Update: Texas Dad Beats His Daughter’s Molester to Death *Post 286*

[Kingsmith88]

how long is 'continually beating'? more than a minute? i think you could get in 20-25 full force strikes in about a minute, probably guy is knocked out by the 5th or 6th blow, by blow 8 he has a concussion and broken face, by blow 11 his brain starts to swell, also at this point his nose is for sure broken making it hard to breath and is probably swallowing some blood in his mouth. Someone could easily die at this point if not treated immediately, more blows increase the likelihood of his death and that all could happen in about 30 seconds.

Not necessarily a time element you describe a beating that would fall under what I said.

 

[Lonestar94]

Good! I would have done the same thing.



http://www.theblaze.com/stories/he-...as-dad-beats-his-daughters-molester-to-death/

Justice served.

 

[Deuce511]

Interesting topic. I stumbled across this...


Join the Military or Go to Jail?

By Rod Powers, About.com Guide



My father served in the Army during the Korean War and told me that many of the soldiers he served alongside with were in the Army as an alternative to prison. Several Vietnam-era vets have told me they've served with military members who were told by a judge, "Join the Military, or go to jail."

Can courts still do that? Can a criminal court judge sentence a person to military service as an alternative to jail. Can a prosecutor mandate that someone join the military as an alternative to criminal prosecution?

Well, a judge or prosecutor can do whatever they please (within the limits of the law for their jurisdiction), but -- that doesn't mean the military branches are required to accept such people and -- they don't.

The Army addresses this issue in the Army Recruiting Regulation, Army Regulation 601-210, paragraph 4-8b: "Applicant who, as a condition for any civil conviction or adverse disposition or any other reason through a civil or criminal court, is ordered or subjected to a sentence that implies or imposes enlistment into the Armed Forces of the United States is not eligible for enlistment.."

The Air Force Recruiting Regulation, AETCI 36-2002, table 1-1, lines 7 and 8, makes an applicant ineligible for enlistment if they are "released from restraint, or civil suit, or charges on the condition of entering military service, if the restraint, civil suit, or criminal charges would be reinstated if the applicant does not enter military service."

The Marine Corps Recruiting Regulation, MCO P1100.72B, Chapter 3, Section 2, Part H, Paragraph 12 states: "Applicants may not enlist as an alternative to criminal prosecution, indictment, incarceration, parole, probation, or other punitive sentence. They are ineligible for enlistment until the original assigned sentence would have been completed."

In the Coast Guard, enlistment prohibition is contained in the Coast Guard Recruiting Manual, M1100.2D, Table 2-A.

Interestingly, the Navy Recruiting Manual, COMNAVCRUITCOMINST 1130.8F, does not appear to contain any provisions which would make such applicants ineligible for enlistment. However, I've been informed by several Navy recruiters that the Navy will not accept applicants for service, as an alternative to criminal prosecution or other punitive sentence.

Recruiter Participation in Criminal Proceedings

All of the branch's recruiting regulations prohibit military recruiters from becoming involved in criminal proceedings for any military applicant.

Under no circumstances may recruiting personnel intervene or appear on behalf of prospective applicants/DEPpers pending civil action with court authorities. Civil action is defined as awaiting trial, awaiting sentence, or on supervised conditional probation/parole. Waiver of this restriction is not authorized. The following are clarifications:


a. Recruiting personnel may not appear in court or before probation or parole authorities under any circumstances on behalf of any applicant or DEPper.

b. Informal conversations with defense attorneys or probation or parole officers must be limited to explaining the military's recruitment policies. Recruiting personnel may give no opinions or suggestions to enable an unqualified applicant to enlist. They must allow the normal course of civil action to occur without assistance or intervention.

 

[jobberone]

Interesting topic. I stumbled across this...


Join the Military or Go to Jail?

By Rod Powers, About.com Guide



My father served in the Army during the Korean War and told me that many of the soldiers he served alongside with were in the Army as an alternative to prison. Several Vietnam-era vets have told me they've served with military members who were told by a judge, "Join the Military, or go to jail."

Can courts still do that? Can a criminal court judge sentence a person to military service as an alternative to jail. Can a prosecutor mandate that someone join the military as an alternative to criminal prosecution?

