinous, and seemingly the decedant deserves what he got. But I'm not a killer and don't see the need for a human life to taken in this instance. But Southern laws are much different than up north. The guy may walk. Yes, the decedant is a sick man, but sexually assaulting anyone, much less a 4-year old is a sign of a sickness that needs cured. Jerry Sandusky is a sick man. What you all have cosigned was the death penalty for persons with a mental illness. It is what it is. I'm not for the death penalty, especially for persons with a mental illness. But most of you are consistent. You see no problem with Zimmerman killing a high school student that was accosted while he was minding his own business; and you have no issue with this dad killing a person with a mental illness.

That is an out false statement.

 

I am not a death penalty guy either. It is one of those things - in this instance at least - assuming it transpired where he walked in on the act happening, I have no problem with the justice handed. I know that position is counter to what I normally believe and it may not make full sense. Now that does not mean there may be no consequences. But that is something one should be prepared to deal with when killing the other person.Though I could argue having to witness that and relive the scene for the rest of one's life is enough punishment.

I hear you but the typical punishment, even in Texas, for a sexual predator is not death.

 

Not saying I blame the dad or that this guy did not deserve what he got, but from a legal standpoint he still murdered a guy.

 

I am coming into this late, so probably already posted...but no intent, no pre-meditation, no murder.

^If by "sickness that needs cured", you mean becoming the catcher in a prison battery for the rest of their life, or being sent to meet their maker, we're in agreement. If not, then that's just absurd.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

The catcher in prison. :lol:

 

Something tells me we aren't talking baseball.

Outside of the most liberal states, no jury will convict this father.

 

I agree with the second part of the quote but not the first. I consider myself a proud liberal and would vote for acquittal with the facts as presented (father steps in to stop sexual molestation of his daughter...or sexual molestation of anyone, for that matter.)