# Kidnap-Rapist-Murderer stopped by legally armed citizen!



## AC_Pilot (Jan 21, 2005)

Sad breaking story.. but at least the crazy was stopped. Unfortunately he is still alive but at least he's under arrest. My prayers go out to the (deceased) young lady and her family. Too bad she was not well-armed and ready:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145053,00.html


----------



## 7starmantis (Jan 21, 2005)

Yeah, my sifu is at one of the TV stations right now doing an interview about womens sefl defense because of this. A buddy of mine knows the girls father and they were holding a donation this morning for a higher reward for her before thye found her. 

We are doing a free Womens Self Defense Class this next week in light of this.

7sm


----------



## Jerry (Jan 21, 2005)

I could not find where the article indicated that the person who shot him was legally armed. Nor can I find indication tha tbeing armed would have helped the murder victim (as it sounds as though she was unaware of him until she was hit). 

Honestly, I have no reason to dimiss the thought that she was armed and it was her firearm that she was shot with. All the article seems to say is "she was shot and killed", "he was shot by someone else during a failed robbery".


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 21, 2005)

She was not armed.. Texas law provides (wrongly, it should be 16 IMO) only for those over 21 to obtain a concealed carry lisc... and the scumbag was carrying a bag around, so he had the weapon in the bag or under his coat. Wal Mart has a twisted policy against employees being armed even when returning to their car in the lot, and you can bet they will face a huge lawsuit over this, lack of protecting their employees while dis-arming them.. I will not shop at Wal-Mart for this reason.

The RV park attendant was most certainly legally armed.. in *AZ* open carry of a loaded weapon requires no permit, nor does possession at one's business. And CCPs are easily obtained by any law abiding citizen.

I could tell you of several times my lady has used a handgun in self defense.. and myself at least 6 times. This does require a person to be alert and see the threat coming.. if the victim is in *bunny rabbit condition white* and is not paying attention, a rotary grenade launcher won't help.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jan 21, 2005)

There's not going to be a lawsuit over this, her being armed really isn't the issue. Now you can bet a change in policy about where employees park is in order, but we are forgetting that the ******* in this scenario is not Wal Mart, its the attacker who is now in custody. How in the world could a place like Wal Mart let its employees carry guns in the store? Thats just asking for trouble. 

You have fired your weapon in self defense 6 times? And your lady many times as well? Wow, maybe you guys should start hanging out somewhere different!  

Oh, what is "bunny rabbit condition white"?

7sm


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 21, 2005)

AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> She was not armed.. Texas law provides (wrongly, it should be 16 IMO) only for those over 21 to obtain a concealed carry lisc... and the scumbag was carrying a bag around, so he had the weapon in the bag or under his coat. Wal Mart has a twisted policy against employees being armed even when returning to their car in the lot, and you can bet they will face a huge lawsuit over this, lack of protecting their employees while dis-arming them.. I will not shop at Wal-Mart for this reason.
> 
> The RV park attendant was most certainly legally armed.. in *AZ* open carry of a loaded weapon requires no permit, nor does possession at one's business. And CCPs are easily obtained by any law abiding citizen.
> 
> I could tell you of several times my lady has used a handgun in self defense.. and myself at least 6 times. This does require a person to be alert and see the threat coming.. if the victim is in *bunny rabbit condition white* and is not paying attention, a rotary grenade launcher won't help.


I guess we can mark part of the problem up to poor marksmanship on the part of the RV Park attendant.  Had he placed his rounds better, this whole case would be wrapped up and we wouldn't have to hear about a trial. Of course he did hit the guy, so i'll give him marks for quick response and picking an appropriate force option.  Still, when a law abiding citizen shoots a dirt bag criminal, I like to hear words like "Fatal wounds" and "died at the scene".
While I disagree with CCW for 16 year olds (I barely trust them with a car) a law abiding 21 year old should be able to carry their concealed carry weapon.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 21, 2005)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> There's not going to be a lawsuit over this, her being armed really isn't the issue. Now you can bet a change in policy about where employees park is in order, but we are forgetting that the ******* in this scenario is not Wal Mart, its the attacker who is now in custody. How in the world could a place like Wal Mart let its employees carry guns in the store? Thats just asking for trouble.
> 
> You have fired your weapon in self defense 6 times? And your lady many times as well? Wow, maybe you guys should start hanging out somewhere different!
> 
> ...


I'll field "bunny rabbit condition white".  That's the state of being where a UFO could land 100 yards from you, and you wouldn't even notice it because you're lost in your own little world, oblivious to your surroundings.  It's where most people live their lives.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 21, 2005)

We agree on everything sgtmac, except one.. if they are responsible enough to drive a 2,500 lb piece of deadly machinery on the street with lots of innocent motorcyclists, pedestrians, car drivers, then they should be safe with a concealed handgun. It's a matter of discipline and in the old days a 16 year old was a man or woman. The problem is a lack of Spartan discipline. I would never allow a daughter to be out there in a car driving around without full self defense training and being armed..at minimum with pepper spray but if she was mature and able, a small full caliber pistol.

