AZ - Man who followed teen into Phoenix restroom beaten to death by girl's father, 2 Aug. 2018

[flute4peace]

This. Dad did not save her life. She was already safe. No doubt scared, but safe. He willfully and intentionally beat Mr. Armstrong, who died as a result of his injuries.

And even if Mr. Armstrong’s intentions were criminal, which we’ll never know on account of him being beaten to death instead of questioned by police and having his day in court if appropriate, he is a victim in this case and as such he should be protected by WS TOS.

But isn't that just parroting the spin the family has put on the beating *after* he was charged? From most of the reporting, she was already protected and safe from Armstrong, in the car some time after the stall incident and after they watched the video with security. I got the impression they figured out who was in the bathroom with her from the video, not from any face-to-face confrontation between her and Armstrong in the restroom outside the stall, though the reporting doesn't say one way or the other, AFAIK.

It's clear the family wants to frame the beating afterward as protecting the daughter to justify what Harris did, even though she apparently was already safe and was probably less protected having been taken closer to Armstrong again in the car when they could have just driven away.

I agree these are two incidents separated by some amount of time, but it seems some people want to treat them as one continuous incident where the girl was still at risk, which I don't believe from what I've read.

Even the young girl in this case has stated that the man "attempted" to enter her stall and that was that. The father "defended" her honor at the most. The girl was no longer in any danger nor was any violence enacted upon her. Short of any earth shattering revelations, this father will very likely be successfully prosecuted. He exacted textbook vigilante justice.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

he is a victim in this case and as such he should be protected by WS TOS.

rsff

He is, indeed.

Any member who refers to this victim having a history as a pedophile, or refers to him as a pervert, a child molester, rapist, etc will face temporary or permanent loss of posting privileges. Let the facts come out before resorting to affixing labels to a deceased victim.

rsff

 

[flute4peace]

rsff

He is, indeed.



rsff

I almost wonder if the “report post” feature isn’t working properly. @Tricia or @sillybilly tagging you just in case.

 

[MindHunter13]

It should also be pointed out that no matter what your own personal views are (generally speaking), the law specifically states that even if he did possess a background involving pedophilia or sexual assault, the father still was not within the law to literally beat this man to death.

We have a jury and courts for a reason. And while I may have my own personal opinions, the cop in me says that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, whether we as the general public like it or not.

 

[flute4peace]

It should also be pointed out that no matter what your own personal views are (generally speaking), the law specifically states that even if he did possess a background involving pedophilia or sexual assault, the father still was not within the law to literally beat this man to death.

We have a jury and courts for a reason. And while I may have my own personal opinions, the cop in me says that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, whether we as the general public like it or not.

Exactly!

 

[Sillybilly]

This post lands at random.

Re posts further back in the thread ... we don't always have time to go back to remove all offending posts and all the responses to them. Thus the reminder or warnings that we post that covers anything from there forward. If we get time later on, we can review the entire thread and tidy it up.

 

[flute4peace]

This post lands at random.

Re posts further back in the thread ... we don't always have time to go back to remove all offending posts and all the responses to them. Thus the reminder or warnings that we post that covers anything from there forward. If we get time later on, we can review the entire thread and tidy it up.

Thank you, SB! I appreciate knowing that you’re aware of them. I’ll stop worrying

 

[dspdenver]

rsff

No. She made those statements on her own, imo. If anything, it might be the other way around — the family might be parroting her.

Well, from this story on the 15th (Teen's dad accused of killing alleged bathroom creeper), Harris' fiancee was quoted:
["He did what he was supposed to do for our kid," Jackson said. "You cannot tell someone they're wrong for protecting their children."]

CBS Morning's tweet of the interview of the daughter was dated the 16th (though I don't know if the interview was from that morning, although it looks like they tweet that day's Morning news the same day), and the initial post in this thread was from the 14th, so I think it is likely the family had already discussed among themselves the beating and formulated the "protection" angle before any news interviews.

 

[MindHunter13]

Well, from this story on the 15th (Teen's dad accused of killing alleged bathroom creeper), Harris' fiancee was quoted:
["He did what he was supposed to do for our kid," Jackson said. "You cannot tell someone they're wrong for protecting their children."]

CBS Morning's tweet of the interview of the daughter was dated the 16th (though I don't know if the interview was from that morning, although it looks like they tweet that day's Morning news the same day), and the initial post in this thread was from the 14th, so I think it is likely the family had already discussed among themselves the beating and formulated the "protection" angle before any news interviews.

As in formulated a conspiracy? [INSERT DRAMATIC *DUM DUM DUM* HERE]

But all jokes aside, I doubt the family made sure to have their story straight. It seems much more likely and natural that they all truly felt that the father was protecting his daughter. And the father very likely felt justified in doing so.

The problem lies in the fact that the father very likely doesn't realize that he was wrong by accosting the man AFTER any potential danger had long been mitigated.

