Opinion: Does an angry parent killing a child molester ever serve justice?

What do you think of a man who has been charged with killing an unarmed man? Inexcusable, right? Now, would it change your mind if the dead man had molested a child and the accused shooter was the child’s father?

All right, here’s more information: The molestation happened a dozen years ago. Finally, would it change your thinking to know the dead man had already served time in prison for the crime and paid restitution? Opinion Piece

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It should be perfectly clear to anyone who doesn’t believe in, and recognizes the danger of double standards that it is a crime to murder anyone for any reason; especially if they have served time and/or paid restitution. It’s highly disturbing that the court is even considering anything other than premeditated murder against the man who murdered Raymond Earl Brooks in cold blood; Jay Maynor.

The fact that Brooks was a registrant who served his time, and paid restitution, and presumably led a law abiding life upon release. If he continued any kind of criminal conduct you can rest assured the press would have been all over that; like flies on sh*t.

Ellie Nesler; the drug addict committed premeditated murder too, and should have been charged accordingly. The fact that she wasn’t and is now free sends a dangerous message and is as close to giving consent for vigilantism / murder as one can get, and the judge that participated in this poor excuse for justice should have been held accountable; but he wasn’t.

I have never touched a child and have never been inclined to do so, yet I’m a registrant and fully aware that most people could care less about the particulars of anyone’s individual case; especially if they are intent of murdering a “sex offender.” I have a variety of defensive tools placed about the property where I live, and they are all legal. Should anyone ever come on to the property where I reside with the intention of murdering me they will be in for a very big surprise; (unless they shoot me with a long range rifle), and I would do everything humanly possible to make sure they could never attempt to murder again. If anyone thinks I’m extreme just take a look at this site and you will no longer wonder why I consider the passive “that only happens to other people” crowd careless with their own life.


Then look around this site for even more instances of registrants being murdered after they have paid their debt to society. The courts and police can not / will not / do not protect us; the fact of the matter is it is the system that places our very lives in danger. We do not get justice. If anyone doesn’t recognize this fact then they are indeed blind to the truth of their situation.

Yes; I get pi**ed every time something like this happens.

Note: the article requires subscription, so only the first couple of paragraphs can be read. Can someone summarize the article, including the gist of the author’s own bias? Thanks.

How about an angry parent helping to create and pass laws against offenders who never touched his/her child?? Maybe never touched any child.

For those having trouble getting more than a few paragraphs here’s what you need to know. The opinion piece questions whether or not vigilante justice is justice at all. Using the recent Alabama case as a foreground and other prominent examples from previous years as a background in showcasing the different times where vigilante justice was applied, but sometimes not seen as criminal by the law and other times prosecuted with (public supporters) leaning favor of the vigilante rather than the law. In the end the author wonders how the justice system in the United States can be upheld when certain individuals take it upon themselves to circumvent the system in favor of their own brand of so called justice.

The short answer to the question is a resounding no, the actions of the angry don’t serve justice.

Justice will be the father getting convicted of 1st degree murder. Maybe he weighed the “one man’s justice” idea against the justice system and decided it was worth it…as we all know all too well:you can’t stop someone intent on committing a crime. I’m not saying I condone his actions, but I understand. Sad to say it, but at least he didn’t go on a crusade to drive the steamroller of the system over every offender by turning his daughter into a poster child of victimhood. Maybe, in the interest of jurisprudence, we should disarm and monitor everyone who’s ever had a loved one victimized to keep this from happening again.

In my opinion, this man should be convicted of 1st degree murder and spend the rest of his life behind bars (I don’t believe in the death penalty for anyone – period). This was a well-written op-ed.