Reader comments
Utah case raises the question: vigilantism or protecting kids?
103 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
What was going on at Party? | 7:58 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
"But Latu is also concerned that more red flags didn't go off for Fair
once he saw someone else's children in his house. Furthermore, she
doesn't understand why Bell didn't try to return the children to their
own home immediately if he found them wandering."
Because it's 6:30 in the morning and a 2 and 4 year old are wondering outside by themselves while their parents are partying. As a NORMAL person I wouldn't take those children back to their home instead I would take them into my house, attempt to calm them down and make sure they were okay and then I would call the police.
From the actions of the mother and the attackers I would have to say Bell's actions were justifiable. Anyone who would get into an argument with someone whose trying to protect their children and attack them before removing the children, tell them to lock their doors and send 5 people to break into their house and beat them, throw a TV at their heads, chase them down, cut their neck with shards of glass and try to CUT THEIR TOE off are deranged.
It's no wonder the children were crying.
Because it's 6:30 in the morning and a 2 and 4 year old are wondering outside by themselves while their parents are partying. As a NORMAL person I wouldn't take those children back to their home instead I would take them into my house, attempt to calm them down and make sure they were okay and then I would call the police.
From the actions of the mother and the attackers I would have to say Bell's actions were justifiable. Anyone who would get into an argument with someone whose trying to protect their children and attack them before removing the children, tell them to lock their doors and send 5 people to break into their house and beat them, throw a TV at their heads, chase them down, cut their neck with shards of glass and try to CUT THEIR TOE off are deranged.
It's no wonder the children were crying.
Separating the Issues | 7:59 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Hate crime implies that the parents' reaction was based on the couple being
homosexual. Possible, but not likely given that they had been guests in the
parents home for the party. The real issue is children disappearing and being
found in the neighbor's bedroom. Even if the children were of the opposite
sex of the neighbor, I don't think it would have changed the parents'
reaction much. This is not the reaction of a stright neighbor to a gay
neighbor, it is the reaction of a parent to a perceived predator preying upon
their children. There is no comparison.
Comments continue below
Left a 2 & 4 yr old unsupervised | 8:04 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Betty,
"So there is a party going on into the wee hours of the night."
It wasn't the "wee hours of the night" instead it was 6:30 in the morning.
"I doubt that they were having punch and cookies. I don't mean to imply that having a party is a crime here but I wonder about the state of soberness that anyone was in."
As do I considering that we know the party went on for at least 4 hours which places it as starting on or before 2:30 a.m. and ending around 6:30 am.
"It was apparently ok for the children to play in this man's carport, he was a guest at the party, but until you know how the children came to be in his home unharmed by the way; I think that they should be charged with some form of asault."
We know the mother and Bell got into an argument but we don't know about what but I'm assuming Bell chose to confront her about being an unfit mother and she sent people to attack him.
"They beat up an innocent bystander. They should have to pay for that."
Bell didn't commit a crime either.
"So there is a party going on into the wee hours of the night."
It wasn't the "wee hours of the night" instead it was 6:30 in the morning.
"I doubt that they were having punch and cookies. I don't mean to imply that having a party is a crime here but I wonder about the state of soberness that anyone was in."
As do I considering that we know the party went on for at least 4 hours which places it as starting on or before 2:30 a.m. and ending around 6:30 am.
"It was apparently ok for the children to play in this man's carport, he was a guest at the party, but until you know how the children came to be in his home unharmed by the way; I think that they should be charged with some form of asault."
We know the mother and Bell got into an argument but we don't know about what but I'm assuming Bell chose to confront her about being an unfit mother and she sent people to attack him.
"They beat up an innocent bystander. They should have to pay for that."
Bell didn't commit a crime either.
anom | 8:05 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
vigilants are not sworn officers of the law. they have no legal rights and they
are extremely dangerous. people who take the law into their own hands and
measure out justice as they see fight are no better than criminals. i respect
those who detain criminals whilst officers of the law show up, however this does
not give them the right to be judge, jury and executioner.
His house was full of people | 8:10 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Separating the Issues,
"Hate crime implies that the parents' reaction was based on the couple being homosexual."
I could have a black person in my house as a guest but doesn't mean I'm not racist. Just because Bell was a guest doesn't mean the attack wasn't motivated by hate and bigotry.
"Possible, but not likely given that they had been guests in the parents home for the party."
Again, it's extremely possible. In fact, one lady was killed by her father-in-law because she wasn't of the same race as his son.
"The real issue is children disappearing and being found in the neighbor's bedroom. Even if the children were of the opposite sex of the neighbor, I don't think it would have changed the parents' reaction much."
The only reason they were in his house was because they were roaming around outside while their mother was busy partying from 2:00ish to 6:30ish. There is no evidence that he took them from their house and witnesses state they came over to the house.
"There is no comparison."
No, I doubt very much that this has anything to do with her perceiving him as a predator since there were 5 people there.
"Hate crime implies that the parents' reaction was based on the couple being homosexual."
I could have a black person in my house as a guest but doesn't mean I'm not racist. Just because Bell was a guest doesn't mean the attack wasn't motivated by hate and bigotry.
"Possible, but not likely given that they had been guests in the parents home for the party."
Again, it's extremely possible. In fact, one lady was killed by her father-in-law because she wasn't of the same race as his son.
"The real issue is children disappearing and being found in the neighbor's bedroom. Even if the children were of the opposite sex of the neighbor, I don't think it would have changed the parents' reaction much."
