Judge makes predetermined choice

[guyser]

Liberal minded judge forces jury to find defendant guilty. I wonder what would have happened if the father got killed by the skid? I'll bet the farm that the sentance would have been a lot less due to his "problems" and "situation". This is one case where the father had good reason to kill the drug dealer and he has the support of a large proportion of Canadians. Better that this nut be around, than the drug dealer. Who knows how many lives that drug dealer ruined, who knows how many people would have OD'd because of him. Better the drug dealer go than some kids.

A Liberal minded judge? Oh I get it, the Judge instructs the jury as to matters of law, and all of a sudden he is a liberal minded judge.Um ...would not a Liberal minded Judge get him off the charge? I think you are confused on this.

So what if the father got killed? He didnt, he did the killing. Immaterial , and thank you for calling it a murder, cuz that is exactly what that dumbass dad did.

And further blueblood, you do not even for a brief moment answer any questions. Why not? Maybe because the kid did not "coerce her to do drugs " as you claim? Obfuscation is what that is. Not to mention the death angle that none of can say with ANY certainty.

The drug dealer never ruined anothers life. Never mentioned that he tied people down and poured drugs or injected drugs into their bodies now did he? No no....they all took drugs willingly. Too bad for them. It is called personal responsibility.

The father is worse than the kid. He goes around and kills someone. Not much worse than that. If you dont think so, check statutes of law with respect to sentence lengths. Hmm...murder 1st degree is what 25 years? How much for selling pot or hash....a lot less and depending on the amounts.

And of course your kicker, support of a lot of Canadians. Really, you think so? Then why do more than half of Canadians are in favour of legalizing MJ ? Hell even the Senate released a widely read report that said we should legalize some soft drugs.

So your son is dating my daughter....and my daughter is ill behaved and is talking your son into things such as stealing and burglaring. Are you going to kill my daughter ?

[cybercoma]

Liberal minded judge forces jury to find defendant guilty. I wonder what would have happened if the father got killed by the skid? I'll bet the farm that the sentance would have been a lot less due to his "problems" and "situation". This is one case where the father had good reason to kill the drug dealer and he has the support of a large proportion of Canadians. Better that this nut be around, than the drug dealer. Who knows how many lives that drug dealer ruined, who knows how many people would have OD'd because of him. Better the drug dealer go than some kids.

The judge didn't force the jury into anything. He informed them of the laws in this country, that were written by governments elected by the people.

What would have happened if the father got killed by the drug-dealer? How does the situaton play out in your head? Does the father show up, with a gun, angry and aggressive and the drug-dealer kills him in self-defense? If the drug-dealer had a gun on him at the time the father murdered him and the drug-dealer got the shots off first after being threatened, he almost definitly would've gotten off on self-defense -- or given manslaughter.

That's not the case with the father. The drug-dealer didn't kidnap this man's daughter, he didn't murder the daughter, he didn't rape and torture the daughter, he was just another junkie who the daughter chose to live with. Daddy feels this gives him the right to murder someone?

Hell no. No one in this country is allowed to murder anyone, except in extremely rare cases of self-defense. Is drug-dealing careless and irresponsible? Yes. But the daughter chose that path and the way the father dealt with it is absurd.

The father is a murderer. He consciously took another person's life and justified it, much the same way you and other posters here are justifying it. I find it horrifying, revolting actually, that people here can actually justify killing.

Most people can't even wrap their minds around actually killing someone with their own hands. And here everyone is, commending this father for killing someone who obviously has a problem. The man was addicted to drugs and needed help. He didn't deserve to be murdered anymore than the executives of duMaurier or Players do and just the fact that people like you can justify murder makes me sick.

[Argus]

Capital punishment without trial or jury for drug dealing.

That doesn't sound like a very good idea to me Argus.

It sounds like an EXCELLENT idea to me. My only doubt is the verification process. I don't trust our incompetent court system to be right every time. If I could then I'd say go ahead, shoot them all.

Furthermore, this girl made the decision to live with this guy. These parents, who obviously don't know how to handle things rationally (as evidenced by the father's willingness to take another person's life, not because the guy murdered his daughter, but because he was doing drugs WITH her), allowed their 16 year old daughter to live with him. Maybe allow is not the right word, but the daughter for whatever reason refused to live with them.

