Jury acquits father in shooting death of drunk driver

[d2mini]

Originally Posted by Mandres

Let's be clear here people. This wasn't a question of whether this shooting was justified - it wouldn't have been. This was a question of whether this man did the shooting. He was acquitted because there wasn't enough evidence that he pulled the trigger. His defense argued that it wasn't him.

My concern with the way this has been reported is that less-informed people are going to hear about this acquittal and assume it's now legal to kill someone in blind rage.

I think pretty much everyone understands the fact that there wasn't enough evidence to convict.
And if you ask the jurors, I bet nearly everyone of them would admit that they think he did it. Just not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

But you can't help asking yourself what you would do if you were in his shoes.
I don't own a gun, but I probably would have beat him to death right there on the spot with no regrets.
At least that's what I say without actually being in his shoes. Nobody should have to fill those shoes.

[14Bricks]

Originally Posted by d2mini

I think pretty much everyone understands the fact that there wasn't enough evidence to convict.
And if you ask the jurors, I bet nearly everyone of them would admit that they think he did it. Just not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

But you can't help asking yourself what you would do if you were in his shoes.
I don't own a gun, but I probably would have beat him to death right there on the spot with no regrets.
At least that's what I say without actually being in his shoes. Nobody should have to fill those shoes.

I think he did it, or at least knows who did it. But when you don't have the murder weapon, no witnesses, and no gun powder residue on his hands, its kinda hard to convict a guy.

[jerbear30]

Originally Posted by Mandres

Let's be clear here people. This wasn't a question of whether this shooting was justified - it wouldn't have been. This was a question of whether this man did the shooting. He was acquitted because there wasn't enough evidence that he pulled the trigger. His defense argued that it wasn't him.

My concern with the way this has been reported is that less-informed people are going to hear about this acquittal and assume it's now legal to kill someone in blind rage.

This WAS a question of whether the shooting was justified. The law is never, ever what it says it's about.

[Mandres]

Originally Posted by jerbear30

This WAS a question of whether the shooting was justified. The law is never, ever what it says it's about.

Wrong. If the father had confessed to pulling the trigger he would be in prison right now.

There is no question that going home to get a gun, returning to the scene and shooting someone execution style is murder. There is no ambiguity in the law. All of this speculation about what would we have done in the same situation makes for good discussion comments but is completely irrelevant in the eyes of the law. I think it's important that people understand this. Our personal feelings about whether or not we sympathize with the shooter make no difference in court. Vigilante justice is illegal, period.

The drunk driver was murdered in cold blood. There's no debate about that fact. There was simply not enough evidence to prove that the father was the murderer. The prosecutors should never have brought the case to trial.

[Terr]

It's obvious he did it. I mean come on, deserted rural road, at night, with a horrific accident, and just by an incredible coincidence an unknown and unnoticed killer comes by, with no motive, and kills the drunk driver? The only thing that would make it more ridiculous is if Barajas would now announce that he will dedicate his life to looking for the man who killed Banda.

I have a feeling, though, that the lack of evidence that allowed the jury to have "reasonable doubt" was engineered. As in "let's not look very hard for the weapon". Or "maybe Barajas should wash his hands, they're a bit dirty"...

That said, Banda got what was coming to him.

[Mandres]

That's the problem with the way this story was reported. Every media outlet presented it as a proven fact that Barajas did the shooting so that's the point all of the armchair analysts are starting from.

I think it's a lot more likely his wife or another family member pulled the trigger.

[elleari]

I always feel good when I read about the death of a drunk driver, thief, burglar, etc. It's especially good that the alleged triggerman in this case isn't going to serve any time for doing society a favor.

[Oildog]

Originally Posted by jerbear30

This WAS a question of whether the shooting was justified. The law is never, ever what it says it's about.

Not even close, this is ignorant.

For better or worse, its about producing enough evidence to support your claims or charges.

[Oildog]

Originally Posted by Mandres

Wrong. If the father had confessed to pulling the trigger he would be in prison right now.

There is no question that going home to get a gun, returning to the scene and shooting someone execution style is murder. There is no ambiguity in the law. All of this speculation about what would we have done in the same situation makes for good discussion comments but is completely irrelevant in the eyes of the law. I think it's important that people understand this. Our personal feelings about whether or not we sympathize with the shooter make no difference in court. Vigilante justice is illegal, period.

The drunk driver was murdered in cold blood. There's no debate about that fact. There was simply not enough evidence to prove that the father was the murderer. The prosecutors should never have brought the case to trial.

Agree. Prosecutors should have considered a lesser charge since they lacked evidence.

[trele6]

I truly wonder if he did it. It would have required a lot of planning on his part to be "residue" free after firing a gun, hiding it, all while it a fit of rage/impromptu murder. Just think about it, people plan out murders for weeks sometimes and they easily get caught. This guy had minutes only to plan it and pulled off the perfect crime??? I don't think he is that clever. I will second the thought that he probably knows who did it though, but I don't think he pulled the trigger.