The only reason they were in his house was because they were roaming around outside while their mother was busy partying from 2:00ish to 6:30ish. There is no evidence that he took them from their house and witnesses state they came over to the house.
"There is no comparison."
No, I doubt very much that this has anything to do with her perceiving him as a predator since there were 5 people there.
The children were neglected | 8:17 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
anom,
"vigilants are not sworn officers of the law. they have no legal rights and they are extremely dangerous."
I agree but I'm not so sure that they were attacked because they were gay or because the parents thought Bell was predator as much as I'm inclined to think he gave their mother a piece of his mind about allowing her children to roam around at 6:30 in the morning. I think they came back to beat them up and claim he was a predator to prevent him calling the police and having their children taken away.
"people who take the law into their own hands and measure out justice as they see fight are no better than criminals."
I agree wholeheartedly if that's what they did but all the evidence suggest another motive.
"i respect those who detain criminals whilst officers of the law show up, however this does not give them the right to be judge, jury and executioner."
I think you need to take a minute and consider the series of events and you will begin to realize that this is about an altercation over child neglect and not pedophilia. It's really a case of child neglect.
"vigilants are not sworn officers of the law. they have no legal rights and they are extremely dangerous."
I agree but I'm not so sure that they were attacked because they were gay or because the parents thought Bell was predator as much as I'm inclined to think he gave their mother a piece of his mind about allowing her children to roam around at 6:30 in the morning. I think they came back to beat them up and claim he was a predator to prevent him calling the police and having their children taken away.
"people who take the law into their own hands and measure out justice as they see fight are no better than criminals."
I agree wholeheartedly if that's what they did but all the evidence suggest another motive.
"i respect those who detain criminals whilst officers of the law show up, however this does not give them the right to be judge, jury and executioner."
I think you need to take a minute and consider the series of events and you will begin to realize that this is about an altercation over child neglect and not pedophilia. It's really a case of child neglect.
Matthew | 10:53 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Beating someone is a crime. End of story. The District Attorney should be
removed from office for not doing his job. It doesn't matter if this was a
hate crime or not (I would say any beating is a hate crime!).
What is the world coming to that there is any question about this part of the case?
What is the world coming to that there is any question about this part of the case?
Dustin | 10:54 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Yet again, the Deseret News manages to make another attempt at producing a fair
and balanced story, but accidentally (or intentionally) leaves some important
gaps in the story.
Firstly, the DN attempts to paint David as a liar by quoting his post-Miranda statement, of course they would never compare the statements from the mother from either witness testimony or media coverage. If they were to review the mother's statements, they would find just how many holes, overlaps, and outright false statements are made.
Secondly, the wonderful opinion of Dr. Driessen seems cut and dry, but it falls flat on balanced understanding of the legislative and judicial system here in Utah. She states that the D.A. would likely review possible charges taking into consideration the political repercussions of the matter. Of course, in the State of Utah, it is the responsibility of the D.A. to review evidence without considering separate litigation, and to do it's job without considering the political implications.
Lastly, I would like to point out that Dr. Driessen speaks of the beaten individuals as cohorts. As no witness has identified Mr.Fair as an assailant, there can be no precedent for the attack on him.
Firstly, the DN attempts to paint David as a liar by quoting his post-Miranda statement, of course they would never compare the statements from the mother from either witness testimony or media coverage. If they were to review the mother's statements, they would find just how many holes, overlaps, and outright false statements are made.
Secondly, the wonderful opinion of Dr. Driessen seems cut and dry, but it falls flat on balanced understanding of the legislative and judicial system here in Utah. She states that the D.A. would likely review possible charges taking into consideration the political repercussions of the matter. Of course, in the State of Utah, it is the responsibility of the D.A. to review evidence without considering separate litigation, and to do it's job without considering the political implications.
Lastly, I would like to point out that Dr. Driessen speaks of the beaten individuals as cohorts. As no witness has identified Mr.Fair as an assailant, there can be no precedent for the attack on him.
Taylor | 10:58 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
Not filing felony assault and attempted murder charges against these
"vigilantes" is pure bunk.
The "parents" said they had to protect their children. Wait, real protection would have been knowing where they were, being able to care for them, and not having them wander where you don't want them.
Trying to kill these 2 men afterward is nothing but vengeance, maybe to keep them from calling CPS. Beat up someone who cares for your child and say it was protection--what a way to stave off a child abuse charge on the parents.
Although I have never had sympathy for gays, I also have no sympathy for the cowards who beat them up. These men had not committed any crime, and the children were out of the house. How safe were these children while everyone went to beat up and kill the gays? Were you protecting your children then?
In spite of what people say now after the event, I believe any reasonable person would try to help 2 very young children crying alone outside at 6:30 am with parents nowhere, who must have been stoned out of their skulls to commit such heinous crimes.
The "parents" said they had to protect their children. Wait, real protection would have been knowing where they were, being able to care for them, and not having them wander where you don't want them.
Trying to kill these 2 men afterward is nothing but vengeance, maybe to keep them from calling CPS. Beat up someone who cares for your child and say it was protection--what a way to stave off a child abuse charge on the parents.
Although I have never had sympathy for gays, I also have no sympathy for the cowards who beat them up. These men had not committed any crime, and the children were out of the house. How safe were these children while everyone went to beat up and kill the gays? Were you protecting your children then?
In spite of what people say now after the event, I believe any reasonable person would try to help 2 very young children crying alone outside at 6:30 am with parents nowhere, who must have been stoned out of their skulls to commit such heinous crimes.
