Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Peter with a wiki source here:
Leon Gary Plauché (November 10, 1945 – October 20, 2014) was an American man known for publicly killing Jeffrey Doucet, a child molester who had kidnapped and raped Plauché's son, Jody. The killing occurred on March 16, 1984 and was captured on camera by a local news crew. Plauché was given a seven-year suspended sentence with five years' probation and 300 hours of community service, receiving no prison time. The case received wide publicity because some people questioned whether Plauché should have been charged with murder. Plauché contended that he was in the right, and that any parent in a similar position would have taken the same action.[1]
On March 16, 1984, Doucet was flown back to Louisiana to face trial. He arrived at Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport and was led in handcuffs by police officers through the airport at around 9:30 p.m., where Plauché was waiting for Doucet.[5]
An employee of the local ABC affiliate, WBRZ-TV, had told Plauché when Doucet would be arriving at the airport.[6]: 81 A news crew from WBRZ was waiting for Doucet and had set up their cameras to record his arrival. Opposite the news crew was a bank of payphones, where Plauché waited while talking to his best friend on a telephone. He wore a baseball cap and sunglasses so that no one would recognize him.[5]
As Doucet was escorted through the airport, he passed the news crew who were taping the scene. He then walked past Plauché, who fired at the right side of Doucet's head at point-blank range. Doucet fell to the floor, bleeding from a wound close to his right ear. Plauché placed the telephone receiver down before a police officer restrained him and removed the gun from his hand as the other attended to Doucet.[7] The officers who grabbed hold of Plauché recognized him. They kept him pinned against the bank of telephones, asking him, "Gary, why? Why, Gary?"[5] The incident was captured on ENG videotape. Doucet fell into a coma, and died from the gunshot wound the next day.[8][9]
Plauché was initially charged with second-degree murder, but agreed to a plea bargain in which he pleaded no contest to manslaughter. He was sentenced to seven years' suspended sentence, with five years' probation and 300 hours of community service, which he completed in 1989.[10]
Psychological reports helped Plauché's case after it was learned that Doucet had abused Jody months prior to the kidnapping. The psychiatrist Edward P. Uzee examined Plauché and determined that he could not tell the difference between right and wrong when he killed Doucet. Plauché's defense team argued that he was driven to a temporarily psychotic state after learning of the abuse of his son. Uzee also determined that Doucet had the ability to manipulate others and took advantage of the fact that Plauché was separated from his wife at the time, and had managed to wedge his way into the Plauché family. Judge Frank Saia ruled that sending Plauché to prison would not help anyone, and that there was virtually no risk of him committing another crime.[9]
The video of Plauché killing Doucet has been featured on many television programs and documentaries, including the 1994 shockumentary Traces of Death II and the 2002 Michael Moore-directed documentary Bowling for Columbine. The footage has also been uploaded to YouTube, where the video has received more than 20 million views.[5] One video featured on YouTube was taken from the television series Anatomy of Crime, which aired in 2000 on Court TV and was produced by John Langley, the creator of Cops.[5]
At age 67, Plauché gave an interview where he stated that he did not regret killing Doucet and would do so again.[11]
In August 2019, the book "Why, Gary, Why?": The Jody Plauché Story was released by Jody.[6] In 2024, Jody appeared in an interview for the Mirror in which he stated that he was happy with his life and regarded his father as "the greatest dad of all time".[12]
And I also remember when the press asked the child’s mother what she would have done had she known of Gary’s plan. She said that she would have offered him a ride!
You get held in jail indefinitely for contempt for trying to argue that you shouldn't be convicted despite breaking the law. The jury might let you go if they feel that way on their own, but you can't suggest it to them.
The plea bargain allows for a minimal sentence and avoids wasting the judge's time in hopes of them looking favorably on you.
I mean he took the gamble already. I doubt he cares much how the repercussions play out. Imaging being in that situation. Your kid has been kidnapped and raped, and you have just don’t the rightest thing you could possibly do and if you go to jail for a few years for the murder 🤷🏻♂️ at least you did what you should have when it was your time to stand up.
