Wow. Time out. Wait. Man shoots guy who killed his kids VIA DUI and he's not guilty?

Damn texas is awesome. If obama was from texas russia would be one of the states of usa.

I had no idea the father had his two boys hell him push the car down a dark road in the middle of the night. He's no hero, that's for sure. They could have easily been hit by a sober driver.

[QUOTE=~primetime~]Manslaughter is an accident, murder is premeditated[/QUOTE]


That's not true. Well, not always.

You can get manslaughter by intentionally killing someone

[QUOTE=red1]terrible post. driving drunk doesnt necessarily make someone a shitty father[/QUOTE]

:biggums: yeah but killing two kids does.

If ever there was a case where I could understand a temporary insanity defense, this is it. This man just saw both his children killed by a drunk moron, who wouldn't snap at a time like that ?

I don't think there was anything morally wrong with what he did, and I don't see him as a danger to society, so he should be found innocent.

[QUOTE=~primetime~]You know your avy is a drunk icon right?

It is very unlikely that girl will be better off without a dad[/QUOTE]

She basically would've been without a dad regardless as he would've been in prison if he lived.

[QUOTE=DwnShft2Xcelr8]Making irresponsible decisions and following through on them doesn't make someone a terrible father? He has/had an infant just born days ago and decides to drive after drinking. That's an irresponsible decision if I've ever heard of one.
Even if he didn't kill these boys, he could've just as easily killed someone else. God forbid he decided to take his newborn for a drive after drinking. He could have also ended up in jail if he had been caught driving by cops.
He should've known better. He had a newborn at home to take care of. Now that little girl is growing up without her biological father in her life. [B]Little baby probably got lucky.[/B][/QUOTE]
:facepalm complete lack of perspective
[QUOTE=oarabbus]:biggums: yeah but killing two kids does.[/QUOTE]
the fact of the matter is that we don't know how the accident happened. do we even know if it was the alcohol that caused it and not the poor conditions for visibility?

[QUOTE=DwnShft2Xcelr8]Good. One less shitty father in the world.[/QUOTE]
It's a terrible situation to be in. All around really bad.

you should not be able to execute someone because of an accident... it looks like this dad was going to shoot the nguy whether he was drunk or not. Hes honestly more of a scumbag than the guy who accidently hit them.

there was no actual evidence that he shot him IIRC. no gun, no witnesses, etc.

[QUOTE=BigTicket]If ever there was a case where I could understand a temporary insanity defense, this is it. This man just saw both his children killed by a drunk moron, who wouldn't snap at a time like that ?

I don't think there was anything morally wrong with what he did, and I don't see him as a danger to society, so he should be found innocent.[/QUOTE]
this isnt what happened. he (supposedly) left the scene to get his gun, came back and capped the dude. but there is no actual evidence of this, so.....

[QUOTE=tpols]you should not be able to execute someone because of an accident... it looks like this dad was going to shoot the nguy whether he was drunk or not. Hes honestly more of a scumbag than the guy who accidently hit them.[/QUOTE]

The more I read into this, the more it seems like three young people lost their lives that night because of this guys poor decisions. He's definitely no hero :facepalm

Not really much point in getting sour over the verdict, though. He's without his two sons which is worse than any punishment the law would have given him. Shitty situation with no winners.

[QUOTE=PHX_Phan]The more I read into this,[COLOR="Red"] the more it seems like three young people lost their lives that night because of this guys poor decisions.[/COLOR] He's definitely no hero :facepalm

Not really much point in getting sour over the verdict, though. He's without his two sons which is worse than any punishment the law would have given him. Shitty situation with no winners.[/QUOTE]
yep, who has two little boys pushing a car on a dark rural road early morning on a weekend night?...no way in hell I would let my own son get out on a dark highway for ANY reason.

I would bet money this guy was ALSO drunk...told his own kids to get out and push...his kids were blocking the tail lights so no other car could see them...big fckin surprise a drunk youngster hits them at that hour.

Then he takes the young partier's life...who was also a father...everything sucks, and everyone loses

[QUOTE=~primetime~]yep, who has two little boys pushing a car on a dark rural road early morning on a weekend night?...no way in hell I would let my own son get out on a dark highway for ANY reason.