First of all, drug dealers aren't really human. I think, as no one has disputed that he was a drug dealer, we should stop referring to him as though he were someone of any importance. ie, killing him wasn't exactly a terrible thing for society. Probably should've been done long ago. Second, the daughter is a teenaged girl - which species is notoriously dumb especially when it comes to men. I think the father protected his daughter in the only way he could. Maybe he should have threatened the guy first or something, but we don't know all the details. Maybe the drug dealer was a big, violent guy and the father's only resort was "the great equalizer".

I absolutely believe that this man should be charged with murder, first degree for the act and intent of murdering his daughter's bf.

I would suggest an appropriate punishment would be something served in the community - community service of some sort, perhaps helping out at a drug rehab centre.

Unless, as I said above, the death penalty with no trial or jury is the appropriate penalty for dealing drugs. Vigilantes in the streets murdering drug dealers based on suspicions is not something I feel would be constructive in our society.

I agree, though there is apparently no doubts in this case so I'm fine with it.

[Argus]

He shot the man his daughter was living with because she willingly took drugs ?

And you are okay with it.WOW!

Glad to see the dad is going to jail . He deserves it and the justice system in this country is correct in punishing him.

I don't feel you should go to jail for stepping on a cockroach.

[Argus]

In your post you say the father "snapped" which by definition means he didn't react as a reasonable, rational person. We make laws to protect us against people who "snap" and he should face the penalty.

I find it incredibly ironic that you'd bash drug-dealing (which deserves to be bashed as well), but say a murderer deserves respect.

They were both wrong and if you really want to argue, the drug-dealer's crime was FAR less despicable than the murderer.

Personally, I think they were both wrong and I think you're a terrible person for supporting someone who murdered someone...not because he was threatened, not for self-defense, but because the other guy did drugs and was dating the murderer's daughter.

I find it interesting how some people try to minimize the drug dealer's part in this. He did not "do drugs" he was a long time convicted drug dealer. I.e, scum. He was not "dating" the man's daughter, who was 8 years younger than him, he hooked her on the drugs and she had moved in with him.

As for "despicable", the drug dealer hurt people. The father only stepped on a cockroach. There's a big difference.

[Argus]

think back to your highschool days, and imagine, if all the drug dealers were treated as this one was.

im not about to defend drug dealers, but i'd say that at least 5 out of the 10 that i was aware of have changed their lives completely for the better at this point.

how dare that father remove this opportunity from that young man.

repulsive.

You know, not long ago most of the people here were ready to cruficy any adult male who had sex with a teenage girl. Some of them were even calling the pedophiles for sleeping with sixteen year olds.

This guy was not a toker from high school dealing a little weed. He was twenty four years old, and a serious drug dealer, and he hooked a sixteen year old girl on drugs and had her move in with him. Her life was headed for the toilet had her father not intervened. In a perfect world, this guy would have been in prison and not out hurting young girls.

I don't regard removing him from society as being much of a negative.

[Argus]

The girl was forced into it, that is common knowledge. Had the father not intervened, she'd be dead. The father killed the guy for forcing his daughter's hand and ruining her life. Are the scores of Canadians that support him terrible people too?

Yes in fact they are terrible people .

They advocate nothing but some nut like this dad going and killing someone because his daughter used some drugs. Judge jury and executioner , all in one.

The girl was "forced into it, that is common knowledge" . It is? Not in any report that I read. She MAY have believed if she kept on doing that she could die, but none of us, including her dumb daddy , knew or knows for sure.

Talk about abdicating personal responsibility .

Seems that the court and jury agrees with one of us. I wonder why?

Judges have absolutely no interest in fairness or justice. And this judge ordered the jury to convict, and unfortunately, juries are selected for their dumbness. They're mostly people who have no jobs and don't read the news, so have no opinions on anything. They did what they were told, following the letter of the law.

You apparently have tremendous sympathy for drug dealers. I'm wondering why.

