Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 1, 2014 10:06:46 GMT -5
It doesn't matter where I live- it matters what kind of street it was and the conditions. A two lane rural road at night- no freaking way- it would be pulled over as far as it could and we would be walking- period. I would be concerned about ANY driver smashing into my kids- and as far as we know alcohol was not nec. the cause of this- that's an assumption. And you are wrong about partial blame- all you do is replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver and rerun the exact same crash- who is at fault then? The people in the road or the driver?
Unfortunately we don't get to replace drunk with sober. He was drunk and the ME report states that he was DRUNK. Stop playing what if's; he was drunk driving and killed two kids in the process. This was not a rehearsal where you get to change the end with different scenarios; it was the real thing. You don't get to lessen his guilt in the accident by saying: oops, it could have been something else that caused the accident. He was driving and in control of that car that killed the two kids. Who killed him? I don't know... But not enough proof to indict the father. Too bad, don't cry me a river. And I will freely admit I am bias because a drunk driver ran over my cousin and left him to die in the streets like an animal. But hey I guess it was his fault for crossing the street at 2 AM, guilt lies with him not the drunk driver. Let's say that to his 3 children: "your daddy shouldn't have been coming from his second job at 2 AM trying to support you guys. He should have been safely in bed leaving the streets free and clear for the drunk drivers. He is at fault!" I'm so sorry for your loss. |
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 1, 2014 10:19:33 GMT -5
I don't agree about the dad being partially to blame for the accident. Maybe it wasn't the best decision, but I highly doubt he even thought about some drunk coming along and smashing his children. I don't know how it is where you live, but people push disabled automobiles around here all the time. Especially in the winter. It's not a bit unusual for people to hop out of their cars to help push out a car that is stuck in the snow. That wouldn't make them partially to blame if a drunk came along and hit them. It doesn't matter where I live- it matters what kind of street it was and the conditions. A two lane rural road at night- no freaking way- it would be pulled over as far as it could and we would be walking- period. I would be concerned about ANY driver smashing into my kids- and as far as we know alcohol was not nec. the cause of this- that's an assumption. And you are wrong about partial blame- all you do is replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver and rerun the exact same crash- who is at fault then? The people in the road or the driver?
I'm sorry. I just don't see it. Believe me. I'm about as big on "personal responsibility" as a person can get but I just can't see how the dad is partially to blame here. If we replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver, we probably don't have the accident so there is no fault...because it didn't happen. |
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 1, 2014 16:42:52 GMT -5
Pure speculation-but at least you said probably- so it could have been unpreventable- that being my point. People are killed every day by sober and alert drivers who are not faulted- and that includes people walking in the road, pushing cars, changing a tire half in the roadway, etc.
I'm sorry you don't see it either because a dark road is no place for a child to be standing in- did you not every teach your children to stay out of the street? Did you make an exception for pushing a vehicle? I doubt that.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 1, 2014 16:54:53 GMT -5
It doesn't matter where I live- it matters what kind of street it was and the conditions. A two lane rural road at night- no freaking way- it would be pulled over as far as it could and we would be walking- period. I would be concerned about ANY driver smashing into my kids- and as far as we know alcohol was not nec. the cause of this- that's an assumption. And you are wrong about partial blame- all you do is replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver and rerun the exact same crash- who is at fault then? The people in the road or the driver?
Unfortunately we don't get to replace drunk with sober. He was drunk and the ME report states that he was DRUNK. Stop playing what if's; he was drunk driving and killed two kids in the process. This was not a rehearsal where you get to change the end with different scenarios; it was the real thing. You don't get to lessen his guilt in the accident by saying: oops, it could have been something else that caused the accident. He was driving and in control of that car that killed the two kids. Who killed him? I don't know... But not enough proof to indict the father. Too bad, don't cry me a river. And I will freely admit I am bias because a drunk driver ran over my cousin and left him to die in the streets like an animal. But hey I guess it was his fault for crossing the street at 2 AM, guilt lies with him not the drunk driver. Let's say that to his 3 children: "your daddy shouldn't have been coming from his second job at 2 AM trying to support you guys. He should have been safely in bed leaving the streets free and clear for the drunk drivers. He is at fault!" I was making a point- and I absolutely get to play what if's because the man never had his day in court over the crash.
