https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2019/12/teen-kills-pedophile-priest-who-abused-him-by-ramming-crucifix-down-priests-throat/

Would not want to be on that jury.

AstroAg17 said:

---

Disagree. He has to go to jail. You can't murder someone based on an unproven (right?) accusation. Only he knows if what he did was just unfortunately. That's the conflict with vigilantism. I'm for vigilantism if the justice system fails, but a society can't allow it because it undermines the justice system.

---

I believe the article said the priest was accused of molesting him.

AstroAg17 said:

---

Right, but an accusation isn't grounds for action. I don't know the details of the accusation but it doesn't sound like the accusation was substantiated in a courtroom.

There's one way to legally get retribution. The courts. If someone does something to you and you can't provide evidence that it happened then you're SOL. You should be prosecuted if you go the vigilante route.

However, if someone's repeatedly harming others in a way that can't be proven, but you're certain that it's occurring then I think you have an obligation to stop that person if possible. Even though you should go to jail for it.

---

I 100% agree with this statement.

boboguitar said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Would not want to be on that jury.

---

They should just move the kid to another parish and cover it up.

---

That would be fair, but would it be just? Again, I don't want to be on that jury as I'm not sure.

AstroAg17 said:

---

Disagree. He has to go to jail. You can't murder someone based on an unproven (right?) accusation. Only he knows if what he did was just unfortunately. That's the conflict with vigilantism. I'm for vigilantism if the justice system fails, but a society can't allow it because it undermines the justice system.

---

I don't know the details on this case well enough - so I'll speak in general terms. I could imagine a situation where I was willing to commit a crime like this against someone without concern of the legal consequences or with full acceptance of the legal consequences. If anyone ever abused my children in this manner . . . . a 'he said, she said' trial which rarely results in conviction and a best case scenario of having the offender fired or jailed for a few years is not an acceptable outcome for me.

I agree that as a society this cannot be permitted. I agree completely with what you said. Nevertheless, the argument would mean next to nothing to me if I was in this situation. If the priest was the serial child molester he's accused of being, I could completely understand the 19year olds actions and simultaneously find him guilty of murder.

Aggrad08 said:

---

Would not want to be on that jury.

---

I would. I'm just religious enough With just enough doubt to justify letting this slide. God may judge eventually but imma go ahead and take care of it while I'm alive just in case.

But jury duty doesn't exactly work like that, unfortunately.