[Argus]

Liberal minded judge forces jury to find defendant guilty. I wonder what would have happened if the father got killed by the skid? I'll bet the farm that the sentance would have been a lot less due to his "problems" and "situation". This is one case where the father had good reason to kill the drug dealer and he has the support of a large proportion of Canadians. Better that this nut be around, than the drug dealer. Who knows how many lives that drug dealer ruined, who knows how many people would have OD'd because of him. Better the drug dealer go than some kids.

The judge didn't force the jury into anything. He informed them of the laws in this country, that were written by governments elected by the people.

Really? Please cite for us the law which says juries MUST convict if a judge orders them to. Cite what law gives a judge the authority to order a jury to convict someone.

[cybercoma]

Argus, do me a favour, please compile a list of crimes you feel should be punishable by vigilante murderers. It doesn't make the father any less of a murderer because this other guy was dealing drugs.

Not once did I support the actions of the dealer; however, saying he gets people hooked on drugs is ridiculous. There are drug-dealers all over the place and the vast majority of people aren't addicted to their product, why? Because most people aren't stupid enough to get addicted to drugs.

The drug-dealer's crime should have been dealt with appropriately and allowing the average citizen to rip his guts open with bullets is not appropriate. This father is obviously someone who is out of control of himself if he thinks it's reasonable to murder someone and out of control of his 16 year old daughter if he didn't raise her to understand the dangers of heavy narcotics.

You may think community service is a reasonable penalty for an out of control murderer, but I would say he deserves life in prison. He cannot function as a rational human being in our society and thinks mowing down people is the way to solve problems. You may wish to bend this any way you'd like to justify killing, but I think he's just as much a scumbag as the dealer.

There is no law that says the jury has to convict someone, but when the man openly admits to loading the gun and intentionally murdering someone, it would be grossly irresponsible for them to let him go. Show me where it says the judge is not supposed to inform the jury of the laws.

[Black Dog]

This guy was not a toker from high school dealing a little weed. He was twenty four years old, and a serious drug dealer, and he hooked a sixteen year old girl on drugs and had her move in with him. Her life was headed for the toilet had her father not intervened. In a perfect world, this guy would have been in prison and not out hurting young girls.

I don't regard removing him from society as being much of a negative.

Irrelevant. Person A killed Person B, even though Person B was not presenting an immediate threat to Person A's...person. That's murder. The character of the victim or the intentions of the killer are largely irrelevant.

[Jenna]

what kind of a society do we live in

when did offering help to people go out the window, and get replaced by straight up elimination

people thinking that theyre God-like is dangerous, and unacceptable

the fact that a murderer is being defended on here just made me puke in my mouth a little.

[guyser]

Judges have absolutely no interest in fairness or justice. And this judge ordered the jury to convict, and unfortunately, juries are selected for their dumbness. They're mostly people who have no jobs and don't read the news, so have no opinions on anything. They did what they were told, following the letter of the law.

You apparently have tremendous sympathy for drug dealers. I'm wondering why.

Not much knowledge of the court system huh? "No interest in fairness or justice" ...laughable at best , pathetic at worst. What do you think they do all day, sit in chambers and discuss with other judges how to screw things up? The judge explained the law and gave them the options. The jury could have given vurtually any verdict, as FTA lawyer explained earlier. But they didnt, because they know what murder is.

Yup, jurists are dumb people who dont have jobs. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.Hmm...lets see, last week I was in a discussion with a friend of mine as he had just completed jury duty on a severe case of incest up in cottage country. Oh....sorry , he owns three business' , and he knew one other juror personally , and lo and behold, that jurist was a business owner too.

Shocking , my mother, who at the age of 78 still runs her own business and is an university grad from U of T did her jury duty in November.

As for drug dealers, you are right , I will defend them . We are ALL DRUG USERS , make no mistake. You are I am, and everyone else on here is.

Go ahead , kill the CEO's of Rothmans , Bacardi , Apotex, SmithKline, cuz ya know, they are all worthless.

Point is, it is immaterial what he was. You may not like, I may not like it, so go ahead and get him busted if that is your bent.

Poor baby girl got herself in a mess. Dumb daddy kills boyfriend , so now we have two families lives ruined, dad is in pound me in the ass house, a mother grieves her son , and the daughter , well hopefully she lives a nice long life with her guilt.