Drunk-yes, that is a fact. At fault? No evidence one way or the other has been presented. I am not interested in the indictment other than that I hope the decisions were made for the right reasons. What I have issue with is the automatic assumption that the drunk driver was at fault and for some folks deserving to be murdered-so I am playing devil's advocate. I maintain is was dumb as hell to allow children in the road like that- they could have just walked home safely and came back with some gas.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 1, 2014 17:55:50 GMT -5
Pure speculation-but at least you said probably- so it could have been unpreventable- that being my point. People are killed every day by sober and alert drivers who are not faulted- and that includes people walking in the road, pushing cars, changing a tire half in the roadway, etc.
I'm sorry you don't see it either because a dark road is no place for a child to be standing in- did you not every teach your children to stay out of the street? Did you make an exception for pushing a vehicle? I doubt that.
Yes. Mine was pure speculation - as was yours with the "substitute sober" stuff. I don't have kids so, no, I haven't taught them anything. I pushed vehicles, towed vehicles...and just about everything else you can do with a vehicle since I was old enough to understand what a 5/8 was. If you wish to blame the victim, be my guest. I find fault with the guy who was driving drunk. To each his own. |
|
ZaireinHD
Senior Associate
Joined: Mar 4, 2011 22:14:27 GMT -5
Posts: 12,407 
|
Post by ZaireinHD on Sept 7, 2014 22:18:51 GMT -5
Dad acquitted slaying of driver who killed sons linkoh come on! his two young boys was just killed by this 20 year old kid dad runs out and sees the accident, which happened near his home by the time police arrive - 20 year old kid is SHOT to death! Dad also has a gun (similar) to the gun used - which was found by police in his home Dad blood was found in 20 year olds car no body around to actually see Dad shoot this 20 year old this didn't happen in the big, busy city. sooo  somebody shot this kid to death? it wasn't the trees, the invisible man, or stray bullets flying around! but Dad was tested for firing a gun and test results were negative! (ever heard of gloves) and the time line of Dad calling cops to time of death is off
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770 
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 7, 2014 22:22:26 GMT -5
There's a previous thread on this incident, Zairein, so I'm going to move your post into that thread. The thread can be found HERE. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,919
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 7, 2014 22:45:38 GMT -5
ZaireinHD - some of your facts are wrong according to the court trial. No gun was ever found though bullets and a gun holster that would have held the specific type ofvgun which killed the man. That alone wss enough for the jury to acquit the father. The father was with the boys when the drunk driver hir the boys and the father's vehicle. I believe the father was steering the out of gas the boys were pushing home. Without a gun, the prosecuters had no case.
|
|
ZaireinHD
Senior Associate
Joined: Mar 4, 2011 22:14:27 GMT -5
Posts: 12,407
|
Post by ZaireinHD on Sept 7, 2014 23:01:33 GMT -5
During the trial, investigators testified that a bullet fragment found in Banda's car could have come from a .357-caliber gun, and that ammunition for such a gun was found in Barajas' home.
|
|
ZaireinHD
Senior Associate
Joined: Mar 4, 2011 22:14:27 GMT -5
Posts: 12,407
|
Post by ZaireinHD on Sept 7, 2014 23:08:30 GMT -5
AHH - ok TennesseerI see now that it was ammunition found at his home and NOT gun LOL so when police find the gloves they'll probably find the gun? |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,919
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 7, 2014 23:15:22 GMT -5
AHH - ok TennesseerI see now that it was ammunition found at his home and NOT gun LOL so when police find the gloves they'll probably find the gun? Not sure gloves had anything to do with the case nor can authorities try the father again in court for murder, ZaireinHD. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:51:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2014 0:34:04 GMT -5
Worthy of note: "Not guilty" is NOT "Innocent".
