Someone get a tourniquet, red is bleeding from the heart again. Yes I get it, innocent until proven guilty. Had I been in that situation that would have been enough for me. Tell me if you are on the jury you aren't going to convict doucet. Just like the little army rat that snuck away from his post, the evidence is there in spades. That is probably why Plauche didn't do any time, because it was so freaking obvious that doucet was a scum sumbitch and there was no explanation for why he and that boy were in California, but you keep your head in the sand. Let us know if them chinamen start coming since you will see them first. I know the rule of law must prevail and for the most part 98% or more, it does. In certain circumstances, I get it, I understand. Like I said in either case I cannot with good faith and conscience tell you what I would have done. I may not have shot doucet but you can bet your ass it would have taken more than one man to pull me off of him. Probably more than 3 and he would bleed. A lot. I'm not the one who can't see what is obvious as it pertains to doucet, trial or no trail you cannot tell me you don't think he hurt that boy.
I already said that if the evidence was there, he would be convicted. And you aren't listening very well. This isn't about bleeding hearts for Doucet. It is about Plauche taking the law into his own hands. Got that? Do I have to say it ten fucking times. Then stop defending vigilantes for murder. No big deal. Whip his ass. Call him out. But let him stand trial and take his lumps. You know as well as I do that innocent people are charged all the time. It is why trials are important. This isn't saying that Doucet isn't guilty, it is saying that there is a right way and a wrong way to deal with it. Get on the right side. You make an art out of missing the goddamn point. Geez. Not once have I said that Doucet didn't hurt the boy. That ain't the point. My issue is with some hothead depriving the accused and the public of a proper trial. Now we will never get to see the evidence, hear the testimony, and judge him properly.
Sure it is. Victims' surviving family members are OFTEN unsatisfied with the outcomes of your "fair" trials and don't feel "justice" was done. Look at Nicole Brown's family, and so many others. Horseshit. They don't lock up and keep innocent people in jail for months waiting for trial.
Justice is for the good of society, not to placate the grief of victims and their family. Justice can miscarry, that does't mean that its everybody for themselves. Since when?
Shane you told me to get off my high horse yet here you are jumping to a conclusion that ignores the rule of law. You don't know all the evidence in many of these cases yet advocate a judgment. It is attitudes like that that are causing riots in Ferguson. The legal system isn't fast for a reason. I believe it was Oliver Wendell Holmes who said it is better that 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent be wrongly convicted (or words to that effect). It is up to the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict. It is set up to be dispassionate and try to rule with evidence not passion. You are assuming what Doucet did all he is accused of yet you don't have all the evidence. Even if he did and the evidence shows at trial then it is up to the state to administer justice. Not even beating his ass is a substitute. What you are advocating is medieval..sharia law...an eye for an eye on a personal level. This leads to chaos. You say you understand yet every comment you make negates that.
Oh Winston ol boy you have it all wrong. Your premise is spot on. That is in fact the way it is supposed to work and in most cases it does. In this case however you obviously aren't very well read in. Here are the facts that are known to be true. This isnt speculation or assumption or he said/she said. They are public record facts. Doucet was a pedophile, Doucet kidnapped Gary Plauche's boy and took him to California, He was apprehended in a motel room after he made a phone call to his mother. You do understand that right, facts, pedophile with a young boy that was taken out of state (not that it matters, it could have been around the block but out of state) Now before you get carried away I am not nor have I ever advocated judgement. In fact I would much rather have seen Doucet rot in jail because I have heard what the inmates like to do with pedophiles there and that would have been much more fitting for him. In my opinion Plauche let him off easy. I have NEVER said what Gary did was right or moral or just, I only said I can understand, I can sympathize with him because if I'm in that same situation I honestly don't know what I would do. As I stated to red, which is also a fact, is that the same system you are preaching about didn't hand down ANY jail time for Gary Plauche so apparently they (courts, jurors et al) must have seen it the same way.
Not only do "they" do that all the time. But sometimes those innocents are even convicted. Soemtimes they are even executed like, Cameron Todd Willingham.