[Fortunata]

I would think that the father would have to be pretty desperate as killing someone is a pretty desperate act. He must have felt that he had no other way to protect his daughter. I'm not condoning what he did but I can see where he felt it was either his daughter's life or the boyfriends life. I know premeditation has been defined earlier here but I still feel that this father did not lay awake at night thinking about how he was going to kill the boyfriend and get away with it. To me that would have been premeditation. That something happened in his brain, and without rationalizing it, dad just went ahead and did it meant it was a crime of passion.

It's nice to be able to sit in our nice safe homes or offices with our children safely where they are supposed to be and discuss this case in that light. What if your child were in the same situation? What are your legal options? How impotent does a person have to be legally to make a similar decision? Our laws and our systems do not keep people safe, all it does is allow people to be held accountable after the fact. What good will that do after someone is hooked on drugs, in jail or dead? We'd be better off if we had the ability to do something beforehand.

[guyser]

I know premeditation has been defined earlier here but I still feel that this father did not lay awake at night thinking about how he was going to kill the boyfriend and get away with it. To me that would have been premeditation. That something happened in his brain, and without rationalizing it, dad just went ahead and did it meant it was a crime of passion.

What if your child were in the same situation? What are your legal options? How impotent does a person have to be legally to make a similar decision?

What good will that do after someone is hooked on drugs, in jail or dead? We'd be better off if we had the ability to do something beforehand.

I happen to think that he did exactly that , well maybe not lie awake at night, but in his own words and agreed statement, he did go into the basement , load a gun with bullets , and drove to his daughters apartment.That means he wanted to have deadly force with him.

If he wanted to scare the boy, why the bullets?

If it were my child I would be beside myself. I would worry, fret , lose weight and be miserable. The kid is 16, not much you can do with a determined 16 yr old.

What I would NOT do is go and commit murder. Nope, not gonna happen. FOr me to do so would mean my daughter is in immediate danger of dying, and this does not present itself here.

Your last sentence, "What good will that do after someone is hooked on drugs, in jail or dead?" Well, what are we left with...?....but dad in jail.

[Fortunata]

guyser, the intent of my post was to show a desperate person; desperate people do things they would otherwise not do i.e. become unrational. I also pointed out that we, as non desperate people, cannot determine in a non-desperate condition how exactly we would react given the pressure that family was given. We can think we know but unless it happens to us, we cannot ascertain exactly our reaction.

I also tried to point out that the law only steps in after the fact. If we had justice we would have a solution before and not just punishment after. After doesn't help the boyfriend and it doesn't help the father. The daughter is the only winner here and at an unconscionable price.

[guyser]

guyser, the intent of my post was to show a desperate person; desperate people do things they would otherwise not do i.e. become unrational. I also pointed out that we, as non desperate people, cannot determine in a non-desperate condition how exactly we would react given the pressure that family was given. We can think we know but unless it happens to us, we cannot ascertain exactly our reaction.

I also tried to point out that the law only steps in after the fact. If we had justice we would have a solution before and not just punishment after. After doesn't help the boyfriend and it doesn't help the father. The daughter is the only winner here and at an unconscionable price.

I thought I got the gist of your post . Sorry if misread on my part.

I can sympathize with the dad, but frankly no more. He decided to end life and I could not do that without direct threat to my child or spouse. This was not the case.And fair enough on not knowing exactly but I still believe that I could not kill just because my daughter was doing some drugs. ( that and I am not a hypocrite)

The law always steps in after the fact. Always has been always will. I bet there is a ton of sympathy for the father across the country,but murder is murder. Her life was not in any imminent danger.

[Argus]

Argus, do me a favour, please compile a list of crimes you feel should be punishable by vigilante murderers. It doesn't make the father any less of a murderer because this other guy was dealing drugs.

There is no such thing as murder. There is homicide. Any deliberate act of killing another human is homicide. However, sometimes, we condone that killing. Sometimes, we say it is acceptable, in law, under certain circumstances. So get off your high moral horse, here. The fact he killed a scumbag is no big deal, morally speaking.