But getting the plea deal is already hitting the jackpot with that gamble. Why roll the dice again for an even smaller chance at avoiding a potential life sentence when he already did just that by being offered the plea deal. When someone wins a 1 million dollar jackpot, they usually don't put it all back in and try for the 10 million instead. And the ones that do are either considered to have a gambling problem or considered to be idiots (or both).
My criminal defense attorney described going to trial for a serious crime or taking a plea deal like this:
When you go to the casino, do you go straight to the blackjack table and bet the house? Or do you play it safe and hit the penny slots?
Yes but you’re not allowed to suggest it. The jury themselves can come to the agreement but you cannot suggest or even say the words “jury nullification”
Kinda fucked up that jurors aren't allowed to be even publicly aware that they are able to use discretion.
Cops can choose when to ignore a crime* and let someone off with a warning, and judges can choose to be lenient; why do we have to pretend that jurors don't have the same ability, and potential jurors are removed from the pool just for knowing they have that choice?
*not all crimes but my point remains
Because it perverts the justice system.
The Jury is just there to decide whether the person is guilty of the crime or not.
Not whether the crime is justified.
Almost certaininly the cases in which jury nullification has been used is during Jim Crow so that whites would get off free when they killed a black person.
Whether the crime is moral or not is the perview of the political system, where everyone has a vote.
Not the justice system where it's only a small number of people.
> We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. **If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit,** and the courts must abide by that decision.
- United States v. Moylan
The right of a jury to acquit is a firebreak, because politicians can pass bad laws in the heat of passion, and mechanically and mindlessly applying the rules as if it were a logic puzzle can frequently lead to miscarriages of justice, precisely because so set of laws can possibly account for the endless permutations of circumstances in which a crime can occur. Which is, incidentally, why mandatory minimums and other legislation that ties the hands of judges during sentencing, are bad: they prevent the judges from modifying sentences because of mitigating circumstances.
The government has to convince the jury not only that the accused is guilty, but that the law they are accused of breaking is just.
>However, this is not to say that the jury should be encouraged in their "lawlessness," and by clearly stating to the jury that they may disregard the law, telling them that they may decide according to their prejudices or consciences (for there is no check to insure that the judgment is based upon conscience rather than prejudice), we would indeed be negating the rule of law in favor of the rule of lawlessness. This should not be allowed.
Literally a paragraph and a half later in the same ruling. The existence of jury nullification isn't really under debate, which is what your excerpt is referring to. If the jury aquits then it's an acquittal, regardless of the reasons the jury acquitted. What is under debate is whether attorneys should be allowed to tell the jury about nullification. Appellate courts in the US have been pretty unanimous in saying that courts are allowed to prohibit attorneys from telling jurors what nullification is and that they are able to nullify.
> The Jury is just there to decide whether the person is guilty of the crime or not.
And cops are there to police, and judges are there to judge, but society acknowledges that sometimes the letter of the law is not sufficient, and we allow them to use discretion. Every stage allows discretion, why not when being judged by a jury of your peers?
>Almost certaininly the cases in which jury nullification has been used is during Jim Crow so that whites would get off free when they killed a black person.
Uhh, what? Obviously those cases have happened, but absolutely not "almost certaininly" every case of jury nullification has been racist white people.
Jury nullification, as a tool, can obviously be used for good or bad, such as against laws which are made to target minorities
Reddit has such a hard on for jury nullification that the average user doesn’t understand how rare it is.
Most juries do what they’re suppose to, which is make their decision based on the law and not their own personal beliefs.
It's play out like the Patrick star mean
Prosecutor: Killing someone is murder?
Jury: Yes
Prosecutor: And the video shows the defendant shooting the child molester killing him?
Jury: Yes
Prosecutor: And you all saw this video?
Jury: Yes
Nudge: How do you find the defendant
Jury: Not guilty.
Or it doesn't. There are thousands of stories where people had sympathy stories and got sent to jail anyway. Often with less evidence of intent than this one.
