Texas Killer Who Killed Over a Stolen Twinkie is Acquitted

[ChefChiTown]

The youngest boy was 11 years old. I have an 11 year old nephew & he & his little brother have gotten chastised on a couple occasions about retrieving their football/basketballs from a grumpy neighbors yards without telling us.

Have they ever unlawfully broken into a house and tried to steal from someone? Those are two totally different situations.

Plus, according to the article, he had been robbed several times before, so he probably didn't feel all too safe with walking in on complete strangers standing in his trailer.

Gonzalez had endured several break-ins at his trailer when the four boys, ranging in age from 11 to 15, broke in.

You are right he could have handled that situation much,much better. Maybe if the guy was startled & shot into a dark room I would empathize a bit, but as you say he had clearly assessed the situation & even ordered the other kids to remove their friends corpse after he had shot him in the back. I would not have any sympathy the old man suffered a similiar fate.

I'm pretty sure the first thing on his mind wasn't "Gee, look at these nice innocent kids. Aww, they are so sweet and innocent. I should probably make them some snacks, because they look hungry, and then politely ask them to leave". It was probably more like "Who in the FUCK do these punk ass mother fuckers think they are? Stealing MY food? Get the FUCK OUT!!!"

The guy lives in a trailer in Laredo, TX, which is a shitty ass neighborhood. My cousin used to live there and it sucks. Even according to the article...

Many people in Laredo — a town just across the Rio Grande from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, where drug violence runs rampant — defended Gonzalez's actions.

The guy was probably scared for his life. Who cares if the kids were 11-15? That doesn't mean that they can't carry a knife or a gun. A preteen child with a gun can kill you just as easily as a 50 year old man with a gun.

"There's 3 strange kids in my trailer stealing from me. I live in a neighborhood that is notoriously known for having lots of crime, violence and drug related problems. I bet these fucking kids are dangerous, just like every other criminal in this city. My life is in danger." That was probably how he assessed the situation.

 

[Marlo Manson]

Have they ever unlawfully broken into a house and tried to steal from someone? Those are two totally different situations.

Plus, according to the article, he had been robbed several times before, so he probably didn't feel all too safe with walking in on complete strangers standing in his trailer.





I'm pretty sure the first thing on his mind wasn't "Gee, look at these nice innocent kids. Aww, they are so sweet and innocent. I should probably make them some snacks, because they look hungry, and then politely ask them to leave". It was probably more like "Who in the FUCK do these punk ass mother fuckers think they are? Stealing MY food? Get the FUCK OUT!!!"

The guy lives in a trailer in Laredo, TX, which is a shitty ass neighborhood. My cousin used to live there and it sucks. Even according to the article...



The guy was probably scared for his life. Who cares if the kids were 11-15? That doesn't mean that they can't carry a knife or a gun. A preteen child with a gun can kill you just as easily as a 50 year old man with a gun.

"There's 3 strange kids in my trailer stealing from me. I live in a neighborhood that is notoriously known for having lots of crime, violence and drug related problems. I bet these fucking kids are dangerous, just like every other criminal in this city. My life is in danger." That was probably how he assessed the situation.

Granted and dualy noted, if he had shot 1st into a dark room knowing it was not a family member, but an obvious intruder then I would say if you break into somebodies home, who is already paranoid and been victimized many times prior, I would say he was just shook and acted on 1st implulse!!

When you have the chance to assess the threat, determine they are un-armed and harmless (because you have a cannon aimed @ them) and they are nuetralized, HE COULD HAVE CALLED THE POLICE!! he could have called their parents!! he could have slapped them upside the head and explained that he could have shot them before he had the chance to see them!!

BEATING, KICKING, AND SHOOTING SOMEBODY IN THE BACK, after finding that the intruder is un-armed and is just A DUMB KID IS just COWARDLY and UN-NECESSARY!! REGARDLESS of his past experience of being the victim of intruders! he had the TIME to NUETRALIZE THE THREAT and call police!! MR. G had control of the situation and his life was not being THREATENED @ THE POINT OF HIS UN-NECESSARY BEATING AND EXECUTION OF THIS DUMBASS KID!! :eek:

YES DUMBASS KID! home invasion is one of the DUMBEST and most dangerous crimes for a criminal to engage in!! they don't know if the home owner has a *cannon* and your (the criminal) or they (the intruder) is about to catch a hot one to the head!! its just a really dumb chance to take!! :dunno:

 

[Becks...poamr]

Amazing how I was able to figure out who read the story and who didn't.

....."confronted the boys with a 16guage shotgun.Then forced the boys,who were unarmed,to their knees.....The boys say they were begging for forgiveness when Gonzalez hit them with the barrel of the shotgun & kicked them reapeatedly.The medical examiner testified Anquiano was SHOT IN THE BACK at close range".