Well, a judge or prosecutor can do whatever they please (within the limits of the law for their jurisdiction), but -- that doesn't mean the military branches are required to accept such people and -- they don't.

The Army addresses this issue in the Army Recruiting Regulation, Army Regulation 601-210, paragraph 4-8b: "Applicant who, as a condition for any civil conviction or adverse disposition or any other reason through a civil or criminal court, is ordered or subjected to a sentence that implies or imposes enlistment into the Armed Forces of the United States is not eligible for enlistment.."

The Air Force Recruiting Regulation, AETCI 36-2002, table 1-1, lines 7 and 8, makes an applicant ineligible for enlistment if they are "released from restraint, or civil suit, or charges on the condition of entering military service, if the restraint, civil suit, or criminal charges would be reinstated if the applicant does not enter military service."

The Marine Corps Recruiting Regulation, MCO P1100.72B, Chapter 3, Section 2, Part H, Paragraph 12 states: "Applicants may not enlist as an alternative to criminal prosecution, indictment, incarceration, parole, probation, or other punitive sentence. They are ineligible for enlistment until the original assigned sentence would have been completed."

In the Coast Guard, enlistment prohibition is contained in the Coast Guard Recruiting Manual, M1100.2D, Table 2-A.

Interestingly, the Navy Recruiting Manual, COMNAVCRUITCOMINST 1130.8F, does not appear to contain any provisions which would make such applicants ineligible for enlistment. However, I've been informed by several Navy recruiters that the Navy will not accept applicants for service, as an alternative to criminal prosecution or other punitive sentence.

Recruiter Participation in Criminal Proceedings

All of the branch's recruiting regulations prohibit military recruiters from becoming involved in criminal proceedings for any military applicant.

Under no circumstances may recruiting personnel intervene or appear on behalf of prospective applicants/DEPpers pending civil action with court authorities. Civil action is defined as awaiting trial, awaiting sentence, or on supervised conditional probation/parole. Waiver of this restriction is not authorized. The following are clarifications:


a. Recruiting personnel may not appear in court or before probation or parole authorities under any circumstances on behalf of any applicant or DEPper.

b. Informal conversations with defense attorneys or probation or parole officers must be limited to explaining the military's recruitment policies. Recruiting personnel may give no opinions or suggestions to enable an unqualified applicant to enlist. They must allow the normal course of civil action to occur without assistance or intervention.

I'm not surprised this is currently being used. During time of war things get relaxed and I promise you people used to be ordered into military service. I suspect the Armed Services do background test and drug testing just as most civilian jobs do.

 

[JoseyWales]

I suspect the Armed Services do background test and drug testing just as most civilian jobs do.

They absolutely do. What they don't do is teach martial arts during basic training.

But, back to topic. If this guy is indicted, I'd hope he walks. Seeing his daughter going through this had to be a terrible thing for his mind to comprehend. I don't blame him a bit.

 

[cowboy_ron]

Interesting topic. I stumbled across this...


Join the Military or Go to Jail?

By Rod Powers, About.com Guide



My father served in the Army during the Korean War and told me that many of the soldiers he served alongside with were in the Army as an alternative to prison. Several Vietnam-era vets have told me they've served with military members who were told by a judge, "Join the Military, or go to jail."

Can courts still do that? Can a criminal court judge sentence a person to military service as an alternative to jail. Can a prosecutor mandate that someone join the military as an alternative to criminal prosecution?

Well, a judge or prosecutor can do whatever they please (within the limits of the law for their jurisdiction), but -- that doesn't mean the military branches are required to accept such people and -- they don't.

The Army addresses this issue in the Army Recruiting Regulation, Army Regulation 601-210, paragraph 4-8b: "Applicant who, as a condition for any civil conviction or adverse disposition or any other reason through a civil or criminal court, is ordered or subjected to a sentence that implies or imposes enlistment into the Armed Forces of the United States is not eligible for enlistment.."

The Air Force Recruiting Regulation, AETCI 36-2002, table 1-1, lines 7 and 8, makes an applicant ineligible for enlistment if they are "released from restraint, or civil suit, or charges on the condition of entering military service, if the restraint, civil suit, or criminal charges would be reinstated if the applicant does not enter military service."