Joe Enter | 11:49 p.m. Aug. 17, 2008
This looks like an obvious case of a home invasion and two attempted murders.
Hate Crime In Utah??? | 12:06 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Shocked that Utah would have hate crimes. Main reason i moved away. The entire
state hates each other, mormon, non-mormon, gay, black, white, hispanic. May be
the most prevelent "coded" hate crime state in the US. They hide
behind religion, race, and us vs them mentality. I moved out after 25 years and
will never return.
BTW, return missionary, sealed in temple, serving as 2nd councelor in bishopbric currently in another state. I don't have anything against mormons, just know that Utah is full of "code" hate crimes and many there do not have compassion on anyone. Selfish, stifnecked people.
BTW, return missionary, sealed in temple, serving as 2nd councelor in bishopbric currently in another state. I don't have anything against mormons, just know that Utah is full of "code" hate crimes and many there do not have compassion on anyone. Selfish, stifnecked people.
Re: 12:06 a.m. | 1:28 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Way to paint everyone in the state of Utah with the same brush. My family is in
Utah and find that a good majority of them are unselfish and kind.
Pendragon | 2:18 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
I agree with Hate Crime. We have put an unneeded burden on our legal system by
creating "hate crime" legislation. We should just be prosocuting the
crime. When we ask our prosocuters to start proving "hate" we really
tie their hands making it much harder to obtain convictions. In my opinion hate
is already present at any type of crime.
I know that they have tied mandatory sentences and such to hate crime legislation, but wouldn't it have been just as easy to attach mandatory sentences to each level of charges filed in a crime?
IE: 2 years for a Class 3 Felony or something? (Sorry I don't know the crime classifications this is just an example)Both parties were wrong in this case, both parties bear responsibility for the things they did. The only ones innocent it seems to me, were the children and Mr. Fair
I know that they have tied mandatory sentences and such to hate crime legislation, but wouldn't it have been just as easy to attach mandatory sentences to each level of charges filed in a crime?
IE: 2 years for a Class 3 Felony or something? (Sorry I don't know the crime classifications this is just an example)Both parties were wrong in this case, both parties bear responsibility for the things they did. The only ones innocent it seems to me, were the children and Mr. Fair
Todd | 4:33 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Weather people realize it or not,Crystal Meth runs rampant in Utah.I lived there
for 2 years,and was totally shocked at how deep people are into that.
And I am no stranger to drugs.I think we need to find out what actually went on at this party before we judge what should come about legally.
And I am no stranger to drugs.I think we need to find out what actually went on at this party before we judge what should come about legally.
To: hate crime in Utah | 6:30 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Had you bothered to check actual numbers you would know that Utah is right in
line with other states. In fact, Minnesota had almost double the rate of hate
crimes reported with similar population numbers than Utah with anti-black,
anti-white and anti-jewish at the top of the list.
The Rock | 8:07 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Hate crime legislation punishes people for what they believe and are probably
in violation of the 1st amendment.
I would never take another's child into my bedroom. It is not appropriate.
If I found my child in the bedroom of a gay man, I would be very angry, especially if the child was in the home without my permission. Permission would not be granted to any gay person to watch my child.
Homosexual men are known to be the most sexually promiscuous group on the planet. This does not mean that they a pedofiles; however, this fact, coupled with the existance of NMBLA does not help their reputation.
Beating the men was a definate over reaction and the assailants should be punnished to the full extend of the law.
I would never take another's child into my bedroom. It is not appropriate.
If I found my child in the bedroom of a gay man, I would be very angry, especially if the child was in the home without my permission. Permission would not be granted to any gay person to watch my child.
Homosexual men are known to be the most sexually promiscuous group on the planet. This does not mean that they a pedofiles; however, this fact, coupled with the existance of NMBLA does not help their reputation.
Beating the men was a definate over reaction and the assailants should be punnished to the full extend of the law.
Parental instincts | 8:20 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
What a sad situation all together. It sounds like the parents were neglectful
and not doing a good job of supervising thier children that night. I feel for
the children and the difficult situation they are in. I also can understand the
rage of the parents upon finding the children crying in a homosexuals house at
6:30 am and having serious concerns about what was happening. I have had
someone molest my children and their is an anger and parental instinct that
wells up in you that is very difficult to control. I understand that these
children weren't molested, but it certainly didn't look very good. I
also can understand the sheer terror of the mothers threat to "lock your
door" and how terrifying it would be to have 5 large men break down your
door, smash in your windows and then to beat you severely. I agree with some
that the rage of the parent was extreme, but is it o.k. in our society to give
in to natural instincts and hurt people? If so watch out on the freeway! I
could understand a punch or two, but smashing a t.v. over someones head and
cutting thier throat?
Death Wish VII | 9:01 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Another example of the Salt Lake County Attorney's office method of
deciding which cases to prosecute - flip a coin. Of course the County Attorney
might have some compassion for people involved in late-night parties. It looks
like Charles Bronson is alive and well in South Salt Lake.
Whatever | 9:05 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Why in the world would DN show the picture? Do we see pictures of children after
they are molested and beaten up? I can't believe there are not more
comments against the parents after seeing that picture.
Gay people like to say that being gay is instinctive, and they can't help it so they have to act on their urges. I don't understand why the same principle doesn't work for parents. It is instinctive to want to protect your children. We can't help it. If someone took my children out of there room at night, I would assume the worst gay or not. Also, every gay person I have talked to has been molested by a man as a child, so by all the statistics, it is not unreasonable to assume that a gay person is more likely to be a pedophile. That being said, I think the parents should have called the police. Violence is not the answer to anything.