Pretty unmanly of Gonzales to shoot a 13 year old in the back while down on his knees. :dunno: Maybe not a murder charge ,but the guy should have at least gotten some lesser charge.
We've turned into such a country of cowards that are so paranoid/fearful about crime that we can justify shooting a 13 year old in the back. Since friends & family know his name & location I wouldn't feel sorry if Mr Gonzales suffered a similiar fate.

Girk, you quoted a part of the story that I was going to.

I probably wouldn't be as upset at the shooting as I am if it wasn't conducted execution-style.

 

[captclown]

If you break into a lion's cage at the zoo or a human's house anywhere and get attacked and possibly killed, it's your fault.

 

[Facetious]

We've turned into such a country of cowards that are so paranoid/fearful about crime that we can justify shooting a 13 year old in the back.

Take your personal security for granted, do you ?

Aside from this case - You'd be surprised of the vigor that some kids have. Some of 'em are classified as more dangerous than their adult counterparts. If you're raised like a pitbull, you don't have a responsible father figure in your life, mom's out at her boyfriends house 'till 2 AM 5 nights a week and your brothers are gangsters . . .that's a dangerous cocktail !

 

[ChefChiTown]

Take your personal security for granted, do you ?

Aside from this case - You'd be surprised of the vigor that some kids have. Some of 'em are classified as more dangerous than their adult counterparts. If you're raised like a pitbull, you don't have a responsible father figure in your life, mom's out at her boyfriends house 'till 2 AM 5 nights a week and your brothers are gangsters . . .that's a dangerous cocktail !

Tell me about it.

When I was a younger kid (10-15 years old), I was absolutely terrified of what would happen if I did something "bad". Never would I even think of doing something like rob a house, steal a bike or something like that. Now, kids seem to be doing it like they're pros. I don't get it.

I also remember when I was a younger kid, if I was walking down the sidewalk and an adult (or even a kid who was older/bigger than me) was walking the opposite direction, I would move over so they could walk by. Now that I'm an adult, I see all these punks ass fucking kids walking the opposite direction on the sidewalk and they don't even fucking move!!! They pretty much "stand their ground" like some sort of wanna-be hard ass and expect ME to get out of THEIR way. Then, as soon you as get up close to them, they look at you like you're a pussy and that they want to kick your ass. Kids, now-a-days, are fucking...ridiculous.

 

[DreamSparrow]

The concept of actual private property just baffles some people.

If I enter the doors of a private residence without due consent of the proprietor, I deserve anything that might come in my direction.

Bollocks.

A little greying, granny stops by to bring the new neighbour some peach cobbler as an introduction to the neighbourhood. She knocks on the door a few times. She waits, hearing no answer, she steps inside, peering around to see if anyone is at home. The neighbour happens to be a sick, twisted fuck who grabs his shotgun and blasts the granny to hell.

Did she deserve everything she got? According to your reasoning, the answer is yes.

We all interpret our liberties differently - What is ones' liberty is anothers' oppression & vice versa. I guess that there are some that would like a community mess hall and leave it at that.

We clearly do interpet them differently, because while you're so busy focussed on the right to property, you appear to have forgotten that other crucial liberty - the right to LIFE. That is the first liberty, the one which takes precedence over all the others, especially in a case like this.

If someone is burgling your home, you have the right to stop them, without being excessive in the force you use against them; you do NOT do more harm than is necessary. If you reasonably fear an attack on yourself or another, then of course you can act in self-defence or in defence of another.

In this case however, a grown man with a shotgun forced children to their knees as they begged for forgiveness -- at that point they should have been considered subdued, and no longer any kind of threat. He should have picked up the phone to call the police right then.

Instead he set about beating them, clearly administering his own justice, which in itself should have been considered CRIMINAL under any sane law. He was acting as judge, jury and executioner, and you along with others here, support him in that right.

"Even if you're a dumb, misguided kid stealing candy, 'you deserve anything that might come in your direction', and if that's a bullet through the back, so be it."

Does it get more heartless than that? People are so attached to their material possessions that they're willing to take the life of a child? Fucking hell.

If you break into a lion's cage at the zoo or a human's house anywhere and get attacked and possibly killed, it's your fault.

I guess some people happen to believe that human beings should hold themselves to a standard greater than that which is expected of animals.

 

[Fresno]

Protect yourself your love ones and you belongings, but don't hold your own execution of the people who did this to you!

He had them on their knees, all he had to do was call the police!

 

[captclown]

Protect yourself your love ones and you belongings, but don't hold your own execution of the people who did this to you!

You have to do what you have to do.

He had them on their knees, all he had to do was call the police!