I would bet money this guy was ALSO drunk...told his own kids to get out and push...his kids were blocking the tail lights so no other car could see them...big fckin surprise a drunk youngster hits them at that hour.

Then he takes the young partier's life...who was also a father...everything sucks, and everyone loses[/QUOTE]
this is definitely the case. He put those kids in a very dangerous situation. Not that the driver wasnt at fault, but the situation was not a very smart one to begin with.

[QUOTE=MadeFromDust]Jury nullification.[/QUOTE]
Not at all.

There's no reason to believe that the jury conspired to vote not guilty on a man they believed to have been proven guilty. The murder weapon was never found and there was no evidence that the father had fired a gun. You can't possibly convict when there is no actual evidence that he committed the murder.

[QUOTE=tpols]you should not be able to execute someone because of an accident... it looks like this dad was going to shoot the nguy whether he was drunk or not. Hes honestly more of a scumbag than the guy who accidently hit them.[/QUOTE]
This is another key point.

It's easy to condemn a drunk driver after the fact when all the blood tests are done. At the time though, he didn't know that. For all he knew, somebody drugged him or the car could have even had a mechanical malfunction or he could have driven over something that made his car loose control. I highly doubt the father took time to confirm that the driver was drunk before executing him.

That being said.... There is no actual evidence that the father was the one who shot him.

[QUOTE=NumberSix]This is another key point.

It's easy to condemn a drunk driver after the fact when all the blood tests are done. At the time though, he didn't know that. For all he knew, somebody drugged him or the car could have even had a mechanical malfunction or he could have driven over something that made his car loose control. I highly doubt the father took time to confirm that the driver was drunk before executing him.

That being said.... There is no actual evidence that the father was the one who shot him.[/QUOTE]

Like the dad comes back with the shotgun and finds out the driver[I] isnt[/I] drunk.. and totally changes his temperment and lets him go:roll:

He wouldve killed the guy no matter what smh

[QUOTE=boozehound]this isnt what happened. he (supposedly) left the scene to get his gun, came back and capped the dude. but there is no actual evidence of this, so.....[/QUOTE]
If there isn't actual evidence of that and no witnesses, then why repeat it? Maybe he had a gun at the scene and didn't have to go home to get it? Or maybe someone else shot him? All that reasonable doubt is there.

Or if the dude was shot to death, then where do the ballistic tests lead? Why couldn't they trace the bullets and any casings back to the gun owner?

[QUOTE=MadeFromDust]If there isn't actual evidence of that and no witnesses, then why repeat it? Maybe he had a gun at the scene and didn't have to go home to get it? Or maybe someone else shot him? All that reasonable doubt is there.

Or if the dude was shot to death, then where do the ballistic tests lead? Why couldn't they trace the bullets and any casings back to the gun owner?[/QUOTE]
I am just repeating what was in the houston media at the time. As I pointed out, there wasnt any tangible evidence, but its pretty clear the driver didnt shoot himself........

hmmmmm I don't see how that was ruled out either if there is no evidence. Real drunk, full of grief, shoots self, father steals the gun or removes it from the scene, etc.

[QUOTE=MadeFromDust]hmmmmm I don't see how that was ruled out either if there is no evidence. Real drunk, full of grief, shoots self, father steals the gun or removes it from the scene, etc.[/QUOTE]
shot multiple times...

[QUOTE=The Macho Man]Dude flew off the handle and should be in jail. He gets pissed over 2 little shits dying? Drunk dude did him a favor should have shook his hand[/QUOTE]

Easily one of the worst posters on this site. Not even remotely funny. Stick with that circle jerk you guys have going on in the BTE.

this was like a mafia style hit .. reminds me of when the guy who drove into and killed gotti's son 'disappeared' .. didn't really matter to them that it may have been an accident .. they just wanted the guy dead for killing their kid(s) .. in gotti's case, there was never any chance he was going to be tried for obvious reasons

[QUOTE=The Macho Man]Dude flew off the handle and should be in jail. He gets pissed over 2 little shits dying? Drunk dude did him a favor should have shook his hand[/QUOTE]

:facepalm .... just :facepalm

If you are familiar with the case you would know that there was no evidence or proof to convict him. No gun was retrieved, no forensic evidence etc etc

Can't convict someone without proof, evidence or an admision of guilt.