I would finish off the guy too.

ProgN said:

---

If I'm on that jury he walks free or I'd hang it. I'm not sending a father to prison for doing what a real father should do.

---

My thoughts exactly!

BadMoonRisin said:

---

43 counts of child rape...released on bond?

And then he continues to offend. What are these ****** judges doing?

---

I think either covering for the good ole boys club, the fact they were co-workers (he was the local PD chief), or it's a bleeding heart "Every person can be rehabilitated!" type.

Or a mix of all three. I hope this judge gets voted out next election, that low of a bond for sex crimes in sheer lunacy, especially when involving a minor.

If the charges may be justified on some level, then the jurors ought to be entirely justified in jury nullification and vote based on their conscience instead of on the law in order to prevent a gross miscarriage of justice.

The judge may do his best to not consider the question of self defense. On the other hand, the judge might want a not guilty verdict in order to shield the father from additional penalties.

Quote:

---

Arkansas Code of 1987 (2024)
Title 5 - CRIMINAL OFFENSES ( 5-1-101 5-79-101)
Subtitle 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS ( 5-1-101 5-5-501)
Chapter 2 - PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY ( 5-2-201 5-2-622)
Subchapter 6 - JUSTIFICATION ( 5-2-601 5-2-622)
Section 5-2-607 - Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person

• (a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:
  
  • (1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving physical force or violence;
  • (2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
  • (3) Imminently endangering the person's life or imminently about to victimize the person from the continuation of a pattern of domestic abuse.

• (b) A person is not required to retreat before using deadly physical force if the person:
  
  • (1) Is lawfully present at the location where deadly physical force is used;
  • (2) Has a reasonable belief that the person against whom the deadly physical force is used is imminently threatening to cause death or serious physical injury to the person or another person;
  • (3) Except as provided under 5-2-606(b)(2)(B), is not the initial aggressor and has not provoked the person against whom the deadly physical force is used;
  • (4) Is not committing a felony offense of possession of a firearm by certain persons, 5-73-103, with the firearm used to employ the deadly physical force, unless the person is in or at the person's dwelling or in the curtilage surrounding the person's dwelling;
  • (5) Is not engaged in criminal activity that gives rise to the need for the use of deadly physical force at the time the deadly physical force is used; and
  • (6) Is not engaged in any activity in furtherance of a criminal gang, organization, or enterprise as defined in 5-74-103.

• (c) As used in this section:
  
  • (1) "Curtilage" means the land adjoining a dwelling that is convenient for residential purposes and habitually used for residential purposes, but not necessarily enclosed, and includes an outbuilding that is directly and intimately connected with the dwelling and in close proximity to the dwelling; and
  • (2) "Domestic abuse" means:
    
    • (A) Physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, or assault between family or household members; or
    • (B) Any sexual conduct between family or household members, whether minors or adults, that constitutes a crime under the laws of this state.

---

AR Code 5-2-607 (2024) (emphasis added)

Sure looks like (a)(1) covers this.

erudite said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

This will be an interesting story to follow. It's Arkansas so we aren't dealing with an anti-gun state. I would have assumed he's within his rights to use deadly force to defend his daughter.

What am I not getting?

---

I'm sure it will be construed as a "judged by 12 or carried by 6" situation. This guy will be judged by 12.

The key question as it always is will be did he fear for his life?

---

That is not the question….

To be clear, if he reasonably believed his daughter was going to victimized to a felony using physical force, he is entitled to use lethal force in response.

If that question is presented properly to the jury, there is no way this guy is convicted of even a petty misdemeanor. This judge should be removed from the bench.

---

Thank you

I was about to clear this misconception up but you swooped in first

Well done

---

It is also alleged (by the defense) that the dead perp was abusing his daughter when he found them, both sides agree that there was a verbal altercation (Probably something like "Get your hands off my daughter you sob"), and then (the state claims) he shot him becuase he wouldn't comply, and then mag dumped him deliberately to make sure the perp was extra dead.
Dead man was a family friend and apparently (?) he got caught extorting the daughter by this father, so he knew this man was a sex predator.

I fundamentally disagree with the gag order, and I honestly think this case should be televised to prevent further abuses by this judge or another.

---

Yeah, we're going to be hearing a tad bit more about this 15 round mag dump. Good luck with all that. Attorney gonna be earning his check for sure if he can dance around that.

remember this?

https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/grand-jury-no-charges-taqueria-shooter/285-6b117ced-e3c1-4ba9-a023-d6b371b5bb5e

Sometimes you just have to take out the trash.