There is no way in hell you can actually guarantee they were going to stay there until the cops arrived without plugging one of them. Some of these kids don't learn unless you show them the consequences.

 

[Marlo Manson]

I am definitely a person that says if you break into my home your catchin some hot ones in your head!!

On the same token if I saw and determined the threat was harmless and I happened to gain control of the situation without shooting or violence and the threat was nuetralized, I of course wouldn't shoot in that situation!!

If I would have seen a gun, or they didn't obey my command (which would be whatever would have come out of my mouth @ that time) I prolly would have opened fire, but if I had the threat contained, nuetralized, under control, like MR. G. did!! he had ABSOLUTELY no reason to ATTACK!! he's just a COWARD that over-reacted!! he had the situation under control!! as long as that 16 GUAGE IS POINTED @ THEM YOU THINK THEIR GONNA MOVE??? not a fuckin chance if they've got any brains!!!

In this situation MR. G deserves to be charged with felony murder, capital murder in texas am I correct?? regardless of the intruders ages, regardless if the younger are more inclined to be violent and more dangerous!! THE POINT IS, the man had them under control!! thats the whole issue!! MR. G had ample time to CALL THE POLICE!! but he didn't, instead he beat, stomped, kicked, and finally shoot a kid in the back execution style that is not ACCEPTABLE UNDER ANY CIRRCUMSTANCE'S!! :hatsoff:

 

[ChefChiTown]

You know, after reading all of these posts that are leaning towards the "poor kids" side of things, it got me thinking...

If one of the kids had a gun and shot this guy over some fucking Twinkies, I guarantee that you wouldn't be saying "they're only kids"...you would be saying "what a bunch of rotten little fucks."

The guy didn't know if they had a gun or not. He was defending himself. I would do the same thing. I'm not going to have faith in the "innocence of children" and just automatically assume that I'll be safe if I don't take a stand. I'm going to grab a bat, beat some shit around and take control.

Also, the coroner said that the autopsy showed the kid was shot in the back at "close range", which, in legal terms, could be almost anything. 5 feet? 10 feet? 50 feet? Who knows?

Plus, it was a 16 year old kid who said all that shit about how the guy made them get on their knees, then got hit with the barrel of the gun and got kicked around. Where was the evidence that actually happened? Did they have bruises? Cuts? :dunno: If you notice, it's not in that article. He was 16, he was scared, he said some shit that might not have actually happened in order to make himself look innocent. For all we know, one of the kids might have been on his knees, but then got up really quick to run, making the scared 63 year old man believe that he was about to be attacked, the man shot him in self defense and killed the kid.

Hell, when I was 16 and got caught doing something I wasn't supposed to be doing, nothing even close to the truth would come out of my mouth. Why? Because I was 16 and I didn't want to get in trouble, so I made it sound like nothing was my fault, only other people's faults.

 

[Marlo Manson]

You know, after reading all of these posts that are leaning towards the "poor kids" side of things, it got me thinking...

If one of the kids had a gun and shot this guy over some fucking Twinkies, I guarantee that you wouldn't be saying "they're only kids"...you would be saying "what a bunch of rotten little fucks."

The guy didn't know if they had a gun or not. He was defending himself. I would do the same thing. I'm not going to have faith in the "innocence of children" and just automatically assume that I'll be safe if I don't take a stand. I'm going to grab a bat, beat some shit around and take control.

Also, the coroner said that the autopsy showed the kid was shot in the back at "close range", which, in legal terms, could be almost anything. 5 feet? 10 feet? 50 feet? Who knows?

Plus, it was a 16 year old kid who said all that shit about how the guy made them get on their knees, then got hit with the barrel of the gun and got kicked around. Where was the evidence that actually happened? Did they have bruises? Cuts? :dunno: If you notice, it's not in that article. He was 16, he was scared, he said some shit that might not have actually happened in order to make himself look innocent. For all we know, one of the kids might have been on his knees, but then got up really quick to run, making the scared 63 year old man believe that he was about to be attacked, the man shot him in self defense and killed the kid.

Hell, when I was 16 and got caught doing something I wasn't supposed to be doing, nothing even close to the truth would come out of my mouth. Why? Because I was 16 and I didn't want to get in trouble, so I made it sound like nothing was my fault, only other people's faults.

I never said anything about poor little kids etc..etc.. they put themselves in a very Dumb, precarious, and dangerous situation as we are all aware of now!!

those are some really dumb ass kids that need to be in juvie, or juvenile jail, whatever its called!!

all I am saying is this 63 yr old fart shot a kid in the back EXECUTION STYLE!! if MR. G. had indeed had these little fucks trembling on the ground with a cannon aimed @ them? MR. G. should be held accountable for UN-NEEDED FORCE!!

