Warning: This is an adult-themed post. If you find this offensive, please do not read further, thank you.
Last week it was all over the news about the young Texas father who beat his 5 year old daughter’s rapist to death with his fists. Way to go Daddy-O! Seriously. Parents always say how they’d kill to protect their children. Here’s a guy who walked the talk. The situation is tragic all the way around without doubt. This heroic dad has to live the rest of his life knowing he killed someone, and a little girl is potentially scarred (emotionally at least) for life; her innocence irretrievably lost forever. She has this comforting thought to hold onto though – her dad was there for her – 100%. I pray for this family and trust they find the peace and healing they deserve.
The Texas grand jury got it right when they decided not to prosecute the dad. I think I like Texas – a lot. The state with a well developed sense of chivalry and justice for the weak. Call them a bunch of rednecks if you want to, but I say God Bless Texas! I was not able to determine whether or not the family of the monster who raped the little girl could bring a civil suit against her father. The only states that I could find that have an immunity clause within their castle doctrine laws were Minnesota and Wisconsin. I can only hope that Texas does in fact have such an immunity clause. Massachusetts – in its inherently cyanotic “wisdom” does not. Further, MA law does NOT specifically cover incidents occurring on one’s property, just within the “dwelling”. Dumb…..
Massachusetts has a castle law that does not require a duty to retreat. Persons in Massachusetts can be criminally charged if they injure or kill an intruder. However, using force necessary to stop an offender who is reasonably believed to be intent on causing physical harm to anyone inside the residence is a justifiable defense. The statute states:
Section 8A. In the prosecution of a person who is an occupant of a dwelling charged with killing or injuring one who was unlawfully in said dwelling, it shall be a defense that the occupant was in his dwelling at the time of the offense and that he acted in the reasonable belief that the person unlawfully in said dwelling was about to inflict great bodily injury or death upon said occupant or upon another person lawfully in said dwelling, and that said occupant used reasonable means to defend himself or such other person lawfully in said dwelling. There shall be no duty on said occupant to retreat from such person unlawfully in said dwelling.”
Here’s how this might play out here in MA:
Family hosting picnic. A guest sees a hispanic man (I’m going with the facts of the actual case for a scenario, not trying to be racist) forcibly carrying off the property owner’s five year old daughter and tells the father. Dad catches this man raping his daughter behind a barn on the property. Beats rapist with his bare hands, calling 911 for assistance, rapist later dies from injuries inflicted by his victims father. Father is immediately arrested and charged with homicide, thrown in jail overnight or until he can make bail. Family must put their house up as collateral so that the father can make bail. Family begins to be harassed by local gang members and need to relocate to protect themselves. Younger family members are harassed at school. Grand jury indicts father – reluctantly – for second degree homicide in part because the killing did not occur within the four walls of their dwelling. The case goes to trial. The reputation of the daughter/rape victim is called into question during the trial by the prosecution attorneys (she was dressed “provocatively” in a bathing suit during the picnic). The father is found guilty, but only sentenced to community service. – as the jury understands he was acting to protect his daughter. However, the family of the rapist decides to bring civil suit against the father. They go to court and win millions in judgement, partly due to how the castle doctrine laws are worded in MA. Sound fair? Nope. But its a reasonable potential scenario here in the bluest of blue states. Sigh.
Here are some of my other concerns and questions as regards the case itself:
The rapist (I won’t dignify the degenerate monster by using his name) was 47 at the time of his demise. Was here in the US legally with a green card. I find it impossible to believe that, at 47, this was the first time he had acted out and raped a defenseless child. This pervert HAD to have a criminal history, so how did he get a green card? Apparently, we do not have any transparent exchange of information with Mexico. This also leads me to question whether or not many of the illegals here in the US are here to escape capture and prosecution for crimes in their country of origin. Just look at what Castro did in the 80’s with the boat people – emptying his prisons and “allowing” Cuban criminals to mix in with legitimate refugees. (“say hello to my little friend…”)
And this is what it comes to, with gravest apologies to Emma Lazarus:
your tired, your poor, (your child molesters, rapists, murderers and takers of innocence)
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free (your criminals escaping justice) … Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! (I’ll give them driver’s licenses, free medical care, a job with unlimited access to children, and the opportunity to continue their horrific, reprehensible behavior…unchecked – until a victim’s dad steps in to stop them)
God Bless America….land of opportunity for all – regardless of race, creed or criminal history….