Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

tridim

(45,358 posts)
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 04:12 PM Aug 2013

SCUT FARKUS NOT GUILTY IN SHOOTING DEATH OF LIL RALPHIE PARKER UNDER INDIANA STAND YOUR GROUND LAW


Evidence Suggests Ralphie Was Straddling, Striking Defendant When Farkus Shot Out Boy’s Eye, Brains

HOHMAN, Ind. – Scut Farkus, the so-called “yellow-eyed bully” accused of murdering Ralphie Parker, was found not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter Thursday afternoon.

The verdict marks the end of a legal saga which had gripped the country since last December when the tragedy was first reported in the national press, and televisions across the nation were filled with little else but the story of little Ralphie Parker throughout the holiday season.


Farkus all smiles after verdict

At the time of those initial reports, the incident was widely thought to be a clear cut murder case — a fight provoked by a bully which ended in the tragic, inexplicable shooting death of his victim, Ralphie Parker, a boy who was just trying to walk home.


Young Ralphie Parker

As the prosecution put it: “Farkus had been following Ralphie all over town, making him feel unwelcome and uneasy in his own neighborhood; all Ralphie wanted to do was get to get to his house unmolested.”

Further supporting the impression that Farkus provoked an altercation with Ralphie was the widely reported fact that the older boy had been asked to break off his pursuit of young Parker.

Much more... http://www.citizenschwartz.com/ripralphie/
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SCUT FARKUS NOT GUILTY IN SHOOTING DEATH OF LIL RALPHIE PARKER UNDER INDIANA STAND YOUR GROUND LAW (Original Post) tridim Aug 2013 OP
Jesus H Christ on a trailer hitch NightWatcher Aug 2013 #1
funny hfojvt Aug 2013 #2
Yea, it's not as good as I thought it was upon first reading... tridim Aug 2013 #3
He was the one they buried in a ventriloquist's trunk. Gregorian Aug 2013 #4
Stand Your Ground needs to be challenged in court meow2u3 Aug 2013 #5
Of coarse we both know the OP is parody? pipoman Aug 2013 #8
I believe Mr. Parker was wearing a hoodie rurallib Aug 2013 #6
In Virginia he would have been found guilty. ileus Aug 2013 #7

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
2. funny
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 04:18 PM
Aug 2013

but also clearly a case of self defense.

Since all Farkus ever really did was chase people, and in this incident he was attacked for merely mocking Mr. Parker with the words "you gonna cry? Go on, cry?&quot

It is believed that Mr. Parker was suffering from the effects of soap poisioning as he apparently ingested several bars of soap in the previous week in attempts to get high.

tridim

(45,358 posts)
3. Yea, it's not as good as I thought it was upon first reading...
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 04:23 PM
Aug 2013

Take it as entertainment I guess.

meow2u3

(25,250 posts)
5. Stand Your Ground needs to be challenged in court
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 05:01 PM
Aug 2013

The way I read those laws, it's so vague--perhaps intentionally so--that it can be interpreted to mean a license to murder anyone the shooter doesn't like.

Even the race, class, or national origin/ancestry of the victim can be, and often is, construed as "suspicious behavior." In other words, a criminal who picks a fight can get away with murder--literally. It's about time the courts took a close look at the license to kill laws.

 

pipoman

(16,038 posts)
8. Of coarse we both know the OP is parody?
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 05:25 PM
Aug 2013

That said 'stand your ground' has been the law of the land for centuries. There was a brief stint when some states changed to a standard they called "duty to retreat"..it was a failure because it unjustly punished and imprisoned far too many innocent people...when this failure was determined 'duty to retreat' was repealed and replaced with a standard some states call 'stand your groung'...it is a reversion back to the old standard which has always been the standard in federal cases..to this day..The federal standard was enshrined by, iirc, Oliver Wendell Holmes. in the 1920's..It will stay..there's piles of case law supporting it, and the alternative is worse...some guilty will go free to ensure less innocent are punished..

rurallib

(64,688 posts)
6. I believe Mr. Parker was wearing a hoodie
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 05:02 PM
Aug 2013

True, it was about 10 below 0, but that should be no excuse as there are alternatives.
And I am fairly sure that Parker's blood contained traces of Ovaltine a well-known stimulant.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
7. In Virginia he would have been found guilty.
Mon Aug 5, 2013, 05:15 PM
Aug 2013

We have the perfect example of common law / SYG in the country IMHO.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»SCUT FARKUS NOT GUILTY IN...