There may be a lawsuit in one of these cases in the near future and it's going to be a big blow to the anti-companies because as has happenned many times, the scumbag was noticed by security, they did nothing and the company policy that disarms employees while taking no steps for their safety is denying them the basic right to life and liberty, endangering them. 

As far as employees being armed, there are many businesses that allow this and it has never been a problem.. ask any gun store that has all it's employees armed. I would never work anywhere that I could not be armed, but then I am self employed so I don't have to worry about that. My lady carries at work and it's legal and OK. It's nice to know that when she goes out to her car after work, in that dark parking lot she always has at minimum her short barrelled .357 magnum loaded with full power ammo. If it were my gal this scumbag attacked, he would be toes up in the morgue.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jan 21, 2005)

Wow


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 22, 2005)

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050122/D87P5OKO0.html

"Swindle provided little detail about the killing, but said Holden died of a gunshot wound, adding: "We have every indication that she was shot at the location where her body was found." (Texas)


Authorities said Williams kept heading west as he continued his crime spree, attempting a robbery at an Arizona RV park, but was *foiled by a store worker* who fired the shot that landed Williams in the Arizona hospital where he was treated and then taken into custody. 
"He said, 'This is robbery, I want all the money in the cash register,'" retired New York City firefighter Richie Chapman said. "And as he said  
that, he drew a weapon from underneath his shirt,           
*and I drew and fired." *(Legally concealed weapon in the hands of a citizen)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Police said Williams, a preacher's son who was discharged last year after four years as a Marine, was arrested last month in Tyler on a cocaine possession charge. He was released the same day on $2,000 bond. 

Police said Williams also was involved in an armed robbery at a convenience store in Texas on Thursday. http://apnews.myway.com/image/20050...0121180736.html?date=20050122&docid=D87P5OKO0"Something happened to my son," the suspect's mother, Pat Williams, told Dallas television station KDFW, saying he had trouble adjusting to civilian life after serving in Iraq. "Some of the things that he endured I may never know. But it changed who he is and for that I'm sorry."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AC Pilot, continuing my thoughts..
I've been saying for some time now that the Iraq invasion was  "breeding" psychopaths, who would return here to commit horrible crimes. I have a cousin who is insane and dangerous as a result of Gulf War 1, so this is nothing new to me.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 23, 2005)

I think alcohol purchasing and handgun carrying are a better comparison than a driver's license. Even so, most states have graduated licenses now, recognizing the shear number of teenagers dying in car crashes.  I doubt you'd like your daughter and her friends to be able to buy alcohol at 16.  At the same time, I doubt you'd like one of her girlfriends drunken 16 year old boyfriends to have a .357 tucked in his pants whenever he gets in a fight with another drunken 16 year old.  

I was 16 once, and if we had concealed weapons we'd have used them just like we jumped off bluffs, raced cars and did other things we never thought would come back to haunt us.  Your assessment about the lack of Spartan discipline is correct, but that doesn't change the fact that there is not such discipline in the world today, and kids are not grown adults at 16 years of age.  I figure, if you made it to 21 without a felony conviction, you're probably responsible enough to carry a gun.  I don't want 16 year old kids carrying concealed weapons.  I don't care if you as a grown adult do, because there's a difference between you and a 16 year old kid.  

That's just my opinion, and we can politely disagree on that one point.  Other than that, though, we're pretty much in agreement.


----------



## BrandiJo (Jan 23, 2005)

i think if she had requested scurity to walk her out she would have been fine, i have never carried a gun, nor do i plan to. I do how ever request walk outs with the store scurity and carry peper spray stuff at all times. I dont think a gun would have saved her life, i think if she had one it may have been used on her.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 23, 2005)

BrandiJo said:
			
		