Gay people like to say that being gay is instinctive, and they can't help it so they have to act on their urges. I don't understand why the same principle doesn't work for parents. It is instinctive to want to protect your children. We can't help it. If someone took my children out of there room at night, I would assume the worst gay or not. Also, every gay person I have talked to has been molested by a man as a child, so by all the statistics, it is not unreasonable to assume that a gay person is more likely to be a pedophile. That being said, I think the parents should have called the police. Violence is not the answer to anything.
Sandy | 9:12 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Unbelievable, um what exactly did they do? They took these children out of their
home. Maybe you think kidnapping is nothing, but I would want to hurt badly
someone who had unnamed plans for my kids at any time of day.
Rick | 9:43 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Drugs and beer, party animals who don't know where their children are.
Raising kids by example! Gay guys with the neighbor's children in their
home, education or protection? vigilante kin? teaching life lessons to neighbors
or murderous intent or just a taste of western justice. why these are the
elements of a good real life television show. how do you spell disfunctional
Frank Matheson | 10:30 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Partying until 6:30 am without knowing where their kids are? Beating their
neighbors to a pulp even after the children are safely returned?
The children should be removed from the parents by child protective services, and the parents should be charged with felony assault.
Hopefully they'll not just move out of the neighborhood, but out of the State.
The children should be removed from the parents by child protective services, and the parents should be charged with felony assault.
Hopefully they'll not just move out of the neighborhood, but out of the State.
Aggravated Assault | 11:05 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
It is clear to me that all Bell did was try to help two crying children in his
yard at 6:30 in the morning. It is also clear to me that the mother assumed the
worst, and had five family members beat up Bell and his partner on a whimsy
supposition instead of calling the police on a whimsy supposition.
Completely unreasonable, and very, very criminal. It is not Bell who should be arrested, because it is stupid and sick to arrest the victim. Everyone involved in the assault should be arrested. Aggravated assault is a monstrous act, has resulted in many deaths across America, and should never be treated lightly.
Think about it: they threw a television at Fair's head. Aggravated assault. They pounded Bell's head repeatedly against the sidewalk. Aggravated assault. They cut Bell's neck with broken glass. Aggravated assault. They tried to cut off one of their toes. Aggravated assault.
No matter where the children were, or no matter what sexual orientation these two victims were, there was no call for this. Were the children harmed? No. Was the gay couple harmed? Take a long look at that picture, and arrest that family for aggravated assault.
Completely unreasonable, and very, very criminal. It is not Bell who should be arrested, because it is stupid and sick to arrest the victim. Everyone involved in the assault should be arrested. Aggravated assault is a monstrous act, has resulted in many deaths across America, and should never be treated lightly.
Think about it: they threw a television at Fair's head. Aggravated assault. They pounded Bell's head repeatedly against the sidewalk. Aggravated assault. They cut Bell's neck with broken glass. Aggravated assault. They tried to cut off one of their toes. Aggravated assault.
No matter where the children were, or no matter what sexual orientation these two victims were, there was no call for this. Were the children harmed? No. Was the gay couple harmed? Take a long look at that picture, and arrest that family for aggravated assault.
Presumption of Innocence | 12:09 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Duke lacrosse players. Falsely accused of rape.
Richard Jewell. Falsely accused of bombing the Atlanta Olympics.
Steven Hatfill. Falsey accused of anthrax terrorism.
There are many good reasons why civilized people don't beat the snot out of our neighbors before we know the facts.
Likewise, there are many good reasons why civilized people don't allow small children into our houses when there is a strong likelihood of getting the snot beat out of you.
Richard Jewell. Falsely accused of bombing the Atlanta Olympics.
Steven Hatfill. Falsey accused of anthrax terrorism.
There are many good reasons why civilized people don't beat the snot out of our neighbors before we know the facts.
Likewise, there are many good reasons why civilized people don't allow small children into our houses when there is a strong likelihood of getting the snot beat out of you.
Cal Coug | 1:58 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Who poses for a blood-soaked picture like that? One theory: a guilty person
trying to make himself look like the "victim." Classic case of getting
caught with your hand in the cookie jar and then acting like the person catching
you is the criminal. No one in a right frame of mind takes someone else's
kids into their own home.
jday | 2:01 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
whatever the reason, whatever the rationale, and whatever those two men did, the
5 people who did the beatings deserve to be prosecuted. This went far beyond
what should ever be considered acceptable.
However, I don't think this is a hate crime. If 5 people would do this to two gay men who took their children, they'd do it to two straight men who had their two children in their bedroom. Both sides are pretty clearly in the wrong here.
However, I don't think this is a hate crime. If 5 people would do this to two gay men who took their children, they'd do it to two straight men who had their two children in their bedroom. Both sides are pretty clearly in the wrong here.
Ing | 2:13 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
The problem with most of these comments is that we don't know all the
evidence yet. None of us knows enough to say whether the family acted out of
bias or whether they were legitimately provoked.
It's kind of disturbing to see so many people talking like they know everything. We can make some guesses, but nobody really knows enough to fully judge...except, I hope, the ACTUAL judge, once all the evidence is presented in the courtroom.
Having said that, it's not a point in the family's favor that they came back to administer the beating AFTER retrieving their children unharmed. That's when the police should have been called. I can see how there could be a case against them.