As for legally - and vigilantism. Vigilantism arises chiefly when the law does not act in keeping with the requirements of the citizenry. Given the stunning level of incompetence of our legal system I'm amazed there isn't more vigilantism.

Not once did I support the actions of the dealer; however, saying he gets people hooked on drugs is ridiculous.

It is, is it? Do you have any kids you care about? How about we locate a few drug dealers next door to them, where they can meet and chat every day. That okay by you?

The drug-dealer's crime should have been dealt with appropriately

But wasn't. Too bad, so sad. If the law can't do the job someone else will.

You may think community service is a reasonable penalty for an out of control murderer, but I would say he deserves life in prison. He cannot function as a rational human being in our society and thinks mowing down people is the way to solve problems. You may wish to bend this any way you'd like to justify killing, but I think he's just as much a scumbag as the dealer.

Yes, your lack of judgment is noted. Perhaps it stems from a lack of life experience. Clearly you have no children and can't imagine how you could possibly raise one which wouldn't have perfect judgment from the moment it started crawling.

Kids are vulnerable to all sorts of persuasion. Didn't we spend a ton of time pointing that out during the discussions on adults having sex with young teenagers? Kids are emotionally immature by their very nature, and driven by emotions and hormones, not common sense. That's why scumbag drug dealers ought to be locked up - or shot.

Apparently, though, your concern is with protecting the rights and safety of drug dealers, while you have little but contempt for children who don't make perfect decisions.

[Argus]

This guy was not a toker from high school dealing a little weed. He was twenty four years old, and a serious drug dealer, and he hooked a sixteen year old girl on drugs and had her move in with him. Her life was headed for the toilet had her father not intervened. In a perfect world, this guy would have been in prison and not out hurting young girls.

I don't regard removing him from society as being much of a negative.

Irrelevant. Person A killed Person B, even though Person B was not presenting an immediate threat to Person A's...person. That's murder. The character of the victim or the intentions of the killer are largely irrelevant.

Are you trying to cite legalism to ME as a justification for whether something is right or wrong?

Have I not already made myself clear on any number of occasions that I hold our legal system in absolute contempt?

I care about right and wrong, about justice, not what some soulless lawyer says.

[Argus]

what kind of a society do we live in

when did offering help to people go out the window, and get replaced by straight up elimination

people thinking that theyre God-like is dangerous, and unacceptable

the fact that a murderer is being defended on here just made me puke in my mouth a little.

Tell you what, sweetie, how about we institute a program where any time a community is having trouble with drug dealers we relocate them next door to you so you can "offer help" to them.

[Argus]

If he wanted to scare the boy, why the bullets?

The boy? You mean the twenty four year old drug dealing scum?

If it were my child I would be beside myself. I would worry, fret , lose weight and be miserable.

And clearly - do nothing about it. Great. You're a real brave person.

[Argus]

Judges have absolutely no interest in fairness or justice. And this judge ordered the jury to convict, and unfortunately, juries are selected for their dumbness. They're mostly people who have no jobs and don't read the news, so have no opinions on anything. They did what they were told, following the letter of the law.

You apparently have tremendous sympathy for drug dealers. I'm wondering why.

Not much knowledge of the court system huh? "No interest in fairness or justice" ...laughable at best , pathetic at worst. What do you think they do all day, sit in chambers and discuss with other judges how to screw things up?

I don't think judges, as a rule, have the intelligence necessary to engage in real planning. I think their massive screw ups are far less organized than that.

The judge explained the law and gave them the options.

If he ordered them to convict then he went above the law. Which is not surprising. I have noticed, over the years, that nothing gets lawyers into a state of outrage more than the thought of someone abrogating what they consider to be their rights and duties. The judge was outraged that the citizen in question "took the law into his own hands" rather than leave it to a feeble, thoughtless, incompetent legal system run by soulless greedheads.

Ten years for stepping on a cockroach? Ridiculous. I think anyone on this site can, without any effort, come up with a dozen outrageous cases where vicious, cruel killers got virtually no time in prison due to the incompetence of our system and the blind stupidity of judges and lawyers.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Perhaps we would all be better off if the courts decided things on the basis of right and wrong. Maybe we should revisit the so called justice system in the interests of society. The penal system itself does little to deter crime. The court system does little to deter crime. Even our governments do little to deter crime. Is it then a stretch that some citizens will choose to take matters into their own hands?

