Life sentence for man who admits stabbing relative’s alleged attacker

[Shwa]

I am not sure how prevalent it is for males to think about deadly vengeance when it comes to attacks on the female members of their family. I believe - as a society - we abhorr violence against women even though the courts sometimes do not rule this way. However, I believe most males have harboured secret thoughts of vengeance if anyone assaulted their mother, sister, daughter or other female family member.

In this very sad case, one male acted out those secret thoughts and was given a very hefty sentence for his act: a life sentence for second degree murder and 10 years before parole. I am actually surprised at the length of the sentence, but the message must be heard loud and clear that society must prosecute the accused and on one else.

Life sentence for man who admits stabbing relative’s alleged attacker

In the early hours of April 5, 2008, Struc stabbed Luis Estrada-Lemmon five times, with one wound piercing his heart. The victim was ambushed at his car outside of a Brampton strip club, court heard.

Estrada-Lemmon was lured outside of the club by an exotic dancer and one of Struc’s friends. Struc had discovered just a short while before that Estrada-Lemmon had been charged with sexually assaulting a relative of Struc’s on July 17, 2007. Struc went to the strip club to inflict a beating on him although he took an eight-inch combat style knife with him, court heard.

The relative didn’t want Struc to find out about the alleged sexual assault, which occurred in her home while she and Estrada-Lemmon watched television and consumed drugs, Sherriff said in an agreed statement read into court.

The Crown had a strong case against Estrada-Lemmon but it was wrong for Struc, no matter his reasons, to take “street justice” into his own hands before a jury could decide the case, Sherriff said.

[Bonam]

I am actually surprised at the length of the sentence, but the message must be heard loud and clear that society must prosecute the accused and on one else.

That is not the message that is sent. The message that is sent is: take vengeance only if you are willing to sacrifice your future freedom to do so. For some people, that may seem a fair exchange.

[AngusThermopyle]

Looking at this case from an emotional point of view I can understand the driving force behind this mans actions. Having said that however I must state that I feel the sentence he recieved was apt. He did conspire to lure the victim outside where he planned at the very least to assault him. Upon luring him out he then attacked him with a weapon in his possesion.

As I said, emotionally it is understandable why he did this. On the other hand vigilantism cannot be allowed nor can it be seen as being tacitly condoned.

[Wild Bill]

As I said, emotionally it is understandable why he did this. On the other hand vigilantism cannot be allowed nor can it be seen as being tacitly condoned.

I agree with you Angus that vigilantism should not be allowed. That being said, a judicial system should not allow itself to lose so much respect that vigilantism becomes more attractive!

For a long time now it seems people of more liberal persuasion than the typical mainstream Canadian have successfully softened the system with lighter sentences, earlier paroles and whatnot. They have accomplished this not by political appeals for public support but rather by achieving positions of power within the system and by keeping their changes gradual and often unannounced to the world at large.

The end result is that many people today no longer trust the system to deliver an appropriate sentence to even the more horrific crimes. When that happens vigilantism is almost inevitable.

Surely a more positive solution would be to make the system more accurately reflect the values of mainstream Canadians, rather than imposing harsher sentences on vigilantes than on the perps themselves! This only sends the message that the "system" will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure that perps do not receive any harsher punishment from any other source than the court system itself.

More simply, if a system breeds disrespect for itself then counter-reactions are inevitable.

[bloodyminded]

I am not sure how prevalent it is for males to think about deadly vengeance when it comes to attacks on the female members of their family. I believe - as a society - we abhorr violence against women even though the courts sometimes do not rule this way. However, I believe most males have harboured secret thoughts of vengeance if anyone assaulted their mother, sister, daughter or other female family member.

No question. I wouldn't be surprised if the thought has arisen, unbidden, in most or all our imaginations.

In this very sad case, one male acted out those secret thoughts and was given a very hefty sentence for his act: a life sentence for second degree murder and 10 years before parole. I am actually surprised at the length of the sentence, but the message must be heard loud and clear that society must prosecute the accused and on one else.

I agree, it's one of those tragic circumstances in which inner contradictions are bound to occur. I feel real empathy for the man; if I put myself in his shoes, I can scarcely disagree with him. But I still feel that we can't let people get away with this sort of behaviour.

[bush_cheney2004]

That is not the message that is sent. The message that is sent is: take vengeance only if you are willing to sacrifice your future freedom to do so. For some people, that may seem a fair exchange.

Furthermore, the punishment for sexual assault is not death. This very patriarchal view is fraught with problems.

[Hydraboss]

Furthermore, the punishment for sexual assault is not death.

It would be if it happened to my family.

This very patriarchal view is fraught with problems.

The only problems are:

1) Hiding the body sufficiently

2) Being willing to give up 25 years (maybe) of your life to do what's right. Count me in.

[bloodyminded]

It would be if it happened to my family.

The only problems are:

1) Hiding the body sufficiently

2) Being willing to give up 25 years (maybe) of your life to do what's right. Count me in.

1) and 2) are, perhaps, a bit contradictory. If committing the murder is the right thing to do, then I'm not sure hiding the body is. At the very least, your victim probably has loved ones, totally innocent of the crimes he has committed, and so they have a right to know what happened to him. You don't want to unneccessarily victimize another family, surely, at least not beyond the murder you commit?

Edited June 19, 2011 by bloodyminded