> i think if she had requested scurity to walk her out she would have been fine, i have never carried a gun, nor do i plan to. I do how ever request walk outs with the store scurity and carry peper spray stuff at all times. I dont think a gun would have saved her life, i think if she had one it may have been used on her.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well Brandijo, we will never know because Megan Leann Holden is _dead_.. how could it have been _worse_ if she attempted to defend herself with a handgun? At least she would possibly not have had to endure being _beaten/tortured and raped_ before dying. Lots of people successfully defend themselves with handguns on the street every day in America.. the ratio of survival/success is _several hundred to one _when a citizen uses a handgun in self defense according to John Lott's studies http://www.johnrlott.com/ There won't always be security guards everywhere you go in life, I assure you. _*You*_ are responsible for your personal safety, not the police or a security guard. In addition, if that security guard is not armed with a suitable handgun and very capable and alert, he might be laying in the parking lot dying from gunshot wounds while the madman kidnapper-rapist murderer is driving away with *you. *You don't always get a second chance in this life and my lady and I will not entrust a stranger, even a well-intentioned one, with our personal safety. I am so happy my lady _wanted _to be armed after a few scary experiences when she was younger..if only you _knew what we have seen in our 44 years on this planet_. She was always pro gun because her parents raised her right and were level headed folks. G-d has been kind to them in return and they are almost 90 yrs and still together and mobile/active. My Susan is an excellent combat pistol shot (Her weapons are revolvers, .357 Magnums and .38 Special snub nosed back ups) and she is quite profecient with her AR15 rifles as well. I have no doubt she and not the psycho would have left that parking lot, were she the intended victim.. her main carry weapon (.357 magnum) has a 94% chance of dropping a bad guy with one solid hit. She is always aware and ready, and gorgeous, too 
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
_SGTmac, we'll agree that many of today's young men and women are utter fools and that is the fault of their *parents*. Young adults should not be *allowed *to roam around acting like children, getting into trouble.. they should be part time employed and kept busy preparing for full adulthood. In the not-so-distant past this "liscence to be immature and irresponsible" was not the norm and an average 16 year old was fully able to bear an arm for self defense. Stay at home moms policed the young folks and when dad got home justice was served if needed. This was how it was in my home, thank G-d. Please don't lump them into one box, my friend. I began working as a man at 13, after school and during the summers, Moved out of the house and had my own new motorcycle at 16, (I paid for it) and paid for my own musclecar (1969 SS camaro) at 18, as an example. I paid my own way thru college and I thank my father every day that he did not coddle me, but instead was quite tough on me..Spartan justice. That was real love. As long as I kept busy I did not have time for trouble. Again, I thank my father, who made sure I was employed and busy. Those ethics are now a part of my personal code of honor..it sickens me to see 14 year old young men in my neighborhood skateboarding around and acting like Bart Simpson, wasting their lives and becoming emotionally stunted degenerates. And young females having sex at 14 when they should not even be able to be alone with a boy at that age, and they *should *have been taught that *virtue* is the most important thing any girl can possess, to give to her husband at marriage as the ultimate gift. (so that goes for the boys also, the girls are the *gateway,* however, if they properly say *"NO!", *it won't happen and the boys naturally will learn how it goes) Yes, I'm "old fashioned" and proud of it. :supcool: _

_There are several states such as Arizona (Where this potential serial killer was stopped by an armed citizen) that issue CC permits to 18 year olds.. they don't seem to have a problem with that, nor do I. IMO all rights and adulthood should come at one time, say 16 or 18, and at that time you can obtain a : Driver's lisc, be drafted, marry who you choose, and have full RKBAs, etc.. it's hypocrisy to draft a young person at 18, send them off to possibly die and therefore never have a life, and tell them when on leave they cannot carry a pistol for self defense. Regards, Steve in Washington State._


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 23, 2005)

I'll wait for the FOX Special ... 

*"When Marines Go Bad"*​


----------



## BrandiJo (Jan 23, 2005)

I am not anti gun, i know how to use every gun my dad and bro owns, and maybe yes she might have had better luck had she had a gun, but a gun is by no means going to give her a 100% survivle rate.  You are right there wont always be scrity or gaurds, not that i really like trusting my self to a totaly stranger, but not every place lets you carry guns, my college that i attend dont, were my dad works dont, were my mom works dont, sometimes laws prevent us from doing what we want to do so we should also accept other ways of protection other then a gun.  I am sorry for the poor girls family, and im glad the SOB who killed her in is in jail right now and i hope he lives to stand a fair trial and goes to prision for a long time, but i dont wish him dead, because sometimes life is worse then death.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 23, 2005)

Brandijo,

Yes there are times even when one is armed (and I almost always am) that unarmed response is best.. I have been in several unarmed fights when I was armed and I did not pull my gun. But then I am a seasoned and trained fighter and few people are. Again, the ratio is hundreds to one positive outcome when a citizen pulls a defensive handgun.. that's pretty strong odds and I personally have done so 6 times without any harm to me or those I was defending. I could tell you hair curling stories but will spare you for now. My lady has done so twice, same result. We are batting 1000 right now. 

The scumbag in Texas, will, thankfully be convicted of capitol crimes, and Texas is *very very* likely to execute him. Good riddance and all I can say is it's too bad we don't have the old style "get a rope" public hanging executions as intimidation against others contemplating such actions. Be safe, Steve


----------



## shesulsa (Jan 23, 2005)

From the article:



> The apparent abductor  a man in a long, dark coat  was seen loitering around the front entrance of the store "for a good period of time," Tyler police spokesman Don Martin said. The man was also seen on tape about 90 minutes before the abduction, emerging from a bathroom and walking around inside the store.
> 
> The tape later shows Holden getting into her truck and the man "running up behind her and either hitting her or pushing her," Martin said.


In another article, the reporter writes that security asked the man what he was doing there and he reported he was waiting for a ride.

So my questions are these: 

Why allow anyone to enter the store carrying a duffle bag?

His behavior was clearly suspicious - why was he not more carefully watched?

When I worked retail security briefed us on procedures and always told us that if we needed to be walked to our vehicles to ask for escort and they would gladly oblige - why is asking security, when available, for escort a bad thing?

Sounds to me (though it is not the fault of the security officers on duty that evening that this girl was abducted, tortured, raped and killed) that perhaps they might have called the police to let them do their job and escort the man off the premises. I think they could have done more, but then again, a security officer's main concern is the client's property, not necessarily those on it. And we can keep blaming victims for being victims if we want, but that is pointless drivel and just plain wrong.

Ah, if only all the crimes in the world could be solved and paid for with, oh, say ... two or four plugs.


----------



## bayonet (Jan 23, 2005)

Hopefully the hammer will fall on this scumbag.


----------



## ghostdog2 (Jan 23, 2005)

_i think if she had requested scurity to walk her out she would have been fine, i have never carried a gun, nor do i plan to. .. I do how ever request walk outs with the store scurity _Posted_ bj Brandijo_

Maybe, just maybe, you're safe with the security guard because the sec. guard is carrying a gun.


----------



## shesulsa (Jan 23, 2005)

Most security guards are not allowed to carry guns nor tazers without special certification.  Most one-stop shopping stores do not contract armed security for anything but transporting deposits to the bank.  But the guard may have pepper spray or extendable baton - the presence alone might ... MIGHT ... have made a difference.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 23, 2005)

_However_, what _*did *_stop him, aside from conjecture, was a bullet wound from an armed citizen :mp5:


----------



## BrandiJo (Jan 23, 2005)

that is true. I hope he gets what he deserves.


----------



## Jerry (Jan 24, 2005)

A couple of points:

First: In my reading, she was surprised from behind. There is no mention of a confrontation, a fight, her running, or even her calling out. The account seems to me that she was clubed from behind and in her vehicle before she knew what was going on. She failed basic awareness of her surroundings an no blade, firearm, or grenade-launcher would have fixed that.

Second: Aremed or unarmed, an escort would have made her a less appealling target and less likely to eb attacked. Security at WalMart is generally unarmed, and it would still have been possible to take them, but it would have been less likely.

Third: Firearms work both ways. Ignoring the "draws attention" problem, I could walk to 20 ft behind you, wait till you turn to your car and shoot you in the head. You would then be dead, wheather armed or unarmed. I can do the same to armed security.

I'm glad he got shot. I advocate people learning to use and carrying fireamrs, though I doubt someone untrained to even observe her surroundings has any business with one yet. I don't think anyone here truely believes that her having a firearm would have "made it all turn out better", but many of the posts sure seem to be saying that.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 24, 2005)

BrandiJo said:
			
		

> that is true. I hope he gets what he deserves.


What he deserves is the presumption of innocence until such time as he is proven guilty before a jury of his peers. It seems that many here have already tried an convicted this person.


----------



## Jerry (Jan 24, 2005)

> What he deserves is the presumption of innocence until such time as he is proven guilty before a jury of his peers. It seems that many here have already tried an convicted this person.


 That depends pretty heavily. We here are not his jury, nor are we acting against him. We have an opinion and are entitled to it.

There comes a point where the presumption of innocence is a neccessairy formailty... and not one that "Joe on the street" needs to make, any more than the witnesses or prosecution needs to make it.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 24, 2005)

Jerry, 

Some good points above.. no weapon does you any good if you are running around on auto pilot and unaware.. this is why freaks like this guy pick the targets they do.. they have learned that intended targets like AC Pilot and his gal are aware of the attack before the bad guys can strike, and fight back without hesitation, intercepting the attack.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As to the innocence issue.. if I were on the jury I would start from scratch and give him a fair trial. The evidence, it seems, is overwhelming. But we out here at this point have only what the media and law enforcement tells us.. and at this point we are told the following basics, aside from forensic and other evidence that will come out in the trial, maybe even a confession:

1) Video cameras at Wal Mart caught the very act of this very scumbag assaulting the girl at her truck, kidnapping her (kidnapping, felony offense) 

2) Her partially clothed body was found in Texas, along a HWY that the suspect drove on the commit one robbery and another attempted robbery where he was shot by a legally armed citizen with a concealed handgun. (abduction-rape)

3) The victim of the rape and murder was found to have a gunshot wound and she is (of course) dead (Murder one)

4) The suspect can be identified as driving the murdered girl's stolen truck by numerous witnesses. In fact he drove to the hospital in it, where sadly he was patched up at taxpayer's expense. This is grand theft auto and made a federal crime I believe, by crossing interstate lines in it.

5) He is accused of at least two armed robberies

If all the above is true and comes out in court he will be found guilty by a jury of his peers, sentenced to death and executed, and rightfully so. In this case justice will be served, but delayed.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 24, 2005)

AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> As to the innocence issue.. if I were on the jury I would start from scratch and give him a fair trial.


Oh, please. Your comments in this thread belie this statement. You have already convinced yourself of this persons guilt and are set on revenging those actions with the death penalty.



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> The evidence, it seems, is overwhelming. But we out here at this point have only what the media and law enforcement tells us.. and at this point we are told the following basics, aside from forensic and other evidence that will come out in the trial, maybe even a confession:


Nothing you have presented is 'evidence'. What you have presented are statements by the police, and by the media concerning some assumed actions. Evidence is presented in a court of law.

Even though we all know that the police, and the media, never, ever tell a lie, or mislead the public.



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> 1) Video cameras at Wal Mart caught the very act of this very scumbag assaulting the girl at her truck, kidnapping her (kidnapping, felony offense)


The video tape caught someone pushing a woman into her car. To ascribe a motive; kidnapping, to that action requires more information than can be seen on a video tape. Further, the statements indicate the person pushing the woman into the car is unidentified. The article assumes it is the same person the security people questioned 90 minutes earlier.



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> 2) Her partially clothed body was found in Texas, along a HWY that the suspect drove on the commit one robbery and another attempted robbery where he was shot by a legally armed citizen with a concealed handgun. (abduction-rape)


How many people drove along that stretch of road?
What happened in the two days, and 300 plus miles between the video tape and the discovery of the body.

I will further point out that *neither of the articles presented make any statements as to rape*. It's awful nice of you to add that to the list of accusations without any supporting evidence. 



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> 3) The victim of the rape and murder was found to have a gunshot wound and she is (of course) dead (Murder one)


re: rape - see above.
Not all gunshot deaths are murder, by the way. Further, no evidence was presented (forensic or even anectdotally) that the person who pushed the woman into the car was the person who caused the gunshot wound.



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> 4) The suspect can be identified as driving the murdered girl's stolen truck by numerous witnesses. In fact he drove to the hospital in it, where sadly he was patched up at taxpayer's expense. This is grand theft auto and made a federal crime I believe, by crossing interstate lines in it.


A is driving B's car. B is dead by gunshot. Therefore, A murdered B.

There are so many flaws in that logic argument as to be laughable. 

This is a non-sequiture argument. It is not possible to determine who shot whom by what car is being driven. While it is possible the two premises are are related, they do not lead to the conclusion presented. 



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> 5) He is accused of at least two armed robberies


Accused is not the same thing as convicted. 

You are further accusing him of kidnapping, rape and murder. I am wondering why you state he is accused of 'armed robberies', but, by the title of this thread, have already determined that the detained person is a 'murderer', 'rapist', and 'kidnapper'.



			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> If all the above is true and comes out in court he will be found guilty by a jury of his peers, sentenced to death and executed, and rightfully so. In this case justice will be served, but delayed.


If all the above is true ....

If all the above is true ....

(hell, that bears repeating again)

If all the above is true ....

It seems from the posts in this thread that many have already made that determination. Some are already impatient for revenge against the accused activities.



			
				Jerry said:
			
		

> That depends pretty heavily. We here are not his jury, nor are we acting against him. We have an opinion and are entitled to it.
> 
> There comes a point where the presumption of innocence is a neccessairy formailty... and not one that "Joe on the street" needs to make, any more than the witnesses or prosecution needs to make it.


Jerry, many of the statements in this thread are, indeed, acting against him. To claim he is a rapist, without any evidence, is character assassination. To think you are not acting against him, I think is deceptive.

The presuption of innocence is there to protect all citizens, even me and you. 

Witnesses are not allowed to view the testimony of other witnesses in a trial. Prosecutors are required to present evidence of innocence if it makes itself know. These actions are required to keep the 'evidence' presented to a jury clean. 

While we are not on the jury for this trial, neither have we been exposed to the 'evidence' at that trial. Surely, we must weigh the value of our 'opinion' against the complete lack of 'evidence' we have before us.

michaeledward


----------



## Tgace (Jan 24, 2005)

All valid points, but when you put together the "facts" (or evidence such as it is) that this guy was seen in the store on video, with a grainy but similar shot of what could be the same guy pushing her into the car, and the guy shows up latter in said car, heck the guys parents are already on Good Morning America saying that PTSD from Iraq is what caused their son to "flip out".....I wouldnt hold out much on "CSI" twists that this guy just happened to be in the same store and somehow managed to just wind up in the dead girls car out of some bizzare twist of fate.

While its not "open and shut", I dont think its a big suprise that many people have come to judgement already.

All the same, I would think that in a crime like this there should be plenty of physical evidence. It dosent look like a well though out crime and there should be things like prints, DNA, ballistics etc. coming forth at trial.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 24, 2005)

I agree Tgace. The guy may very well be guilty as hell. But many here are already screamin' for vengence - Faster Pussycat, Kill! Kill!.

Spinning facts for their argument with the dexterity of Roger Ailes. 

I didn't see any statements in the articles posted about 'partially clothed body', but that doesn't stop this statement as being the basis for a rape accusation. Good Grief.

All while serving the 'King of Kings'. Makes me ask, 'What Would Jesus Do?' ... or as rmcrobertson would say ... 'Who Would Jesus Bomb?'


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 25, 2005)

A few points:
Don't slander my Master by insinuating He would be for Bush and his wars, please. G-d has allowed every human to evidence what they are made of, by their actions and He will judge their eternal destiny. By the evidence, Bush is in big trouble when he comes up in that judgement, but let's not further sidetrack this discussion..

If you think Jesus is against using deadly force on evildoers, or against death for them, or self defense, then you know nothing about scripture. Jesus is the Warlord and Prince of Yahweh (G-d the father) read the end of the 19th chapter of Luke, and Revelations 19

In the meantime G-d created human governments to keep the peace and sanction evildoers. The bible is clear that killing in self defense is acceptable, and so governments may do this collectively, for us. Common sense dictates that the most dangerous among us should be eliminated for the safety of the *innocent*, of which *some* folks, maybe *you*, care little it seems. The liberal's heart bleeds for vicious, monstrous Orcs, twisted violent creatures, void of decentcy or consideration for others, incapable of doing good, bent on evil.. those who are a danger to all around them. 

I won't waste my time trying to respond to the various phony arguments you made, twisting what I stated.. all I will say is that *IF* what we are being told is *presented in court*, this person will be found guilty and thankfully *executed*. If the evidence is accurate, then *more* *evidence* (forensic) will come out in the trial.. proving this person guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. You are no judge of my intents or suitability to impartially judge the facts of the case as a juror, because I have stated these points.

One more point of refutation to you..as I am busy at work today.. the dead girl *was seen being kidnapped on camera by the arrested man, according to law enforcement*.. there's *no* argument against this if true. Her *semi nude body* was discovered on the roadside, http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050122&cat=news&st=newsd87pfqj80&src=ap (Forensics will prove if she was raped and if you don't think it a 99% + *probability*, you are clueless. Genetic evidence will prove this if true) If that evidence, plus *him being found with her truck and committing violent felony crimes immediately afterwards*, is presented in court, and you still had this attitude as a juror, I certainly would definitely question *your* suitability as a juror. I certainly see that you did not care enough about this case to even look up the latest info on it. I do care and I despise creatures that can commit these acts.. such should not be allowed to walk the earth and G-d will destroy such in His judgement..as scripture clearly states. They and those who aid and abet them will not be allowed to exist in the same universe as His faithful children!


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 25, 2005)

Orcs and G-d in the same paragraph. 

Somehow, that just seems so fitting.

Oh, and the standard in a criminal case is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

And still more links with no accusation of rape.


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 25, 2005)

Michael.. I see a lot of concern from you for a probable *monster.. *where's your concern for the other potential innocent victims (if he had not been stopped by an armed citizen)  and the victim and her shocked and suffering family? G-d created Orcs and Angels, and his (temporarily) mortal children in between. This life is a test to see what we, His children, will do.. unfortunately for the vast majority, they are failing this test.. it's a *pass/fail*, with *no* in between. In a mirror of that, if a man murders, he has failed the requirements to remain alive amongst peaceable people, and government's job is to see to this. A jury will decide and they are performing a civil or government action when doing so.

If you cannot see from the evidence presented that she was 99% likely to have been *savaged and raped*, you are blind.. some people go through their entire life in this state, while others see clearly.. it's just the first part of the test.. if you cannot even see clear events and realities, you will fail. 

BTW you act out like every other *liberal*.. emotionally and with angry hate for right thinking people, inherent in your "arguments". You make personal ad hominym attacks which do not relate to the issues being discussed, in an atempt to *sidetrack the basic issue*.  This is because you *do* hate us, but more of us are realizing this and we will not back down to you or be intimidated by the shrill tone. We demand *justice* and that includes the *death penalty for convicted murderers*. I would extend it for certain types of rape, like kidnapping/rape.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

I dunno what the big issue of if this girl was raped or not is. Does it make the person who did it less of a monster if he didnt and more of one if he did? Whoever did it is a low life scumbag regardless IMO. BTW, while I havent seen any announcement that she was raped, I must admit that I wouldnt be too surprised if she was. it would just seem to "fit" in this whole ugly scene.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 25, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> I dunno what the big issue of if this girl was raped or not is.





			
				AC_Pilot Signature said:
			
		

> Happily serving the King of kings, not the traditions of men :jedi1:


Exodus 20:16

"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

Who here is presenting testimony? Or making an official false statement? Thats what "bearing false witness" means to me. Our opinions have no bearing on this guys upcoming legal issues. I dont know if this poor girl was sexually assaulted or not. It just seems like a strange issue to get sidetracked into.


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 25, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Who here is presenting testimony?





			
				AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> that she was 99% likely to have been *savaged and raped*





			
				Tgace said:
			
		

> Or making an official false statement?


I am wondering when 'official' became part of the requirements of that commandment ... seems to me that the teachings said something about even if you have violated the premise in your heart, you have committed the sin.



			
				Tgace said:
			
		

> Thats what "bearing false witness" means to me. Our opinions have no bearing on this guys upcoming legal issues. I dont know if this poor girl was sexually assaulted or not. It just seems like a strange issue to get sidetracked into.


It must suck to have the athiest presenting Christian teachings. But, I am not proclaiming that my principles follow any higher power, and then calling out actions against those principles. And it must be nice to be able to compartmentalize that 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' doesn't mean the tax collectors.

Oh well.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

Well tell me if Im wrong o' enlightened one, but I always thought that "bearing false witness" meant saying something "false" (an intentional lie) in order to get your neighbor in trouble. The old "ive got a hair up my *** about michaeledward" so Ill call his boss and tell him a lie to get him in trouble. Or "oh yes officer I saw him throwing a body in the trunk of his car". Just considering doing any to those would be a "sin of the heart".

If anybody here is "guilty" of anything its of making assumptions without any evidence. Im not claiming she was raped...just that it wouldnt surprise me if it did happen. And Id be lying to say I didnt expect to hear it.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

BTW I havent even stated a "kill him" sentiment or a pre judgement, only thats its natural, based on what weve seen/heard at this point to "think" this guy is guilty as hell. Thats a far cry from "proven".

Who dosent look at a case like this and form some opinion? Like the Peterson case. I thought "yeah, guilty as all get out". Who goes "fishing" on X-mass eve and the body "happens" to surface in the same area? However I was suprised that he got convicted on the evidence presented (what I saw of it at least). From what I saw (qualifier there), I didnt even think there was enough for an arrest. What about OJ? It is possible to separate opinion from what can be proven.

Innocent untill proven guilty is a legal standard, not an emotional one. It must be adhered to if youre a juror. It "should" be the citizens mindset too, but good luck there....


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

Just to see if I was way off base I googled "bear false witness" to see what I could find. I think Im pretty close...intentional lying with the intent to harm another.

http://www.uurockford.org/sermons/s96-11rpt.htm


----------



## michaeledward (Jan 25, 2005)

Tgace ... while normally, just about everything you say offends me (and I am sure the reverse is true too), in this case, I think we are pretty much on the same side. 

I have noticed that you have not claimed the woman was raped. But it we look at the title of the thread, that claim was made right out of the blocks. Claiming "rape", when not substantiated, is, in my unenlighted point of view, 'bearing false witness' ... somebody has got a hair across his or her *** and wants to plunge the needle deeper, faster. 

I have also noticed that you have not made a 'kill him' statement or pre-judgement. However, there are statements on this thread about how it is unfortunate we can't "get a rope" and hang him. Further, his execution would be "justice delayed". Apparently some are impatient for justice.

And, I love the fact we are now turning to the Unitarian Universalist church for guidance on the 10 Commandments. I especially like this quote from the third paragraph:


_It is clearly not now, nor has it ever been my intention to suggest that the commandments are the products of a divinely inspired supernatural act which resulted in a set of immutable laws to which we should submit._

​I wonder how our fundamentalist friends would view that statement... the 10 commandments are *not divinely inspired* .... <chuckle> .... priceless.


Yes, the 'False Witness' extends to the court of law, as the surmon states, that is widely accepted. But there are other, deeper meanings too. Of course, I don't want to get into a 'meaning or scripture' debate because we can always find links that trump each other ... but a quick look found this ... By MARTIN LUTHER (I am thinking this is from *THE* Martin Luther)

http://www.peacemakers.net/peace/notbarefalsewitness.htm


_to avoid this vice we should note that no one is allowed publicly to judge and reprove his neighbor, although he may see him sin, unless he have a command to judge and to reprove. For there is a great difference between these two things, judging sin and knowing sin. You may indeed know it, but you are not to judge it. I can indeed see and hear that my neighbor sins, but* I have no command to report it to others*. Now, *if I rush in, judging and passing sentence, I fall into a sin which is greater than his*. But if you know it, do nothing else than turn your ears into a grave and cover it, until you are appointed to be judge and to punish by virtue of your office._ 

​


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2005)

Well..I am no fundamentalist. 

That is a good link and I appreciate the deeper meaning of it. Im not so solid on the "ignore your neighbors sin" thing. For "forgiving human foibles" (adultry, gossip, and various vices, etc.) yes "but for the grace of god go I" and all of that. If you know your neighbor committed a serious crime, or is a paroled murderer, sex offender....thats different in my book. While the "judgement" thing my still apply in a religious sense (as is the point here and Yes I agree) the sermon only goes so far.


----------



## Bod (Jan 26, 2005)

AC Pilot: this has not been a 'Liberals' vs. 'Whatever the Other Side are Called' board.

Or a Gun Control vs. Gun Evangelism board.

I'd hate it to become so.

Arming all 'good' people works no better than handing out flowers to all 'evil' people. Practical solutions are required for a practical world. This is one thing that martial arts has taught me. Dividing into two camps is great if your only objective in life is to blow off steam. But life is complex.

