What's new

No charge for dad who killed daughter's rapist

fd24

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
5,864
Reaction score
0
A US father who found his five-year-old daughter being raped, then beat the attacker to death will not be charged, prosecutors have said.

The 23-year-old man told police he found the girl being assaulted on Saturday 9 June by Jesus Mora Flores in a rural part of southern Texas.

A grand jury has declined to indict the man, finding that he was allowed to use deadly force to protect his daughter.

The father has not been named to protect the identity of his daughter.

The Lavaca County district attorney and sheriff announced the man would not face charges, as they held a news conference on Tuesday
A witness who saw Flores abducting the girl to a remote spot raised the alarm, said a statement by the district attorney.

The father ran towards his daughter's screams and as he found her being attacked, "inflicted several blows to the man's head and neck area", said investigators.

A recording of the father's 911 telephone call was played at the news conference in which he tells a dispatcher he beat up a man he found raping his daughter.

As police struggle to locate the family ranch, the father swears and tells the dispatcher: "Come on! This guy is going to die on me! I don't know what to do!"

Emergency crews who responded to the father's 911 call found Flores' trousers and underwear pulled down on his lifeless body.

A medical examination of the girl at hospital backed up the father's story that she had been sexually assaulted, said prosecutors.

The father was not arrested, but was investigated for homicide.

BBC News - No charge for Texas dad who killed daughter's rapist

Im glad that he is not being charged because in his shoes i wouldnt think twice in doing the same - the guy has done a favour to all mankind by removing this ***** from this earth..
 
^^^ he was not charged because of circumstances and his intensions. He did not intend to kill the guy.
 
Im glad that he is not being charged because in his shoes i wouldnt think twice in doing the same - the guy has done a favour to all mankind by removing this ***** from this earth..

I agree, I too would have done the same thing to protect a member of my family or anyone else. The f!lthy rapist deserved to die.
 
No question - intent or no intent one can imagine his rage taking over rational thinking. Any normal person would have acted in the same manner...

Anyone with a shred of dignity would fight to the death to defend his daughter from a rapist. I hope his daughter recovers from the horrible trauma she has experienced, & is able to live a good & safe life.
 
I wish we had similar laws in UK..
here the offender has more rights than the victim....I cannot shoot an intruding thief even if he has a knife....
 
Anyone with a shred of dignity would fight to the death to defend his daughter from a rapist. I hope his daughter recovers from the horrible trauma she has experienced, & is able to live a good & safe life.
I will be curious to know what would have happened to him if he had killed in saudi arabia.
Or say a girl commits a murder of a rapist in self defence.
 
I wish we had similar laws in UK..
here the offender has more rights than the victim....I cannot shoot an intruding thief even if he has a knife....

Lets be clear..the law is clear on what or who can be charged with murder even if the reason was morally correct..


In this case, he was trying to protect his daughter by beating the guy,,his intention was not to kill but only to injure to protect his daughter..

But even if the intention was to kill him, if the murder had happened at the time of rape or the moment he found out that his daughter was raped, he would have been probably acquitted as his lawyers would have pleaded Temporary loss of sanity..


But If the father had murdered the rapist after few days of finding who the rapist was..he would be charged with first degree or second degree murder.. even if there is a clear proof that the guy who was murdered was a rapist..in fact that would be construed as a motive and law would find him guilty...
 
Lets be clear..the law is clear on what or who can be charged with murder even if the reason was morally correct..


In this case, he was trying to protect his daughter by beating the guy,,his intention was not to kill but only to injure to protect his daughter..

But even if the intention was to kill him, if the murder had happened at the time of rape or the moment he found out that his daughter was raped, he would have been probably acquitted as his lawyers would have pleaded Temporary loss of insanity..


But If the father had murdered the rapist after few days of finding who the rapist was..he would be charged with first degree or second degree murder.. even if there is a clear proof that the guy who was murdered was a rapist..in fact that would be construed as a motive and law would find him guilty...
repped you for making the point I wanted to make.
 
I will be curious to know what would have happened to him if he had killed in saudi arabia.
Or say a girl commits a murder of a rapist in self defence.

The link below contains old information, but it's still relevant & should answer your question.

Saudi Arabia - Criminal Justice System

The sharia carefully defines crimes--such as homicide, personal injury, adultery, fornication, theft, and highway robbery--and prescribes a penalty (hadd) for each. Various degrees of culpability for homicide and bodily injury are recognized depending on intent, the kind of weapon used, and the circumstances under which the crime occurred. Homicide is considered a crime against a person rather than a crime against society in which the state administers justice of its own volition. Under the sharia, the victim or the victim's family has the right to demand punishment, to grant clemency, or to demand blood money (diya)--a set payment as recompense for the crime.

An act of self-defense is recognized as a right nullifying criminality. Retaliation is permitted to the male next of kin of the victim by killing the criminal in the case of a homicide or exacting the same bodily injury that was inflicted on the victim. Acceptance of diya is, however, considered preferable under the sharia.
 
repped you for making the point I wanted to make.

Actually...influence of Boston legal tv show...:P

There was a episode where a guy murders his GF and pleads temporary loss of sanity and the court acquits him..

The mother of the girl then comes to the lead character(who is a leading criminal lawyer) and asks him how to murder this guy so that she could be then acquitted for temporary loss of sanity...

The hero is dumbstruck and he says that Temporary loss of sanity plea wont work there as she was clearly sane enough to have decided to kill the guy who has murdered her daughter...:hang2:
 
But here the law says " Reasonable force" and that is a very debatable term...
If a guy jumps in your bedroom with knife and you strangle him,for you its reasonable force as you are not sure of his intentions and cannot take risk on your life..But the silly British courts are known to send people to jail on similar incidents.
In america in such situation i can pick up the gun and shoot the guy and i wont be charged.
 
Another thing is the ethnicities of the Mr.Dad and he Rapist...
The jury is usually biased against ethnic minorities..
If tye dad was a white guy and the Rapist a Black/Hispanic guy the Juries decision was no surprised..But if it was the other way round,i doubt the decisions had been the same..
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom