liam24 wrote: » But the argument that 'it's an expected human response under the circumstances' cannot and must not be used as an extenuating factor, any more than a wife who murders her husband for cheating on her should be in any way excused. You can't go around killing people.
jamesbere wrote: » Any father would of done what that man did, it was just unfortunate that the man died. He'll see jail time for it alright but any judge and jury should see common sense here and give a mild sentence. It must be very hard for the daughter
Egginacup wrote: » Excuse me but the length of sentence for murder is not contingent on the character of the victim. I heard the same disgusting talk when that Chinese guy killed the "skanger" outside his internet shop by kicking him to death for allegedly not paying for a phone call. Ok course there'll be the usual chorus of shit from the knuckledraggers saying I'm defending a paedo or that I favour hugs for all skangers just because I'm not dancing with joy that they have been killed. The guy, it seems, was a paedophile or at least had indecent images on his ipad... which is creepy and illegal. The other guy, however, murdered him and also must pay for his crime.
Kiwi in IE wrote: » According to reports he was not 'beaten to death' at all. It was one unfortunately ill placed, well earned punch which went horribly wrong.
jmayo wrote: » One of the guys that was in the gang that beat up and killed British tourist in Spanish village a few years ago got three years for manslaughter. Ehh the polite way of asking if he was a bit of a **acker or one of the lower classes. :rolleyes: It wasn't murder and it wasn't some continous beatening as you are hinting. He was punched once and he died.Of course we all know how amazing it is that some are only to glad to defend even sc**bags.
Egginacup wrote: » Being beaten to death can be accomplished with multiple blows until the victim is dead or just one.
Egginacup wrote: » People are way too quick to take the law into their own hands and others are way too quick to gleefully cheer them on.
Egginacup wrote: » I don't think anyone is defending scumbags. There are two trains of thought here: 1. Those who think it's ok to kill people who are deemed undesirables 2. Those who think it's not ok.
Magico Gonzalez wrote: » it's a tabloid term for those with tabloid perspective.
Magico Gonzalez wrote: » Clearly not murder, but manslaughter doesn't sounds as good when you're being contrary online. No doubt when a paedo photographs their child and harasses them they'll turn the other cheek and allow it to continue. I really hope the guys gets a suspended sentence, the provocation was extreme and his daughter certainly will not benefit from his absence.
Candie wrote: » I understand the fathers actions, but not condone them. Ideally he would have called the police, but people have a habit of doing what feels right at the time. It usually works out, and this dad was unlucky on several counts, as was the perv. I think saying the daughter would have been less traumatised by being raped than she is by seeing her dad punch someone is utterly ridiculous and seriously diminishing. He clearly didn't intend to kill the guy, and pretending it's exactly the same as kicking someone to death or repeatedly battering them with his fists while his daughter watches is disingenuous in the extreme. All assuming the guy was in fact doing anything wrong.That said, if I'd a kid and found a stash of photos of them on a strangers iPad, with all the risk of them winding up online or altered, I'd probably put the guy through a window.
liam24 wrote: » Savage. The irony here is that likely one in ten of the parents protesting so vociferously against this are raping their own children. And as we know with homophobia, it's the guilty ones who are likely to be the most aggressive in their condemnation.
suicide_circus wrote: » Who is "dancing" for joy? Murder? I didn't realise a trial and verdict had taken place?
Larbre34 wrote: » Unfortunately this guy is bang to rights for Manslaughter. The offenders previous history has no bearing on the prosecution. Hopefully a Spanish jury will just refuse to convict.
Magico Gonzalez wrote: » Rubbish. How hard is the concept of manslaughter for you to understand? It.was.not.murder. He punched him, once. Intent on stopping a peadophile from taking photos from his daughter. It is not, in your childishly simple example, "ok to kill" the paedophile, it is however not rational to charge the guy with murder, as it was not premeditated. A manslaughter charge with a large portion given as a suspended sentence should be the correct outcome. Is the guy likely to be provoked by another paedo harassing his children? I doubt it. What value does a custodial sentence serve? None. Does it benefit the daughter? No. Only a contrary fool would deny that it's understandable a father could lose his temper and strike out whilst his children are being harassed by a paedophile. It's not a zero sum, thankfully the allow affords for more judgements than your limited, contrary, binary assessment.