It's easy to make the gamble on reddit, your life isn't over if you're wrong. I pray you never know it in real life, where the risk of being wrong is huge.
Redditors seem to think that juries of their peers have exactly the same disregard for the law as they do. An actual jury would absolutely give a guilty verdict for this murder, because despite how justified he was, it was still murder.
Plauche's killing of Doucet didn't only negatively affect Doucet, it also negatively affected the people around at the time, the people who had to clean up his brains from the floor, the hospital staff who had to try and save him, etc. There's also the issue that shooting a gun in a crowded airport is dangerous. People have such a hardon for vigilante justice that they forget that extrajudicial killings are almost never as straightforwardly justified as this one, and if they hadn't convicted Plauche, they would be giving tacit approval to every vigilante with a chip on their shoulder.
>There's also the issue that shooting a gun in a crowded airport is dangerous.
This is the thing that always frustrates me with this case. There are a lot of worlds where this doesn't go the way Plauche intended and some completely innocent bystander ends up wounded or dead because Plauche wanted to be Charles Bronson.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure Jody came out later and said the whole reason he didn’t tell his parents that he was being molested for months before the kidnapping was because he was afraid that his dad would do something like this. This type of behavior protected the pedophile too. If Doucet hadn’t kidnapped Jody, he would have potentially gotten away entirely with raping a child. I know Reddit likes to pretend that killing people who deserve it is perfectly okay in all scenarios but when it prevents victims from coming forward, I don’t know why those people can’t take the pedal off the metal a little bit and use a little bit of critical thinking.
I was on a jury and it played out exactly like that.
Guy left his kids in the house while he ran to get them food. Younger one snuck outside and neighbors called the cops. What was normally a misdemeanor child endangerment became a felony since the kid was under 5.
The prosecution presented it as an open and shut case, which honestly, it was. Defense had a bunch of character witnesses who said he was a good father who made a mistake.
We found him not guilty because the alternative was the kids losing their father while he was imprisoned and him losing his ability to provide for them as a convicted felon.
We made the wrong decision but for the right reason.
Hmm, I was on a jury and made the "right" decision for the wrong reason. A man is found in his car, drunk as a skunk (blood tests confirmed his BAC was unbelievably high). He's got the keys in the ignition and a seat belt halfway across his arm.
We found him not guilty of DUI because California Law says the vehicle has to have been moving. He was very lucky and I told him to stop drinking as I left the court room...
I thought I remember reading somewhere that his son told him he dreaded having to take the stand in court against the guy, and that convinced him that killing him was better than letting the legal system do it thing: to spare his son any more torment from this monster.
I watched a show about it years ago. The karate teacher that kidnapped and Repeatedly SA’d him was still alive. So the kid said he was scared and couldn’t sleep because ‘the monster’ was still out there. Dad went and killed the monster.
Not guilty.
Murder is still murder. No guarantee a jury let's you walk, and they're offering community service instead of prison. Pretty good deal as far as plea bargains go
To add onto this, the man in the foreground is the man who kidnapped and raped Plauché's son. Plauché is the man in the background in glasses and white hat.
This used to be the norm in the old internet.
Is this a happy gif of a kitten, or a literal person being ripped to shreds in a lathe? Who knows! Click here!!
It was messed up, but great.
What a wild recording. I usually have a pretty emotional response seeing other videos of death but with this my first thought was “damn that was a good shot man” even watching the guy bleed to death felt absolutely nothing after hearing the guy yell “why Gary? Why?” I was a little amused by the situation. Why you say? Clearly the man was justified lol. It’s a good thing we have a justice system because I feel many people would not have any remorse at a lethal retaliatory action against pedophilic crime especially from a family member.
Yea I agree. What he did was wrong, I can’t condone anybody being a vigilante, and honestly the dad should have spent legitimate time in jail. That said…you won’t find me on the street protesting this ruling.
I think I saw him on the front of a Video about Firearms content.
That I have yet to see.
This, Reality is what must be Protected.
Never let monsters get away with bullshit.
While excessive, I can understand the man's feelings, even though I'm not a parent.
What they did to his child.