The Marine Corps Recruiting Regulation, MCO P1100.72B, Chapter 3, Section 2, Part H, Paragraph 12 states: "Applicants may not enlist as an alternative to criminal prosecution, indictment, incarceration, parole, probation, or other punitive sentence. They are ineligible for enlistment until the original assigned sentence would have been completed."

In the Coast Guard, enlistment prohibition is contained in the Coast Guard Recruiting Manual, M1100.2D, Table 2-A.

Interestingly, the Navy Recruiting Manual, COMNAVCRUITCOMINST 1130.8F, does not appear to contain any provisions which would make such applicants ineligible for enlistment. However, I've been informed by several Navy recruiters that the Navy will not accept applicants for service, as an alternative to criminal prosecution or other punitive sentence.

Recruiter Participation in Criminal Proceedings

All of the branch's recruiting regulations prohibit military recruiters from becoming involved in criminal proceedings for any military applicant.

Under no circumstances may recruiting personnel intervene or appear on behalf of prospective applicants/DEPpers pending civil action with court authorities. Civil action is defined as awaiting trial, awaiting sentence, or on supervised conditional probation/parole. Waiver of this restriction is not authorized. The following are clarifications:


a. Recruiting personnel may not appear in court or before probation or parole authorities under any circumstances on behalf of any applicant or DEPper.

b. Informal conversations with defense attorneys or probation or parole officers must be limited to explaining the military's recruitment policies. Recruiting personnel may give no opinions or suggestions to enable an unqualified applicant to enlist. They must allow the normal course of civil action to occur without assistance or intervention.

I doubt it in todays world..it was a completely different era when they needed ground infantrymen which is where they went along with most draftees...I joined at 17 so I was on easy street compared to those guys.

 

[Hostile]

The Army, particularly the Rangers, called them combatives. They are also abbreviated HTH or H2H for hand to hand combat. It is a form of martial arts.

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some will go to.

 

[Kingsmith88]

The Army, particularly the Rangers, called them combatives. They are also abbreviated HTH or H2H for hand to hand combat. It is a form of martial arts.

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some will go to.

My hand to hand training in basic was pretty basic. Lol.

If I remember correctly only lasted one day or so. Never used it outside of those few days, likely would have gotten my butt kicked if I had. I went through during peace time though and in the 90's. I wasn't anywhere close to being a Ranger either.

 

[cowboy_ron]

We just beat hell out of each other with pugil sticks....I doubt they go through the gas chamber during basic either..or fire live rounds 18" above you while you're low crawling...fun stuff..

 

[Kingsmith88]

We just beat hell out of each other with pugil sticks....I doubt they go through the gas chamber during basic either..or fire live rounds 18" above you while you're low crawling...fun stuff..

Did all that. They taught us some throws and trips and stuff. I remember that course where they fired over our heads. We had to run there in the dark. Good times.

 

[Hostile]

My hand to hand training in basic was pretty basic. Lol.

If I remember correctly only lasted one day or so. Never used it outside of those few days, likely would have gotten my butt kicked if I had. I went through during peace time though and in the 90's. I wasn't anywhere close to being a Ranger either.

Like I said earlier, he and I do not get along, but he freaking scares me with that stuff. I'm just saying he was really good and he did the training.

I remember he had a tape when he got discharged and came to stay with us for a summer to decompress. I went running with him and it was an actual tape he made while they were doing double time runs while he was in the Rangers.

I remember lines like "5 miles, no sweat, got 5 more to go yet." And then at odd times someone would say "Airborne" and the platoon would almost growl back "Rangers!" which was followed by "death from above."

My point was though that I admire what this father did. Just like I admired that he did that. It is something that has been deep seated in me since those days. If someone does something that horrible they deserve what they get. JMO.

 

[cowboy_ron]

Did all that. They taught us some throws and trips and stuff. I remember that course where they fired over our heads. We had to run there in the dark. Good times.