However, if I had just rescued my children from being kidnapped, and if the kidnapper was within my reach, I probably would have done what these people did. I'm not saying it's the right thing in the eyes of the law, but I can understand why the family would be upset enough to go vigilante.
Bottom line, we shouldn't be agitating to have anyone summarily punished based on a couple of news articles--the facts and the law will decide that.
It's kind of disturbing to see so many people talking like they know everything. We can make some guesses, but nobody really knows enough to fully judge...except, I hope, the ACTUAL judge, once all the evidence is presented in the courtroom.
Having said that, it's not a point in the family's favor that they came back to administer the beating AFTER retrieving their children unharmed. That's when the police should have been called. I can see how there could be a case against them.
However, if I had just rescued my children from being kidnapped, and if the kidnapper was within my reach, I probably would have done what these people did. I'm not saying it's the right thing in the eyes of the law, but I can understand why the family would be upset enough to go vigilante.
Bottom line, we shouldn't be agitating to have anyone summarily punished based on a couple of news articles--the facts and the law will decide that.
What a joke! | 5:42 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
First off, I agree with both sides. It was a dumb move to have the kids in their
house without the parent's permission. But, it was absolutely dumber for
the children's parents to WARN the couple that a beating was coming! That
sounds like premeditated to me. I understand vigilantism, and honestly I agree
with it. If I found somebody in the process of hurting my children or family, I
don't know what I would do. But, the parents never witnessed any kind of
abuse personally. They assumed. That does not make what they did okay. Is it
okay to beat somebody up because you think that possibly something could have
happened? No. Also, they were obviously not just looking to protect their kids,
or they would have beaten them up when the mom first went in the house. Poor Mr.
Fair, who got beat FOR NOTHING! That alone, should make the DA question whether
to charge them. The fact that one guy might have done something does not give
them the right to BREAK INTO a house and beat up whoever they want, and almost
KILL THEM!
Elements | 7:17 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
The fact that the D.A. chose not to prosecute the parents doesn't mean that
they codone the reaction. It means that there was insufficient evidence to
prove every element necessary to pursue either burglary or aggravated assault.
The South Salt Lake City prosecutor still has the option of filing misdemeanor
trespass and/or assault charges. In order to prove burglary, the D.A. would
have to prove that they entered or remained in the home with the specific intent
to commit an assault or a felony (as opposed to rescuing their children).
Daniel Fair told police that the people hitting him kept asking where the
children were (so, obviously, they were unaware that they had been safely
retrieved). To prove aggravated assault, the D.A. would have to prove (1) the
identity of the attacker (Mr. Fair didn't know who it was) and that the
attacker acted with the specific intent to cause serious bodily injury (which is
legally much different than the common understanding). Prosecutors decline
charges all the time in cases where they don't agree that a person behaved
lawfully if they don't have evidence to prove all elements beyond a
reasonable doubt.
SS | 7:26 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Doesn't seem like there is a shred of evidence of kidnapping, abuse, etc.
But there seems to be a lot of evidence for attempted murder. Talk about
politics. Sounds to me like the party was getting to rough for little kids,
they came over, and he responded kindly, just like the "old days." So
they bash his head with a TV and no charges??? you have got to be kidding. For
the record, I would be considered "homophobic" by the gay community,
but sexual preference has zero to do with a correct analysis of the case (which
the DA did not do)
Interloper | 9:18 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Frankly, I believe the DA is insulting both sides based on stereotypes. She is
willing to buy the nonsense that the gay men were potential child molesters
because they are homosexual. (There is no correlation. In fact, most child
molesters are heterosexual males.) But, she is also unwilling to hold the
assailants responsible for their actions, perhaps because she does not see them
as full-fledged adults. Could that be because they are people of color? I
have the impression that the prosecution is dismissive of both sides because
neither is seen as 'normal' citizens.
As for the people attacking hate crime legislation, they often are folks who believe abusing people because of race, gender, sexual preference, etc., is acceptable. Of course they do not want to see bigots held accountable.
As for the people attacking hate crime legislation, they often are folks who believe abusing people because of race, gender, sexual preference, etc., is acceptable. Of course they do not want to see bigots held accountable.
Miller sides with her voters | 9:55 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Elements,
"It means that there was insufficient evidence to prove every element necessary to pursue either burglary or aggravated assault."
There's enough evidence in this article ALONE to convict someone on assault and burglary charges.
"In order to prove burglary, the D.A. would have to prove that they entered or remained in the home with the specific intent to commit an assault or a felony (as opposed to rescuing their children)."
The article clearly states that they had already removed the children from the house PRIOR to them returning and attacking the occupants.
"To prove aggravated assault, the D.A. would have to prove..."
That's just great isn't it? The Fair family doesn't get justice because the burden of proof is higher even though there isn't any evidence Bell molested or kidnapped these kids yet the burden of proof in his case is lower. I wonder why? Is it because voters like you write laws to protect your own faction of society?
"Prosecutors decline charges...if they don't have evidence to prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt."
Yet they charge Bell even though there's no witness that says he took the children from the house. We know who voted for Miller.
"It means that there was insufficient evidence to prove every element necessary to pursue either burglary or aggravated assault."
There's enough evidence in this article ALONE to convict someone on assault and burglary charges.
"In order to prove burglary, the D.A. would have to prove that they entered or remained in the home with the specific intent to commit an assault or a felony (as opposed to rescuing their children)."
The article clearly states that they had already removed the children from the house PRIOR to them returning and attacking the occupants.
"To prove aggravated assault, the D.A. would have to prove..."