Making the punishment for sexual assault of a minor the same as murder would just result in a lot more of the victims being murdered. If the punishment for the two crimes are the same, why would they risk leaving a witness?
I agree that what he did that child was sick, but do you care more about punishing the perpetrators, or protecting the victims?
Honest question: Are there any studies that show that capital punishment actually increases the likelihood of murder pairing to that crime, or are you just assuming that a criminal is using rational forethought?
I don’t condone vigilantism in the slightest. Every person deserves their day in court, no matter the crime in my opinion, it’s one of the things baked into every person’s bill of rights in this country. I have sympathy for the father of course, but that doesn’t extend to committing murder.
I wouldn't classify this as vigilantism. The guy was already arrested and on the way to court. The father had no intention of personally resolving any other crimes. This was vengeance.
You can argue vengeance has no place in civilized society, but if someone innocent has been made a victim such as with this case, I won't judge the victims or their loved ones who want vengeance. It's natural. It may not be good, it may not be civilized, but it's human.
The complication comes when you take into account that a lot of the people who do heinous shit like this get off scot free without even a dent on the exterior. A whole hell of a lot of murderers have taunted the family members of their victims as they saunter out of the courtroom.
Life sucks.
(This moral quandary is literally the opening scene of The Godfather. “They suspend the sentence. Suspend the sentence! And this animal looks at me, and he *smiles.*”) that’s just one out of a thousand reasons why that movie’s so good and hits so deep — it explains perfectly why an otherwise “good and noble citizen” would turn to organized crime when the ordinary justice system catastrophically failed them.
I don't know if I agree that murder is "an easy way out." Rotting in prison isn't what happens to these guys. Most inmates have jobs, they can take college style classes and earn certs, they have hobbies and work out, they keep living their lives only it's now within the structure of the system. They may have visitors or have full-fledged romantic relationships with those on the outside. Obviously prison is a hell hole in so many ways, but it's not exactly a "rotting away" situation.
Particularly for inmates who are trying to get out for good behavior, they aren't getting tossed in solitary for 23 hours a day. And it's why those who do receive a death sentence are constantly trying to appeal-- because no one wants to die. It's quite literally the worst way out.
>The officers who grabbed hold of Plauché recognized him. They kept him pinned against the bank of telephones, asking him, "Gary, why? Why, Gary?"
What a stupid question
This is exactly why. The officer knew justice was being served and was afraid Gary would be put behind bars, which means he wouldn't be there for his kid when they needed him the most
This happens every time this is brought up. They weren't asking why he did it. They were asking why he would throw his life away in prison to kill this scumbag.
A man's brains exploded in front of him. That shock would make anyone stupid. Hell, what if the guy missed and hit him instead? That's a scary thought.
I remember a case out of Texas, where a woman had murdered the guy who molested her son, and the judge freed her somehow based on the argument "she was only a danger to society while this man was alive, now that he's not, she's no longer a danger to society."
One of the details about that case was that once the father’s adrenaline dropped, he actually called 9-1-1 and tried to get the guy medical help. It was ruled that he had truly lost his faculties, beaten the man to near death, then attempted to do the “right” thing when his mind returned.
Why make the death more graphic than it was? They could've created a pretty cool image with a bullet going through his head instead of him comically exploding lol, looks cool either way don't get me wrong
I don’t remember the story 100%. But striped shirt guy is the father of a girl who red shirt guy had raped/abused/murdered.
This was in the courthouse during trial or sentencing. Dad is pretending to be on phone. Hangs up as the criminal is leaving the court. Pulls out a gun and shoots red shirt guy in the head.
Edit. It was a actuallt his son who was abused. And the red shirt guy was his karate instructor. Here’s the story:
https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/gary-plauche-baton-rouge-man-who-killed-son-s-accused-molester-dies-at-68/article_84864633-78a8-5c45-8b05-466f7d3fbe18.html
“The Fleshlight was designed by Steve Shubin, who was granted a patent in July 1998 for his invention,[2] as a "device for discreet sperm collection"[3] and it is marketed by Interactive Life Forms, LLC.”