Panaceas do not exist. A life of disciplined thought and action improves the world somewhat. This is the only thing I can be sure of. Discipline may be executing a man who we strongly believe is guilty despite his pleas. It may be killing an agressor despite our natural compunction against it. It may mean throwing out a flawed court case despite knowing the person to be bad. It may mean waiting for justice. Discipline may mean turning the other cheeck for the greater good.

But it is very difficult to judge these things in advance. Blanket judgements don't work as effectively as careful consideration of individual cases. But careful consideration takes discipline.

I respect many of your views, and the way that you seem to have come to your views. That's fine by me. But starting the whole us vs. them thing doesn't expand our knowledge. Not mine, not yours.

I'm sorry if this post sounds preachy. It is a bit. Feel free to become incensed and even upbraid me for it. I know how I'd feel after reading a post like this. But you are in my opinion too valuable a member on this board for me to flame you or hit your opinion points or something stupid like that.

Peace be with you.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jan 26, 2005)

There will be many more details that come out about this horrible incident when it gets to trial, and many of these questions will be answered. 

7sm


----------



## Gin-Gin (Jan 26, 2005)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Yeah, my sifu is at one of the TV stations right now doing an interview about womens self defense because of this.  We are doing a free Womens Self Defense Class this next week in light of this. 7sm


I'm glad your teacher did the interview & am especially glad to hear that y'all are offering a free Women's Self Defense Course, 7sm.   Hopefully more women & girls will take action after hearing about this tragedy. :asian:


----------



## 7starmantis (Jan 26, 2005)

Gin-Gin said:
			
		

> I'm glad your teacher did the interview & am especially glad to hear that y'all are offering a free Women's Self Defense Course, 7sm. Hopefully more women & girls will take action after hearing about this tragedy.


 Yeah, its really touched home for alot of people here around this area. I'm not sayin everything can be prevented, but I'm hoping women will take a more proactive stance in self defense.

 7sm


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2005)

Somebody forces you into a car, at gunpoint or otherwise...its do or die time. That mentality alone will carry you far.


----------



## INDYFIGHTER (Jan 26, 2005)

Quote: Wal Mart has a twisted policy against employees being armed even when returning to their car in the lot, and you can bet they will face a huge lawsuit over this, lack of protecting their employees while dis-arming them.. I will not shop at Wal-Mart for this reason.

I just noticed this, it may have been addressed in another post but I know our Ford plant here has a similar policy and I bet you'll find other big companies won't allow weapons in their employees cars either.  My company states it must be stored in my locked locker and unloaded if I bring it in but there is no rules on leaving it in my car.  Just FYI.

This guy who worked for Ford pointed his pistol at another driver on his way to work and the guy called the police and followed him to work.  The cops met them there where he was arrested in the Ford parking lot and when security at the lot asked what was going on the guy lost his job too.


----------



## still learning (Jan 27, 2005)

Hello, It is sad the girl die. How many times do you think the rapist(this guy may not have a record-war vet) has been in and out of jail? Mostly likely often? Studies have been done on rapist and they found they cannot be change with jail time, when release they go back to their habits (raping). America has to change the way we release people from jails,longer sentence, maybe be more death sentence for repeat offenders. FBI records shows 70% of crimes are commited by repeat offenders. Why are we letting them out? 

 Today is cost $30,000 or more to house a criminal in jail. Can we afford this and the rising cost in the future? Only in the modern times do we have such large prisons. Saw the latest newst by the supreme court?....life sentence is now equal to 45 years (now the lifers can get release in that state). Are we getting dumber?

 In Hawaii it cost the state $8,000 to teach a child and $32,000 to house a prisoner in jail.. .. and we do not have enough money to fix and improve our schools! Yet with the over crowding in the jails everyone gets early out...neat huh. They get out and do it all over again..never ending story....Aloha


----------



## AC_Pilot (Jan 31, 2005)

Yes, we as a society are getting dumber. Some of the "open minded" posts made above are evidence of the mindset leading to why we cannot even deal appropriate punishment to convicted murderers and rapists, and here is the result of our soft-mindedness..: http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050131&cat=frontpage&st=frontpageap20050131_91&src=abc


----------



## KenpoTex (Feb 1, 2005)

AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> Yes, we as a society are getting dumber. Some of the "open minded" posts made above are evidence of the mindset leading to why we cannot even deal appropriate punishment to convicted murderers and rapists, and here is the result of our soft-mindedness..: http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050131&cat=frontpage&st=frontpageap20050131_91&src=abc


That's absolutely disgusting.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 1, 2005)

AC_Pilot said:
			
		

> Yes, we as a society are getting dumber. Some of the "open minded" posts made above are evidence of the mindset leading to why we cannot even deal appropriate punishment to convicted murderers and rapists, and here is the result of our soft-mindedness..: http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050131&cat=frontpage&st=frontpageap20050131_91&src=abc


AC_Pilot ... why do you have this fascination with rape? Have you spoken to any professionals about it? This is the third story you have posted with claims about 'rape' where there are none.

Man, you have got to get some help with that.

Sincerely, Mike


----------

