4-27-17 Alabama:Most parents would do anything to protect their children from pain, including literally laying down their lives.
Fortunately, most parents never find their resolve tested by being put in that position, but Jay Maynor did. By saving his daughter from a traumatic ordeal, Maynor literally gave up forty years of his life, and the world thinks that this is too high of a price to pay for his actions.
Was what Jay Maynor did irresponsible and inexcusable vigilante justice? Or did he do what any other parent might do if they were in his shoes, actions for which the punishment should be significantly less?
Read on and decide for yourself. ...Continued.. by Editorial Board
1 comment:
I would argue Maynor's actions were inexcusable vigilantism. A confrontation, maybe a beat-down might be warranted, but his daughter's otherwise unproven claim supported only by his victim's previous and presumably unrelated offense (which he must have known about) don't justify killing him.
The idea that all accusations are factual with regard to sex offenses these days is increasingly problematic, particularly when they aren't reported or mentioned for years and years after they allegedly occurred. How proponents of the current system of accepting mere allegations as fact regarding sex offenses without requiring something to support them is a system begging to be abused.
For all we know, Maynor may have had to take the plea to avoid having his daughter testify that she made the whole thing up and therefore killed Brooks for no reason at all.
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated, please keep to the issue of the post, as we are trying to have an intelligent, relevant discussion which develops the post. Much appreciated.