 

[kelsie]

He didn't necessarily mean to beat the guy to death. He wasn't dead on scene. I can't blame him. My older brother probably would've done the same thing for me this father did for his daughter.

 

[Jennifer17]

He didn't necessarily mean to beat the guy to death. He wasn't dead on scene. I can't blame him. My older brother probably would've done the same thing for me this father did for his daughter.

He did nothing for his daughter. She was in no danger.

 

[kelsie]

He did nothing for his daughter. She was in no danger.

You're right, but I'm saying I guess that I understand the rage the dad experienced

 

[flourish]

When a person repeatedly kicks and stomps someone's head, it's not a leap they could die. It's a natural and predictable consequence. I don't really see why it matters if he died at the scene or later; the cause of the death was the unlawful, prolonged beating which was initiated after the alleged bathroom incident. People deserve their day in court, and the victim here was denied his rights. Absolutely unacceptable behavior from the dad. Anger is one thing; vigilante justice is another.

 

[bluesneakers]

He did nothing for his daughter. She was in no danger.

He made things much worse for his daughter.

 

[Cryptic]

The problem lies in the fact that the father very likely doesn't realize that he was wrong by accosting the man AFTER any potential danger had long been mitigated.

A very good point.

I can give the man some leeway, but not a blank check. It also appears that the man may have inquired as to whether the deceased needed to be "taught a lesson", then decided to give the "lesson".

Though criminal charges appear to be supported, I would still support Manslaughter unless it could be proved that the man artificially contrived the occurrence, baited the deceased, or was actively stalking him while waiting for a pretense to attack him.

 

[Rocco]

OT kind of but I wanted to share. A distantly related family member of mine served in Iraq. He came back with severe PTSD. He was reluctant to reach out for help. He had seen some terrible things. He began self medicating his mental health issues with illegal drugs. One day while under the influence he entered a local store, went into the women's bathroom, crawled under a stall divider and grabbed a woman and tried to cover her mouth. She fought, screamed and alerted other shoppers. The store management called the police, he was arrested, convicted and is serving time. IMO this is how this situation should have been handled. I don't believe Mr Armstrong even touched the girl in this case. Family member is where he needs to be and is clean and getting mental health services in prison. I'm thankful he wasn't hit, kicked and stomped to death.

Many men and women served in Iraq.

Many returned with PTSD, and understandably so.

The urge to get into the stall of a women's restroom when a female is in there, is not a symptom of PTSD.

It's a symptom of something else, that apparently we're not suppose to offer any opinions on, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[LaborDayRN]

Many men and women served in Iraq.

Many returned with PTSD, and understandably so.

The urge to get into the stall of a women's restroom when a female is in there, is not a symptom of PTSD.

It's a symptom of something else, that apparently we're not suppose to offer any opinions on, so I'll leave it at that.

I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to imply the crime he committed was due to his PTSD. He was an addict. He was out of his mind high at the time of the attack. That's no excuse. For all I know he would have done the same thing without being high, however he had no history of crimes, sexual or otherwise. Like I said, he is where he needs to be. He committed a crime and is incarcerated. I'm just glad he is getting help for his mental health issues in prison, and he's also clean.
As it relates to this case, the point I was trying to make is that I wish for Mr Armstrong's sake, LE would have been called. But sadly that's not what happened.

 

[akazia1978]

You're right, but I'm saying I guess that I understand the rage the dad experienced

I don't and I have a daughter myself, would I be annoyed, yes. Have you never had to pee so badly you will use whatever restroom is open? I have an hour and a half home from work so I have had this issue at gas stations during rush hour. Rattling the door is not offensive to me.

The father seems to have a slight rage issue with the prior domestic violence and arson arrests in my opinion.

Slightly O/T but my friend discovered her fiancee was sexually molesting her daughter. Did she kill him? No, she had her day in court and he will not be seeing the light of day again. She knew she could prove her case in court, so instead of traumatizing her daughter even more by witnessing a murder, and risking her child losing her mother, she took the high road and sent him to jail. This is an example of a much more extreme situation then the one we are discussing here. I'm sure if my friend's 11 year old could stand up in court and testify, his daughter would have been able to do the same. Sometimes you really have to think before acting and causing further damage.

 

[Rocco]

I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to imply the crime he committed was due to his PTSD. He was an addict. He was out of his mind high at the time of the attack. That's no excuse. For all I know he would have done the same thing without being high, however he had no history of crimes, sexual or otherwise. Like I said, he is where he needs to be. He committed a crime and is incarcerated. I'm just glad he is getting help for his mental health issues in prison, and he's also clean.
As it relates to this case, the point I was trying to make is that I wish for Mr Armstrong's sake, LE would have been called. But sadly that's not what happened.

All vets should have treatment if they suffer from mental issues. Too bad your distant relative had to go to prison to get it.

 

[LaborDayRN]

All vets should have treatment if they suffer from mental issues. Too bad your distant relative had to go to prison to get it.

Agreed.