That's just great isn't it? The Fair family doesn't get justice because the burden of proof is higher even though there isn't any evidence Bell molested or kidnapped these kids yet the burden of proof in his case is lower. I wonder why? Is it because voters like you write laws to protect your own faction of society?
"Prosecutors decline charges...if they don't have evidence to prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt."
Yet they charge Bell even though there's no witness that says he took the children from the house. We know who voted for Miller.
Hate crime punishes motive | 10:15 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
The Rock,
"Hate crime legislation punishes people for what they believe and are probably in violation of the 1st amendment."
The 1st Amendment doesn't mention thought or belief. If you commit a crime based on a belief its called a motive and you can be punished differently based on your motive.
If you deliberately plan and carry out a murder you will receive a different punishment then if you, in a moment of rage, stab someone to death. If you kill someone because you were paid to do so you will also receive a different punishment then if you killed a person because you were in a rage.
Intent to do harm is demonstrated by the fact that the mother warned the men to lock their doors (mens reas) and a crime was committed (actus reas) so the elements of the crime of assault and burglary have been met.
Also, the elements of a hate crime are present. The men being gay was the motive based on a reasonable person standard. A reasonable person finding their child in the home of another person wouldn't assume that the child was molested and return and assault them. They may call the police.
"Hate crime legislation punishes people for what they believe and are probably in violation of the 1st amendment."
The 1st Amendment doesn't mention thought or belief. If you commit a crime based on a belief its called a motive and you can be punished differently based on your motive.
If you deliberately plan and carry out a murder you will receive a different punishment then if you, in a moment of rage, stab someone to death. If you kill someone because you were paid to do so you will also receive a different punishment then if you killed a person because you were in a rage.
Intent to do harm is demonstrated by the fact that the mother warned the men to lock their doors (mens reas) and a crime was committed (actus reas) so the elements of the crime of assault and burglary have been met.
Also, the elements of a hate crime are present. The men being gay was the motive based on a reasonable person standard. A reasonable person finding their child in the home of another person wouldn't assume that the child was molested and return and assault them. They may call the police.
You would let them get run over | 10:27 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Cal Coug,
"Who poses for a blood-soaked picture like that? One theory: a guilty person trying to make himself look like the "victim."
Another theory: an innocent person wanting to have proof of the assault and the seriousness.
"Classic case of getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar and then acting like the person catching you is the criminal."
There's no evidence anyone got caught with their hand in the cookie jar except for the parents who probably assaulted them men to prevent them from reporting them for child neglect.
There were 5 people in the house and no one is brazen enough to molest two young children when there are witnesses present.
No one in their right mind would believe Bell kidnapped the children.
"No one in a right frame of mind takes someone else's kids into their own home."
Anyone in the right frame of mind, finding a 2 and 4 year old wondering outside at 6:30 am, knowing the parents had been partying all night, would take a child into their home, check to make sure that they are okay, attempt to calm them down and then call the police.
"Who poses for a blood-soaked picture like that? One theory: a guilty person trying to make himself look like the "victim."
Another theory: an innocent person wanting to have proof of the assault and the seriousness.
"Classic case of getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar and then acting like the person catching you is the criminal."
There's no evidence anyone got caught with their hand in the cookie jar except for the parents who probably assaulted them men to prevent them from reporting them for child neglect.
There were 5 people in the house and no one is brazen enough to molest two young children when there are witnesses present.
No one in their right mind would believe Bell kidnapped the children.
"No one in a right frame of mind takes someone else's kids into their own home."
Anyone in the right frame of mind, finding a 2 and 4 year old wondering outside at 6:30 am, knowing the parents had been partying all night, would take a child into their home, check to make sure that they are okay, attempt to calm them down and then call the police.
Law won't: Fair's family should | 10:35 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Ing,
"None of us knows enough to say whether the family acted out of bias or whether they were legitimately provoked."
Yes we do. The mother took the children, told them to lock their doors and 5 people returned and broke into the house and attacked the men.
"It's kind of disturbing to see so many people talking like they know everything."
We don't need to know everything to make an informed judgment based on the facts that we do know.
"However, if I had just rescued my children from being kidnapped, and if the kidnapper was within my reach, I probably would have done what these people did."
You tell us that we can't jump to conclusions based on this article but yet you claim you would jump to conclusions based on flimsy evidence that your child had been kidnapped and return and assault them.
Hypocrite!
"Bottom line, we shouldn't be agitating to have anyone summarily punished based on a couple of news articles--the facts and the law will decide that."
That's exactly what we should be doing unless we give the family of those attacked the right to return the favor which I'm willing to do.
"None of us knows enough to say whether the family acted out of bias or whether they were legitimately provoked."
Yes we do. The mother took the children, told them to lock their doors and 5 people returned and broke into the house and attacked the men.
"It's kind of disturbing to see so many people talking like they know everything."
We don't need to know everything to make an informed judgment based on the facts that we do know.
"However, if I had just rescued my children from being kidnapped, and if the kidnapper was within my reach, I probably would have done what these people did."
You tell us that we can't jump to conclusions based on this article but yet you claim you would jump to conclusions based on flimsy evidence that your child had been kidnapped and return and assault them.
Hypocrite!
"Bottom line, we shouldn't be agitating to have anyone summarily punished based on a couple of news articles--the facts and the law will decide that."
That's exactly what we should be doing unless we give the family of those attacked the right to return the favor which I'm willing to do.
Re Cal Coug | 1:59 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Cal,
The pictures were taken by the paramedics.
Should we expect your apology now or when?