Maybe he did it... maybe he didn't do it, and it's just a coincidence that a similar caliber weapon to one he had supplies for was used. He doesn't have to prove his innocence, they have to prove his guilt. If he did it, I'm sorry he got away with it... but the system worked like it's supposed to.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Sept 8, 2014 2:48:51 GMT -5
crime of passion. voluntary manslaughter with time off for good behavior. next?  Just as a side note..."near Alvin, about 30 miles southeast of Houston." Nolan Ryan has a ranch in Alvin... Back to the case...with out a witness, weapon..it seems it would be a hard case to prove...that the accused would leave his son in the road ..one died at the hospital..to go to the house to get weapon seems a far fetch though in a case like this strange things could happen..If they did have definite evidence and I was on the jury , I would lean toward a $1.00 fine and a hour in lock up as a sentence... The driving under the influence got to me... |
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 8, 2014 19:02:41 GMT -5
Ahh- another person that assumes the cause of this crash was driving drunk- ok then, a $1 fine for murder.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,914
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 8, 2014 19:19:26 GMT -5
Doesn't cause either issue with me. I'm assuming he really didnt have time to do it but if he did, I'm glad he got away with it. You want justice? Don't depend on the legal system to give it to you.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 8, 2014 21:10:23 GMT -5
Doesn't cause either issue with me. I'm assuming he really didnt have time to do it but if he did, I'm glad he got away with it. You want justice? Don't depend on the legal system to give it to you. i've actually had pretty good luck with the justice system as a victim, and i had a good experience as a juror. what's your beef? |
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,914
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 8, 2014 21:49:40 GMT -5
My beef is that drink drivers that kill should
Be charged with premeditated murder. That pedophiles should never ever be released. The list goes on.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 8, 2014 21:55:12 GMT -5
My beef is that drink drivers that kill should Be charged with premeditated murder. That pedophiles should never ever be released. The list goes on. ok. but that doesn't really mean the whole system sucks, right? just parts of it. i dunno, zib. fine. i see your point. i just think you tend to throw babies out with bathwater, as a general POV. |
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 9, 2014 0:43:37 GMT -5
Of course there has been no evidence that the drunk driver was at fault in this accident.......
Don't know how much faith I can have in the system when there are so many people that know the facts before they are presented and are willing to excuse a murder.
Guess if someone is going to drive after drinking they might as well drive armed too just in case they need to defend themselves. I'm sure the NRA would be on board with it- and in fact legal in some places. |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Sept 9, 2014 2:51:10 GMT -5
It doesn't matter where I live- it matters what kind of street it was and the conditions. A two lane rural road at night- no freaking way- it would be pulled over as far as it could and we would be walking- period. I would be concerned about ANY driver smashing into my kids- and as far as we know alcohol was not nec. the cause of this- that's an assumption. And you are wrong about partial blame- all you do is replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver and rerun the exact same crash- who is at fault then? The people in the road or the driver?
I'm sorry. I just don't see it. Believe me. I'm about as big on "personal responsibility" as a person can get but I just can't see how the dad is partially to blame here. If we replace drunk driver with sober and alert driver, we probably don't have the accident so there is no fault...because it didn't happen. For all those oputting blame on the father having the boys help him push the car home..the 100 yards or so...While we don't know the whole story and facts as long as we are surmising. just possible this family can't afford a service like AAA..possible the car is the only transportation for the family..father needs for work..possible if car is disabled father knows how to fix himself.or has close relative who knows how..only way to afford to keep running..Car being so close to home and possible on a down grade it might not have been such a effort to push it home..All are possibilities.. Fact is, according to the report , the driver of the car hitting the kids was intoxicated over legal limits and had no business being on the road driving..it was his fault the kids were killed..As far as the father of the boys doing something to the intoxicated one..will need more to convict him of killing the one who was shot... |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Sept 9, 2014 2:56:19 GMT -5
Ahh- another person that assumes the cause of this crash was driving drunk- ok then, a $1 fine for murder.