2wealfth Man said:

---

remember this?

https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/grand-jury-no-charges-taqueria-shooter/285-6b117ced-e3c1-4ba9-a023-d6b371b5bb5e

---

Good to know they didn't file charges against him. I remember there being some thoughts the last shot or two might gotten him in trouble.

AggiePops said:

---

Sometimes you just have to take out the trash.

---

Dennis Miller says "Sometimes you just have to cull the herd."

The case is starting to be picked up by the same lawtube people who are covering Karen Read. Melanie Little has had several videos about it now. A troubling case.

BrazosDog02 said:

---

erudite said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

This will be an interesting story to follow. It's Arkansas so we aren't dealing with an anti-gun state. I would have assumed he's within his rights to use deadly force to defend his daughter.

What am I not getting?

---

I'm sure it will be construed as a "judged by 12 or carried by 6" situation. This guy will be judged by 12.

The key question as it always is will be did he fear for his life?

---

That is not the question….

To be clear, if he reasonably believed his daughter was going to victimized to a felony using physical force, he is entitled to use lethal force in response.

If that question is presented properly to the jury, there is no way this guy is convicted of even a petty misdemeanor. This judge should be removed from the bench.

---

Thank you

I was about to clear this misconception up but you swooped in first

Well done

---

It is also alleged (by the defense) that the dead perp was abusing his daughter when he found them, both sides agree that there was a verbal altercation (Probably something like "Get your hands off my daughter you sob"), and then (the state claims) he shot him becuase he wouldn't comply, and then mag dumped him deliberately to make sure the perp was extra dead.
Dead man was a family friend and apparently (?) he got caught extorting the daughter by this father, so he knew this man was a sex predator.

I fundamentally disagree with the gag order, and I honestly think this case should be televised to prevent further abuses by this judge or another.

---

Yeah, we're going to be hearing a tad bit more about this 15 round mag dump. Good luck with all that. Attorney gonna be earning his check for sure if he can dance around that.

---

Ummm, I don't think that's going to be a sticking point for the jury.

Dude was protecting his daughter.

Trying to hold out for a conviction, based upon that weak "evidence", would be folly here.

From what I understand, there has to be an official verdict before SHS can give a pardon.

TexasAGGIEinAR said:

---

From what I understand, there has to be an official verdict before SHS can give a pardon.

---

I think here you commute the sentence. He remains a convicted murderer but serves little or no time. Gets around the mag dump issue.

Squadron7 said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

erudite said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

This will be an interesting story to follow. It's Arkansas so we aren't dealing with an anti-gun state. I would have assumed he's within his rights to use deadly force to defend his daughter.

What am I not getting?

---

I'm sure it will be construed as a "judged by 12 or carried by 6" situation. This guy will be judged by 12.

The key question as it always is will be did he fear for his life?

---

That is not the question….

To be clear, if he reasonably believed his daughter was going to victimized to a felony using physical force, he is entitled to use lethal force in response.

If that question is presented properly to the jury, there is no way this guy is convicted of even a petty misdemeanor. This judge should be removed from the bench.

---

Thank you

I was about to clear this misconception up but you swooped in first

Well done

---

It is also alleged (by the defense) that the dead perp was abusing his daughter when he found them, both sides agree that there was a verbal altercation (Probably something like "Get your hands off my daughter you sob"), and then (the state claims) he shot him becuase he wouldn't comply, and then mag dumped him deliberately to make sure the perp was extra dead.
Dead man was a family friend and apparently (?) he got caught extorting the daughter by this father, so he knew this man was a sex predator.

I fundamentally disagree with the gag order, and I honestly think this case should be televised to prevent further abuses by this judge or another.

---

Yeah, we're going to be hearing a tad bit more about this 15 round mag dump. Good luck with all that. Attorney gonna be earning his check for sure if he can dance around that.

---

Ummm, I don't think that's going to be a sticking point for the jury.

Dude was protecting his daughter.

Trying to hold out for a conviction, based upon that weak "evidence", would be folly here.

---

That is only 0.34 rounds per count.

I'm not sure I'd have such restraint.

---

Yep

John Wick mag eject, reload, aaaaannnnnddd second mag dump.

That Dad did the right thing I will go to jail happily if that is the outcome.

This case might work differently. I don't know. But I've been on 3 trial juries and they never asked us "welp guys, thinking with your heart, what do you think we should do?" "Call your friends and talk about it and let us know."