The pictures were taken by the paramedics.
Should we expect your apology now or when?
Re: Who Poses for Photo | 3:12 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
The photo is one taken by paramedics at the scene.
John Pack Lambert | 6:57 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
To Jolene,
No one was charged with a crime in the beating. I am hoping there are more details involved to explain why no charges were brought.
If there are not, I think it is time for Salt Lake County to get a prosecutor who beieves that the justice system should handle justice, and not various individuals who want to take the law into their own hands.
However, we do not know all the details. I have no clue why the prosecutor is not pushing charges.
I would urge everyone to remember that we should forgive others. Even if they do outrageous things we should not respond in kind.
No one was charged with a crime in the beating. I am hoping there are more details involved to explain why no charges were brought.
If there are not, I think it is time for Salt Lake County to get a prosecutor who beieves that the justice system should handle justice, and not various individuals who want to take the law into their own hands.
However, we do not know all the details. I have no clue why the prosecutor is not pushing charges.
I would urge everyone to remember that we should forgive others. Even if they do outrageous things we should not respond in kind.
John Pack Lambert | 7:02 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
To Jason,
There is no lack of laws banning assault and grave bodily injury. Creating more crime categories will not help in this situation. The actions in this case are already criminal. Another set of laws will not force the prosecuting attorney to press charges.
There is no lack of laws banning assault and grave bodily injury. Creating more crime categories will not help in this situation. The actions in this case are already criminal. Another set of laws will not force the prosecuting attorney to press charges.
John Pack Lambert | 7:06 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
I am surprised it took 11 posts for people to turn it into a racial issue.
Such denigrating of others on racial grouds is outrageous.
The best bishop I have ever had was polynesian, a native of Samoa.
The best bishop I have ever had was polynesian, a native of Samoa.
John Pack Lambert | 7:10 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
To Cosmo,
These parents were not acting according to the laws of God. God says vengence is his, and tells us to forgive other people. I do not see any evidence of such.
These parents were not acting according to the laws of God. God says vengence is his, and tells us to forgive other people. I do not see any evidence of such.
What if... | 7:47 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
... Mr. Fair's family decided to beat the tar out of the people who beat
him to a bloody pulp. They could claim they were not in the "right state
of mind" after they retaliate against the thugs who ganged up on their
brother/son/uncle. Wouldn't they be entitled to the same excuse that this
family is claiming?
anon | 10:00 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Congratulations the family has proven a wonderful point about justice its to be
administered through law and order not fists and stones that break bones if they
were concerned why didn't they call the cops honestly a bunch of family
members who jumped the gun, have the family pay for the medical expenses as
well as ten thousand dollars for the attack if there was ample cause to fear the
man allow the law to determine that. But I might say if there were five family
members who were capable of taking him down so easily why would they need to
attack him in the first place? They out numbered him duh.
This incident was ugly | 4:29 p.m. Aug. 20, 2008
...all the way around....and it has done nothing better than highlight and bring
out of the woodwork all of the deep-rooted, hidden, and hypocritical fear,
racism, prejudice, and irrationality that haunts this state. If you are so
legally ignorant and/or prejudiced by stereotypes that you can't see that
this break-in and beating was 150% illegal and unjustified, you don't
deserve the right to vote, bear arms, serve on a jury, etc. Next time you are
accused of doing something you may or MAY NOT have done, would you want a
near-fatal beating just for being under suspicion? Would you? Is that fair?
The stupidity exhibited here some days is sickening.
Doug | 1:31 p.m. Aug. 21, 2008
It's sad to me that society has "progressed" to the point that
folks will defend vicious assault simply because children were found in a
next-door neighbor's house.
I think back to when I was a kid. If I showed up crying on my next-door neighbor's doorstep while my parents were hosting a party, I'm pretty sure Nanci would have brought me inside, given me a hug, asked me what was wrong and tried to calm me down before taking me back to my house. There may even have been a glass of milk involved.
I don't know any more details about this case than what I've read here online. I'm inclined to think the Latu's committed felony assault -- although I can imagine a situation consistent with known facts that would argue against this.
Based on the facts at hand I tend to believe Bell did nothing wrong other than forget that what was once recognized as neighborliness is now presumed to be criminal. I hope I'm right.
In any case, it makes me sad for society. I don't want to go back to the 1950s, but there were some things they sure had right.
I think back to when I was a kid. If I showed up crying on my next-door neighbor's doorstep while my parents were hosting a party, I'm pretty sure Nanci would have brought me inside, given me a hug, asked me what was wrong and tried to calm me down before taking me back to my house. There may even have been a glass of milk involved.
I don't know any more details about this case than what I've read here online. I'm inclined to think the Latu's committed felony assault -- although I can imagine a situation consistent with known facts that would argue against this.
Based on the facts at hand I tend to believe Bell did nothing wrong other than forget that what was once recognized as neighborliness is now presumed to be criminal. I hope I'm right.
In any case, it makes me sad for society. I don't want to go back to the 1950s, but there were some things they sure had right.
Doug | 1:51 p.m. Aug. 21, 2008
Oh, and I have no great interest either way wrt hate crime legislation.
I'm somewhat inclined to think it nets out as a negative to society,
although I have no objection in principle.
For those who do claim such an objection, the argument seems to come down to one of three things:
1) Punish acts not thoughts. Recognize that the only difference between first-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter could be someone's thoughts and intent. Should they be treated alike?
2) We already have laws against assault & murder; assaulted is assaulted whatever the criminal's reasoning. Again, consider first-degree murder and manslaughter. Dead is dead. Why have both?