I guess its the kids version VS. MR. G's version!! yeah they are incredibly dumb little fucks who deserve to be dealt with!! if it happened anything like the kids version I've already voiced my opinion!!

if MR. G's version is more like what really happened / accurate then its justified!! if you commit an adult crime you deal with the adult punishment!!

I guess we will never know the truth, its young dumb criminals words against a old paranoid homeowners words!! thats a crap shoot both aggressors and victims would be in shock or be hopped up by adrenalin!!

Anybody that knows me, knows I got a 9mm with one in the chamber right next to my bed!! and if somebody comes into my home!! I am shootin em if I see a gun or any kind of weapon, or if they approach me in any manner after they've seen me and my weapon!! or they don't obey my commands!! I would more than likely open fire!!

however slim the chances are that it ends with no shooting, it all depends on the moment / situation!! for example if some rare instance takes place and I am able to gain control of the threat with a bat or no violence and call the police instead of deadly force I would!! :hatsoff:

That being said I have no leaning or swayed opinions because they are only poor little kids, they are absolutely / definitely dumb ass little fuckers!! :thumbsup:

 

[bodie54]

There is no way in hell you can actually guarantee they were going to stay there until the cops arrived without plugging one of them. Some of these kids don't learn unless you show them the consequences.

Wow, apparently human stupidity really is more common than hyrogen.

 

[captclown]

Wow, apparently human stupidity really is more common than hyrogen.

Do you mean Hydrogen? Which brings me back to my original post in this thread,

If you break into a lion's cage at the zoo or a human's house anywhere and get attacked and possibly killed, it's your fault.

 

[don_equis]

Is this related to "Would you kill someone for an Xbox?"

People DON'T break into other people's property especially if they are old and crancky it pisses the hell out of them and they might shoot you, but of course teenagers are stupid they won't listen.

 

[Spleen]

This is as dumb as that fucking xbox story.

8 jurors decided he wasn't guilty, and it was THEM in the courtroom. I'm taking their side, too.


FUCK THE MEDIA.

 

[ninetysixcavy]

When you enter someones property you are fair game. I had a discussion with pops (after a recent break in to my vehicle in my driveway), and I told him I would not hesitate to unload on them. He basically said it's a bad idea and that pretty much crooks have more rights than the actuall law abiding citizen. Tough. If the kids parents didn't raise him right, it seems to me the blood is on their hands. :2 cents:

 

[girk1]

Bollocks.

We clearly do interpet them differently, because while you're so busy focussed on the right to property, you appear to have forgotten that other crucial liberty - the right to LIFE. That is the first liberty, the one which takes precedence over all the others, especially in a case like this.

If someone is burgling your home, you have the right to stop them, without being excessive in the force you use against them; you do NOT do more harm than is necessary. If you reasonably fear an attack on yourself or another, then of course you can act in self-defence or in defence of another.

In this case however, a grown man with a shotgun forced children to their knees as they begged for forgiveness -- at that point they should have been considered subdued, and no longer any kind of threat. He should have picked up the phone to call the police right then.

Instead he set about beating them, clearly administering his own justice, which in itself should have been considered CRIMINAL under any sane law. He was acting as judge, jury and executioner, and you along with others here, support him in that right.

"Even if you're a dumb, misguided kid stealing candy, 'you deserve anything that might come in your direction', and if that's a bullet through the back, so be it."

Does it get more heartless than that? People are so attached to their material possessions that they're willing to take the life of a child? Fucking hell.



I guess some people happen to believe that human beings should hold themselves to a standard greater than that which is expected of animals.

FEAR is what drives many of us here in the US unfortunately Sparrow from our daily lives to politics.One quarter of the local Newscasts here in the US are dedicated to property or violent crimes & it feeds into this cowardice & Fear.

You hear the false bravada in many post defending this coward & others like him ,but it is symptomatic of the many Phobias that permeate this country: Extreme Fear of crime, Xenophobia,Homophobia,etc.......From Weapons of mass destruction,Patriot Act,War on Crimes,etc...politicians have expertly played upon these fears.

The jurors & citizens who think it is okay to beat, kick, & shoot a sniveling 13 year old in the back while on his knees & contained have far less courage & honor than this 85 year old Granny who forced an intruder to call cops on himself:

http://www.newser.com/story/35259/gun-toting-grany-foils-would-be-thief.html

Or this angry ,but reasonable guy:1orglaugh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZyNkKC8GuA

This like religion is another philisophical dead end. And like I said I would not be upset if the old coward suffered a similiar fate. Although I would wish he could at least have the dignity of at least seeing the gun barrel pointed to his face or preferably in his mouth:dunno:

 

[BlueBalls]

The sky is cryin....cant you see the tears roll down the street

 

[METAL HEAD]

wonder what would of happen if the kid layed a finger on his butterfinger ????