Cool to hear they still do that...hated the gas chamber..the day we went through it the wind wasn't blowing at all and you REALLY want the wind to blow to air out the fatigues and dry the tears and snot running down your face....:laugh1: ...ah yes..the good ole days

 

[Kingsmith88]

Cool to hear they still do that...hated the gas chamber..the day we went through it the wind wasn't blowing at all and you REALLY want the wind to blow to air out the fatigues and dry the tears and snot running down your face....:laugh1: ...ah yes..the good ole days

I never realized I had so much snot in my nose. It literally looked like water gushing out. I can't recall if it was windy or not but I do remember my skin burned.

 

[rkell87]

Not necessarily a time element you describe a beating that would fall under what I said.

so time isn't a factor but amount of strikes is? so what is the maximum allowed? 10? what if I hit him 5 times knock him out and he comes to 10 minutes later and I hit him 5 more times and he dies?

I think time is a factor, you can rage for a minute or more but after a while you can realize what you are doing and decide to keep going or not.

he was in a barn, assuming regular barn tools are in there he could have killed him in one action with a pitchfork or shovel and we wouldn't even be talking about it but because he did it with bare hands we are, which is stupid because everybody agrees that he won't be prosecuted.

people have done much worse in less dire situations(like catching a spouse cheating) and pleaded temp insanity and gone free so there is no doubt about this one

 

[Kingsmith88]

so time isn't a factor but amount of strikes is? so what is the maximum allowed? 10? what if I hit him 5 times knock him out and he comes to 10 minutes later and I hit him 5 more times and he dies?

I think time is a factor, you can rage for a minute or more but after a while you can realize what you are doing and decide to keep going or not.

he was in a barn, assuming regular barn tools are in there he could have killed him in one action with a pitchfork or shovel and we wouldn't even be talking about it but because he did it with bare hands we are, which is stupid because everybody agrees that he won't be prosecuted.

people have done much worse in less dire situations(like catching a spouse cheating) and pleaded temp insanity and gone free so there is no doubt about this one

I don't think you understood what I said. Said it didn't have to necessarily be about time. I think he had the right to do what he needed to do to stop the assault on his daughter. Anything more makes it wrong, IMO. He could have stopped after one or two punches. He stopped the assault.

I don't believe that infedility is a legit reason to kill anyone. Don't believe any of us have the right to decide if another lives or dies. Don't believe that the death penalty is right. I certainly don't think that anyone should have the right to kill someone in a situation where a solution can be had without deadly force.

 

[rkell87]

I don't think you understood what I said. Said it didn't have to necessarily be about time. I think he had the right to do what he needed to do to stop the assault on his daughter. Anything more makes it wrong, IMO. He could have stopped after one or two punches. He stopped the assault.

I don't believe that infedility is a legit reason to kill anyone. Don't believe any of us have the right to decide if another lives or dies. Don't believe that the death penalty is right. I certainly don't think that anyone should have the right to kill someone in a situation where a solution can be had without deadly force.

I understand which is why I asked time vs. strikes, I then went on to say that I believe time is a factor.

as for whether or not people can decide life and death and the death penalty, I disagree which is why we are probably having this argument.

I believe that justice was served in this situation and I will probably never be chosen to serve on a jury because I will request for the jury to be able to render a final verdict that we see fit and not based solely on evidence, because there is no way I will send a guy like this father to jail for his actions, nore would I let casey anthony out on time served

 

[bounce]

OK, I'll defer to the experts on the matter...I just had never heard of that before.

You mean your lackeys in the VIP area?

 

[Hoofbite]

If the story is all true, the guy deserves a medal.

Think of all the tax payer dollars that won't be spent to house a pedo for however many years.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

The Army, particularly the Rangers, called them combatives. They are also abbreviated HTH or H2H for hand to hand combat. It is a form of martial arts.

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some will go to.

It's funny that most of them seem to use Ron Burgandy references in their screen names or avatars.

 

[jnday]

If you see someone hurting your child you put a stop to it. The guy beat the other guy to death. That takes time. He may well get off but he will and should be charged.

Do you honestly think the father was wrong? He shouldn't be charged. He should be thanked for getting rid of the lowest form of humanity. With our screwed up justice system, the molester may have been able to sue the father for damages if he had survived the beating. The molester's actions may cause emotional damage for the rest of the girl's life. The molester got off easy considering the nature of the crime. I am glad Texas has laws to protect the father in this situation.