3) Majority-on-minority crime = hate crime while minority-on-majority crime = no hate crime. This, I think, is a legitimate concern. But it's not generally one of principle. Hate crimes laws are typically (and should) be written such that both directions are hate crimes if the act is shown to be based on, say, race or sexual orientation.
Again, I don't care strongly one way or the other about the hate crimes debate. But I do strongly dislike it when people claim to have principled objections but won't apply the principle across the board.
For those who do claim such an objection, the argument seems to come down to one of three things:
1) Punish acts not thoughts. Recognize that the only difference between first-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter could be someone's thoughts and intent. Should they be treated alike?
2) We already have laws against assault & murder; assaulted is assaulted whatever the criminal's reasoning. Again, consider first-degree murder and manslaughter. Dead is dead. Why have both?
3) Majority-on-minority crime = hate crime while minority-on-majority crime = no hate crime. This, I think, is a legitimate concern. But it's not generally one of principle. Hate crimes laws are typically (and should) be written such that both directions are hate crimes if the act is shown to be based on, say, race or sexual orientation.
Again, I don't care strongly one way or the other about the hate crimes debate. But I do strongly dislike it when people claim to have principled objections but won't apply the principle across the board.
Robert | 2:14 p.m. Aug. 21, 2008
Every person involved should be tested for crytal meth,and be arrested until the
facts come out. The parents need to be charged with child abuse and neglect. Not
once did she or this mob check on them.
Once the mother secured the children she should have called the police; No what she did was run to her family saying the gay guys next door was holding our children against their will in their bedroom and was trying to have sex with them, this sounds about right, why the family would act like they did.
Satitics show family members are the most likely to molest children. How do we know that one of these so called family member highed up did not try to hurt the children and they went to some place they felt safe. Criminal charges should still be filed but civil charges will not be able to be dismissed and the family will be impisioned for a very long time and the state will be settleing a large settlement.
Once the mother secured the children she should have called the police; No what she did was run to her family saying the gay guys next door was holding our children against their will in their bedroom and was trying to have sex with them, this sounds about right, why the family would act like they did.
Satitics show family members are the most likely to molest children. How do we know that one of these so called family member highed up did not try to hurt the children and they went to some place they felt safe. Criminal charges should still be filed but civil charges will not be able to be dismissed and the family will be impisioned for a very long time and the state will be settleing a large settlement.
Utah Resident | 3:49 p.m. Aug. 21, 2008
Is this a story from a third world Banana Republic or a supposedly
"civilized" State in the world's most advanced country?
Glad I'm Not In Utah | 12:13 a.m. Aug. 23, 2008
Wow.
To the average American (not from Utah) happening upon this story - so many of you sound like some sort of crazy Neanderthals. You can't spell, have terrible grammar and think that smashing someone's head in with a television set after he's already been beaten to a pulp is "self defense"???
I'm so confused. I thought I lived in and loved a free country with equal protection under the law. I guess Utah has different laws.
To the average American (not from Utah) happening upon this story - so many of you sound like some sort of crazy Neanderthals. You can't spell, have terrible grammar and think that smashing someone's head in with a television set after he's already been beaten to a pulp is "self defense"???
I'm so confused. I thought I lived in and loved a free country with equal protection under the law. I guess Utah has different laws.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Associated Press
Dan Fair and his partner were severely beaten in their home.
- Rabbis join NJ gay marriage debate 9:03 a.m.
- Afghan buildup on faster timetable 9:01 a.m.
- Salahi denies crashing W.H. party 8:58 a.m.
- Suspect in police slayings killed 8:55 a.m.
- Arrests made in Roy slayings 8:35 a.m.
- Bowden meeting with school officials 8:01 a.m.
- FIFA: Ireland won't be in WCup 8:00 a.m.
- Florida's Dunlap arrested, charged 8:00 a.m.
- Stocks climb early as dollar slides 7:59 a.m.
- China: Talk, not sanctions on Iran 7:49 a.m.
- Hall reprimanded by MWC
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal
- Utes won't respond to Hall
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- Cougs begin bowl preparations
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- Y. student vanished in China
- Max Hall issues apology
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
899 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime481
- Hall reprimanded by MWC384
- Max Hall issues apology382
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal317
- Utes won't respond to Hall264
- BYU is champion of the state140
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies123
- Cave to be sealed with body inside120
- Religion in politics is tiresome113
Live 'Twittologue' Dec. 2, 4:00 p.m. with Jason Chaffetz. Click for more.
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
Just in case no one else is watching, gold broke through the $1200/oz barrier...
Assuming that the prosecutor is following the law, it is investigations like...
Now there is no wasted time or money in a prolonged trial and jail time. No...
Isn't there a psychological term called projecting? Isn't that where you...
As evidenced by the posts here, the BYU kitten fans do not feel like the...
Holiday candy is a poor comparison to what few natural sites there are for...
Old Joe Smith and Max Hall had a lot in common: "...and while they were...
I was shocked by the '0-to-5' year term until I read that the "victims" had...
Billions more for war. What on earth for? What a waste of financial...
Awesome story! Way to go to this outstanding family.
Advertisements
Is there any justification in such an awful, despicable crime just because of something you thought they did? Everyone who was involved in the attack deserves prison, and they deserve prison for a very long time.
Yes, this is a hate crime, and anyone who says they "got what they deserved" just because they're gay might as well be accused of hate crime just for saying that. This is despicable.