Right and wrong, those are commonly understood judgements in this society. The problem seems to stem from our embracement of situational ethics. This lust for modification of the existing black and white judgements into an area of grey shades has been largely responsible in my opinion for the failure of society to manage a system of justice in the first place. The harsh reality is that we can only administer justice based upon our ability to pay for it. It comes down to a form of economic if not monetary consideration. How does society pay for its justice?

Some things are just wrong, and our society needs to recognize that.

[Melanie_]

As a mother of 4, I understand the desperation of wanting your children to make good choices. But I have always believed I get the first 15 years to influence them, to teach them right from wrong, and to do my best to instill my values in them. After that, I have to trust that those lessons will guide them when I'm not around to do so. This girl can't be exonerated from responsibility - partially because of her choices, one man is dead and another will spend 10 years in jail. I say partially because they made choices too.

Saying the dad is justified because he "snapped" is a truly scary statement. So is saying this was his only option. Arbitrarily killing someone can't be viewed as an option under any circumstances.

[guyser]

As a mother of 4, I understand the desperation of wanting your children to make good choices. But I have always believed I get the first 15 years to influence them, to teach them right from wrong, and to do my best to instill my values in them. After that, I have to trust that those lessons will guide them when I'm not around to do so. This girl can't be exonerated from responsibility - partially because of her choices, one man is dead and another will spend 10 years in jail. I say partially because they made choices too.

Saying the dad is justified because he "snapped" is a truly scary statement. So is saying this was his only option. Arbitrarily killing someone can't be viewed as an option under any circumstances.

And I can plainly see that there is a mother in Winnipeg rasing 4 great children. You are right, you onl;y have a certain amount of time to instill the things a child needs to advance in life. You dont say they will succeed, you say you give them what they need to succeed.

You are a good mom Melanie.

[guyser]

If he wanted to scare the boy, why the bullets?

The boy? You mean the twenty four year old drug dealing scum?

If it were my child I would be beside myself. I would worry, fret , lose weight and be miserable.

And clearly - do nothing about it. Great. You're a real brave person.

Such vitriol Argus. Wont answer the questions huh?

I can now see you want the to have your kids raised in some utopian society where there are bunnies and fairies around so your kid can have it nice. I am sorry, but it wont work out. You abdocate responsibilty with every thread you post on this issue. Got to kill the bogeyman before my 16 yr old child can make a mistake.

Lets see now...jurists are idiots , so when you are called what then? Another idiot jurist walks in the room? No no, then the system will work wonderfully because you are there. Oh man, you must be laughing by now.

"Scumbag , No big deal, morally speaking" . So now you are the arbiter of morals? This is not a case of morals, and I am sorry you cannot see that. This is a case of law where the guy was tried and convicted of murder. Whether or not you have an ounce of respect for the justice system is immaterial . Just because it doesn't agree with you , or me, does not mean it doesn't work. Lots of people are scumbags , and they dont die. So if you feel so strongly about "killing scumbags", then why aren't you out doing something about it. Why not kill the local thug who robs old ladies. Frankly you are too chicken and want to talk tough on the internet.

The phrase " boy" is right. Or call him a man, whatever floats your boat. Semantics.

She is 16, legal age to do lots of things like driving. She made the choice to take drugs. She got hooked. He never was the one to tie her up and force her into that. Dont you think she would have sung that tune at trial to help her dumb old dad? She didnt because she couldn't.

Got her hooked on drugs you say? Well you are the only one saying it. The court didn't hear that. Oh right, activist judge denied that too huh?

And yes I am a brave person. Thank you for the compliment. You see I would do anything in my power to try and get my daughter out of that predicament. Pretty much anything.....short of murder. But not you , and when my daughter gets cleaned up and out from my actions, I will then be happy to take her for coffee but unfortunately you will have to see your child on weekends , through bars. Yea , real smart of you to kill the drug dealer. Have fun for the next 20 years because I am sure as hell going to enjoy my daughters life and grandkids down the road. Be sure your daughter brings pictures to hang in your cell.