a fathers teen age daughter got involved with an older known drug user and dealer. this guy got her severely hooked on drugs and the father could see it was killing his own daughter !!! after repeated attempts to keep them apart,he came to his final resort to protect his daughter. he shot and killed the drug dealer to save the life of his daughter !!! to my knowledge,you are allowed to use deadly force in order to protect yourself or family !! my opinion is---not guilty !!! remember it was the drug dealer or is daughter ?? your verdict please ????
2007-01-19 08:27:24 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
sorry,no knowledge on how or what the daughter is doing now ..
2007-01-19 08:58:39 · update #1
he was just found guilty of second degree murder !!! not right in my view ...
2007-01-19 09:01:08 · update #2
i'd have to admitt he killed the guy, but i would proberly give him a lesser charge because the dealer would have eventually killed his daughter through drugs.
2007-01-19 08:35:25 · answer #1 · answered by jane 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only question that will be asked of the jury is if the father is guilty of killing the drug dealer? and the answer is yes he is guilty of killing the drug dealer and it is murder, not self defense, unless the drug dealer was attacking his daughter at the scene, but i doubt that this happened if so let me know then the whole thing changed, What is he charged with by the way? why did i ask, " he came to his final resort", intent right there prosecutors going to slam him with that and intent is all you need to be charged with murder, so the verdict once again is guilty, he should've just pleaded guilty from the start to get less time, if he went on to trial i hope he has a damn good lawyer!
Deadly force, you have to feel that a person is goint to either kill or seriously injure you, thats the only legal way to apply deadly force, that rule does not apply here u described it as if he hunted down the man and killed him. Even if he's the reason why his daughter is out on drugs, theres nothing he could've done about it but he did and it was the wrong thing, his daughter just made the wrong choice, and its a lose lose situation for her too, now she has the drug problem and the possible loss of her father.
2007-01-19 17:00:11 · answer #2 · answered by o.O 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Based solely on what you stated. The verdict is Guilty of 1st degree murder. Your reasoning misses one major point. The daughter chose to use drugs, to continue to use drugs and to associate with this drug dealer. The drug dealer wasn't holding her down and forcing the drugs down her throat. Technically, the father should have shot the daughter as she was the source of the problem. If we followed your reasoning, the father could shoot a store clerk for selling her cigarettes because it will eventually kill her and he was therefore acting in self defense. This is obviously an absurd result but is the logical consequence of your reasoning.
2007-01-19 16:34:34 · answer #3 · answered by Daz2020 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Based on what you say there, he is guilty of premeditated murder. His daughter had to be "in Imminent Threat" of her life, for the father to assert self defense, she was not, being hooked on drugs was a way to control and sleep with her, not kill her. Did he even once call the police? Thats not in the evidence you give, And if the daughter kept going back, you can't claim kidnapping or being held there against her will, so we as a jury cannot assume he did hold her hostage or was threatening to kill her, only that Dad was so mad this drug dealer was doing his daughter, the dad killed him. As a crime of passion, I would say he could get off with 7 years, maybe 10, out on parole in 4.
2007-01-19 16:35:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the use of deadly force in defense of self or others is a complete defense to homicide only when such force is used as a defense against imminent threat of death or serious injury.
In the case you mentioned, the killing can only be justifiable if the drug dealer was literaly forcing drugs down the daughter's throat, or injecting lethal amounts of heroin into her arm, and the father personally caught the drug dealer doing so in the act.
I would say that the use of deadly force by the father was not justified.
2007-01-19 16:38:09 · answer #5 · answered by Jack C 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Legally - Guilty of murder.
The threat was not imminent (in the eyes of the law) thus, your trying to use the "protect yourself or family" is not plausible.
He premeditated obviously.
In my opinion - he did what he felt he needed to do, however, he could have shipped his daughter off to rehab and kept her there until she wasn't a risk to herself any longer, along with a bevy of other options. Murder not justifiable still.
2007-01-19 16:37:39 · answer #6 · answered by ☼High☼Voltage☼Blonde☼ 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Guilty. Sorry, I can see where you are coming from, and I sympathize, but the man is guilty of murder. Adult children must make their own choices no matter how stupid the choises they make are, it is a downside of parenthood. Sometimes you just have to let go.
Based on the facts you stated, it was premeditated murder. Sorry, but that is the law.
2007-01-19 16:34:33 · answer #7 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
a whole family ruined by drugs...sad situation....as parents we all try to raise them right and to make the right choices in life, he probably would have had better results just keeping at his daughter to quit and stay away from the crowd she was with...it probably woulda took time, and she would have had to hit bottom, but sometimes the best lessons are the hardest learned...by the way, any info if she has quit drugs now..or is still using...???
2007-01-19 16:39:38 · answer #8 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My verdict is guilty of murder.
I sympathize with the father, but you just can't go around solving your kid's problems by shooting the trouble-maker.
2007-01-19 16:31:48 · answer #9 · answered by Rachel M 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sorry but hes guilty..he could have contacted the drug enforcement agency n had him set up...the father was wrong to take matters into his own hands.
2007-01-19 16:48:51 · answer #10 · answered by purrdykitten2003 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