Your suggesting the dead kids ran out into the road in front of the car being driven by the one who was intoxicated..?? My suggesting of how I would want the father of the kids killed . if it was proved that he was the one who did the shooting, treated is if proved guilty there should be a punishment and my suggestion , for me, kind of fits the crime...If not for you then you could offer your own suggestion..there is nothing stopping you... |
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 9, 2014 11:23:03 GMT -5
For all those oputting blame on the father having the boys help him push the car home..the 100 yards or so...While we don't know the whole story and facts as long as we are surmising. just possible this family can't afford a service like AAA..possible the car is the only transportation for the family..father needs for work..possible if car is disabled father knows how to fix himself.or has close relative who knows how..only way to afford to keep running..Car being so close to home and possible on a down grade it might not have been such a effort to push it home..All are possibilities.. Fact is, according to the report , the driver of the car hitting the kids was intoxicated over legal limits and had no business being on the road driving..it was his fault the kids were killed..As far as the father of the boys doing something to the intoxicated one..will need more to convict him of killing the one who was shot... That would be me I guess- and I am not saying who was at fault. I am saying being over the limit is not and never has been proof of fault in an accident- a factor sure- and so is being in a roadway with a dead vehicle. So no- it is not nec. his fault at all. If he hadn't been drinking it wouldn't have happened, and if the dad spent an extra .50 on the last fill up it wouldn't either- irrelevant. Fact is- the person allegeded to have shot him 1) Had no way of determining whether the driver was over the limit 2) Had no way of determining the cause the accident So what some of you are doing is using information gathered after the fact to justify actions that were taken in a fit of rage when you don't have a leg to stand on. Worse is some have said you would willingly violate your oath as a juror based on the same lack of evidence. That is very troubling. |
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,914
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 9, 2014 17:40:46 GMT -5
Oh, well, I would have zero trouble with it or even sleeping at night. You want justice? You have to do it yourself.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,914
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 9, 2014 17:41:26 GMT -5
No one is going to hurt or kill my loved ones and get away with the slap on the wrist.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 9, 2014 19:48:37 GMT -5
would you have trouble with it if you were wrong?
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 9, 2014 20:44:50 GMT -5
I posed the question before what if he had shot a sober driver- and it was tossed aside because 'it wouldn't have happened' and I say bullshit because people are killed by sober drivers daily- children too. That's dodging a very simple question.
What bothers me is this mindset that as long as the person killed, be it a drunk driver, a cigar stealing youth has some flaw then no problem. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 9, 2014 20:58:38 GMT -5
I posed the question before what if he had shot a sober driver- and it was tossed aside because 'it wouldn't have happened' and I say bullshit because people are killed by sober drivers daily- children too. That's dodging a very simple question.
What bothers me is this mindset that as long as the person killed, be it a drunk driver, a cigar stealing youth has some flaw then no problem. here is reality: people are wrongly convicted EVERY DAY. some for minor offenses, some for major. in the major offense cases, a jury was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that they were guilty as charged, even though they were NOT. i am having a lot of difficulty figuring out what would be an absolutely certain case. preponderance of evidence? nope. confession? not as far as i am concerned. witness accounts? you must be joking. no, i can't think of a single standard OR set of standards that would guarantee guilt. and therefore, given the fact that some innocents will be killed, i cannot condone a system which kills innocents. i have seen the justifications that others here make, i just don't agree with them. the great thing is that when i retire, i won't have to deal with this question any more. virtually every place i am thinking of moving banned the practice long ago. |
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Sept 9, 2014 21:12:49 GMT -5
Think that was to the other thread
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:51:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 21:29:00 GMT -5
Think that was to the other thread Actually... I think it kind of fits on either thread... considering the subject of this thread is a murder case. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 9, 2014 21:38:38 GMT -5
Think that was to the other thread Actually... I think it kind of fits on either thread... considering the subject of this thread is a murder case. i view this as a death penalty thread. sorry if it seems out of place. |
|