That's not how it worked. They asked us a series of questions and a verdict was rendered based on how we answered. For us, on two trials, we all thought not guilty was the "right" verdict but it was not aligned with the way the questions rendered judgement. So, a guilty verdict was rendered. I feel it is designed that way on purpose to mitigate emotional response like we see on nearly every post of the thread thus far.

Also, You don't get to pick a jury that's going to side with you. You get a jury of your peers and that alone is enough to make me not do stupid **** like mag dump a dude on the street. Lots may not agree with that but I've seen my peers and they are the last people I want in charge of my fate. They aren't great.

I'm curious. Do you have a daughter?

Yes.

I don't see how any jury could overlook the rage that a father would have for this POS monster, preying on his own flesh and blood, especially any salt of the earth country folks in Ark. The rage would explain away the mag dump IMO. Guess we'll see.

The SOB should have been castrated with rusty, dull knife prior to the lead poisoning.

BrazosDog02 said:

---

This case might work differently. I don't know. But I've been on 3 trial juries and they never asked us "welp guys, thinking with your heart, what do you think we should do?" "Call your friends and talk about it and let us know."

That's not how it worked. They asked us a series of questions and a verdict was rendered based on how we answered. For us, on two trials, we all thought not guilty was the "right" verdict but it was not aligned with the way the questions rendered judgement. So, a guilty verdict was rendered. I feel it is designed that way on purpose to mitigate emotional response like we see on nearly every post of the thread thus far.

Also, You don't get to pick a jury that's going to side with you. You get a jury of your peers and that alone is enough to make me not do stupid **** like mag dump a dude on the street. Lots may not agree with that but I've seen my peers and they are the last people I want in charge of my fate. They aren't great.

---

Meh, I don't know, I'd like and trust "my peers" in small rural town America a million times more than I would in any major city. But regardless, it's pretty damn easy to say you wouldn't mag dump your child's rapist/abductor when it has never happened to you.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

I don't see how any jury could overlook the rage that a father would have for this POS monster, preying on his own flesh and blood, especially any salt of the earth country folks in Ark. The rage would explain away the mag dump IMO. Guess we'll see.

The SOB should have been castrated with rusty, dull knife prior to the lead poisoning.

---

Rage can certainly make you want to kill someone, but is never an excuse for actually doing so. Justifiable self defense (meaning you didn't start the fight) of yourself or someone else is an entirely different thing. Bye bye bad guy.

BTW, I'm in agreement with your ending statement except for using a dull, rusty knife. You should never let your tools get in that condition so… maybe use a butter knife? The edge of a broken bottle?

BrazosDog02 said:

---

This case might work differently. I don't know. But I've been on 3 trial juries and they never asked us "welp guys, thinking with your heart, what do you think we should do?" "Call your friends and talk about it and let us know."

That's not how it worked. They asked us a series of questions and a verdict was rendered based on how we answered. For us, on two trials, we all thought not guilty was the "right" verdict but it was not aligned with the way the questions rendered judgement. So, a guilty verdict was rendered. I feel it is designed that way on purpose to mitigate emotional response like we see on nearly every post of the thread thus far.

Also, You don't get to pick a jury that's going to side with you. You get a jury of your peers and that alone is enough to make me not do stupid **** like mag dump a dude on the street. Lots may not agree with that but I've seen my peers and they are the last people I want in charge of my fate. They aren't great.

---

Ok, but at that point, we have gotten so far from basic right and wrong.

Can they charge the judge for negligence that led to the police chief's death? I'm not serious about that, but if the summary is accurate the judge was the last person, besides the criminal himself, who actually had a chance to avoid this situation. If he ignored the law or ruled inconsistently with typical cases, could she be held accountable? Should she be held accountable?

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Can they charge the judge for negligence that led to the police chief's death? I'm not serious about that, but if the summary is accurate the judge was the last person, besides the criminal himself, who actually had a chance to avoid this situation. If he ignored the law or ruled inconsistently with typical cases, could he be held accountable? Should he be held accountable?

---

I'm wondering what it takes to charge the prosecutor with malicious prosecution (a prosecution that occurs without probable cause and causes damage).

IMO prosecutors will try to argue that dad instigated the interaction by ramming the truck off the road, which could make any further claim of then using the gun in self defense or defense of others invalid. They will try to argue dad is the initial aggressor in the interaction and should have waited on police.