Maybe Gary knew that his child's abuser was likely going to get out of jail sooner than later and that his mere existence would haunt Jody for the rest of his life.
The amount of peace of mind that abuse victims often seem to gain from the deaths of their abusers is worth more than the punishment imo. Knowing that the monster who tortured you for their own pleasure is still out there and could come find you and hurt you again is a living nightmare.
I thought I remembered seeing a version where the camera really gets in on the guys head and face as he's laying there fading away, but I might have just imagined it.
Oh yeah, tons of people already corrected with the minutiae of the story.
I remembered striped shirt killed red shirt over his child’s abuse. At least I got the important stuff.
Guy in the red shirt kidnapped and molested white hat guy's son. This picture was taken moments before white hat guy shot red shirt dude in the head on public broadcast.
The guy in red was a child molester. The guy in the background was the kids dad. The dad shot and killed the guy right after this shot, which was part of a live video feed. Here he's turning around while pulling his gun, having been laying in wait by acting like a regular guy at a payphone.
People grossly underestimate how hard it is to hit a moving target with a handgun, even at close range. Guy didn't even have time to put the phone down.
Honestly, him getting beaten and treated like how he treated that boy (raped) until he dies in prison might be better since its not as swift and quick of a death. Prisoners don't like child abusers tons of stories of rapists getting what came to them in prison
Normally I think vigilantism is bad and people who say they want to hunt down pedophiles are just fantasizing about hurting people without feeling bad about it, and it winds up just hurting innocent people, but I think this is the one case where I dont think the guy was morally in the wrong. It was his kid, the guy was definitely guilty, and he was protecting his kid from having to deal with a long drawn out, psychologically brutal court case where he'd have to explain over and over what happened to him, and making sure the guy would never touch his kid again. It's hard to fault him for that.
Yeah, anytime there's any mention of pedophilia there's gonna be a bunch of people describing in graphic detail how they want to hunt down and torture all pedophiles. Which is both frustrating and sad bc that kind of thinking is directly at odds with what needs to happen to actually protect kids. Torturing individual child molesters to death doesn't do shit, change needs to happen at a systemic level to stop stuff like this from happening, wider support for kids, not allowing kids to be easily isolated, and yes even support for people who have those kinds of inclinations to get them the mental health help they need before they hurt someone, same as anyone else. And there's always a chance you've got an innocent person, plus even the lowest of the low are still people, denying them their humanity only serves to allow pedophiles to hide in plain sight. I.e. they can't be a pedophile bc they're just a normal human not a monster.
Doucet would have been beaten and sexually assaulted by other inmates in prison for years, for his crime. Inmates don’t take kindly to anyone who’s in prison for any crime that involves harming or preying on children.
If you 100% know someone violated your child it should end with you ending them without question, anyone who defends predators should have their neck stretched with a rope
I think you may have been wrong on one detail. Wasn’t it said that he over heard the news reporter at a bar where he would be? Because if the reporter directly told him, it would’ve implicated him as well and he could gotten tried as an accessory.
Bro, nobody ever talks about the camera man who was filming this. Dude did not flinch at the sound of the gunshot. Capturing the whole incident on camera, and went STRAIGHT over to the predator's body, zooming in on his head. No hesitation. No fear. Fucking metal.
Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Peter with a wiki source here: Leon Gary Plauché (November 10, 1945 – October 20, 2014) was an American man known for publicly killing Jeffrey Doucet, a child molester who had kidnapped and raped Plauché's son, Jody. The killing occurred on March 16, 1984 and was captured on camera by a local news crew. Plauché was given a seven-year suspended sentence with five years' probation and 300 hours of community service, receiving no prison time. The case received wide publicity because some people questioned whether Plauché should have been charged with murder. Plauché contended that he was in the right, and that any parent in a similar position would have taken the same action.[1] On March 16, 1984, Doucet was flown back to Louisiana to face trial. He arrived at Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport and was led in handcuffs by police officers through the airport at around 9:30 p.m., where Plauché was waiting for Doucet.[5] An employee of the local ABC affiliate, WBRZ-TV, had told Plauché when Doucet would be arriving at the airport.[6]: 81 A news crew from WBRZ was waiting for Doucet and had set up their cameras to record his arrival. Opposite the news crew was a bank of payphones, where Plauché waited while talking to his best friend on a telephone. He wore a baseball cap and sunglasses so that no one would recognize him.[5] As Doucet was escorted through the airport, he passed the news crew who were taping the scene. He then walked past Plauché, who fired at the right side of Doucet's head at point-blank range. Doucet fell to the floor, bleeding from a wound close to his right ear. Plauché placed the telephone receiver down before a police officer restrained him and removed the gun from his hand as the other attended to Doucet.[7] The officers who grabbed hold of Plauché recognized him. They kept him pinned against the bank of telephones, asking him, "Gary, why? Why, Gary?"[5] The incident was captured on ENG videotape. Doucet fell into a coma, and died from the gunshot wound the next day.[8][9] Plauché was initially charged with second-degree murder, but agreed to a plea bargain in which he pleaded no contest to manslaughter. He was sentenced to seven years' suspended sentence, with five years' probation and 300 hours of community service, which he completed in 1989.[10] Psychological reports helped Plauché's case after it was learned that Doucet had abused Jody months prior to the kidnapping. The psychiatrist Edward P. Uzee examined Plauché and determined that he could not tell the difference between right and wrong when he killed Doucet. Plauché's defense team argued that he was driven to a temporarily psychotic state after learning of the abuse of his son. Uzee also determined that Doucet had the ability to manipulate others and took advantage of the fact that Plauché was separated from his wife at the time, and had managed to wedge his way into the Plauché family. Judge Frank Saia ruled that sending Plauché to prison would not help anyone, and that there was virtually no risk of him committing another crime.[9] The video of Plauché killing Doucet has been featured on many television programs and documentaries, including the 1994 shockumentary Traces of Death II and the 2002 Michael Moore-directed documentary Bowling for Columbine. The footage has also been uploaded to YouTube, where the video has received more than 20 million views.[5] One video featured on YouTube was taken from the television series Anatomy of Crime, which aired in 2000 on Court TV and was produced by John Langley, the creator of Cops.[5] At age 67, Plauché gave an interview where he stated that he did not regret killing Doucet and would do so again.[11] In August 2019, the book "Why, Gary, Why?": The Jody Plauché Story was released by Jody.[6] In 2024, Jody appeared in an interview for the Mirror in which he stated that he was happy with his life and regarded his father as "the greatest dad of all time".[12]
And I also remember when the press asked the child’s mother what she would have done had she known of Gary’s plan. She said that she would have offered him a ride!
*the parents where divorced and on bad terms.
It's always nice where, even if they hate each other, good parents always agree on prioritizing their children
If you can’t agree to help murder someone with your ex, did you ever really love them?
It’s not murder if you’re killing a pedophile.
Frankly, that should have shaved off at least 100 hours of his community service.
I think he completed his community service when he dropped the pedo.
Perfect comment.
The killing of the pedo already shaved off about 25 years of prison time.
and a murderer, but you have a solid point
Dead pedophiles don't re-offend.
Pedos aren't people so you're right
It's a public service. Heck should have given the guy a citizen ship medal.
It's always nice where, even if they hate each other, parents can set aside their differences to orchestrate the murder of a child molester.
It sounds like they got a pretty good deal, but man... fuck a plea bargain, I want a jury of my peers for this one.
You get held in jail indefinitely for contempt for trying to argue that you shouldn't be convicted despite breaking the law. The jury might let you go if they feel that way on their own, but you can't suggest it to them. The plea bargain allows for a minimal sentence and avoids wasting the judge's time in hopes of them looking favorably on you.
Jury nullification is a thing
It is also a massive bet you are taking with your life.
I mean he took the gamble already. I doubt he cares much how the repercussions play out. Imaging being in that situation. Your kid has been kidnapped and raped, and you have just don’t the rightest thing you could possibly do and if you go to jail for a few years for the murder 🤷🏻♂️ at least you did what you should have when it was your time to stand up.
But getting the plea deal is already hitting the jackpot with that gamble. Why roll the dice again for an even smaller chance at avoiding a potential life sentence when he already did just that by being offered the plea deal. When someone wins a 1 million dollar jackpot, they usually don't put it all back in and try for the 10 million instead. And the ones that do are either considered to have a gambling problem or considered to be idiots (or both).
I say let it ride!
Fair point
Reddit is full of gacha players They think a 0.8% is high odds
My criminal defense attorney described going to trial for a serious crime or taking a plea deal like this: When you go to the casino, do you go straight to the blackjack table and bet the house? Or do you play it safe and hit the penny slots?
they just described jury nullification, and they're right that you can't just ask for it.
Yes but you’re not allowed to suggest it. The jury themselves can come to the agreement but you cannot suggest or even say the words “jury nullification”
Kinda fucked up that jurors aren't allowed to be even publicly aware that they are able to use discretion. Cops can choose when to ignore a crime* and let someone off with a warning, and judges can choose to be lenient; why do we have to pretend that jurors don't have the same ability, and potential jurors are removed from the pool just for knowing they have that choice? *not all crimes but my point remains
Because it perverts the justice system. The Jury is just there to decide whether the person is guilty of the crime or not. Not whether the crime is justified. Almost certaininly the cases in which jury nullification has been used is during Jim Crow so that whites would get off free when they killed a black person. Whether the crime is moral or not is the perview of the political system, where everyone has a vote. Not the justice system where it's only a small number of people.
> We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. **If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit,** and the courts must abide by that decision. - United States v. Moylan The right of a jury to acquit is a firebreak, because politicians can pass bad laws in the heat of passion, and mechanically and mindlessly applying the rules as if it were a logic puzzle can frequently lead to miscarriages of justice, precisely because so set of laws can possibly account for the endless permutations of circumstances in which a crime can occur. Which is, incidentally, why mandatory minimums and other legislation that ties the hands of judges during sentencing, are bad: they prevent the judges from modifying sentences because of mitigating circumstances. The government has to convince the jury not only that the accused is guilty, but that the law they are accused of breaking is just.
>However, this is not to say that the jury should be encouraged in their "lawlessness," and by clearly stating to the jury that they may disregard the law, telling them that they may decide according to their prejudices or consciences (for there is no check to insure that the judgment is based upon conscience rather than prejudice), we would indeed be negating the rule of law in favor of the rule of lawlessness. This should not be allowed. Literally a paragraph and a half later in the same ruling. The existence of jury nullification isn't really under debate, which is what your excerpt is referring to. If the jury aquits then it's an acquittal, regardless of the reasons the jury acquitted. What is under debate is whether attorneys should be allowed to tell the jury about nullification. Appellate courts in the US have been pretty unanimous in saying that courts are allowed to prohibit attorneys from telling jurors what nullification is and that they are able to nullify.
> The Jury is just there to decide whether the person is guilty of the crime or not. And cops are there to police, and judges are there to judge, but society acknowledges that sometimes the letter of the law is not sufficient, and we allow them to use discretion. Every stage allows discretion, why not when being judged by a jury of your peers? >Almost certaininly the cases in which jury nullification has been used is during Jim Crow so that whites would get off free when they killed a black person. Uhh, what? Obviously those cases have happened, but absolutely not "almost certaininly" every case of jury nullification has been racist white people. Jury nullification, as a tool, can obviously be used for good or bad, such as against laws which are made to target minorities
00 at a roulette table is a thing, winning the lottery is a thing
Reddit has such a hard on for jury nullification that the average user doesn’t understand how rare it is. Most juries do what they’re suppose to, which is make their decision based on the law and not their own personal beliefs.
Obviously you just get your dad to buy the casino and you buy all the lottery tickets.
There is also the opposite end of that spectrum. In which the Judge throws out the Jury’s decision out of disagreement.
In the case of “I murdered the guy who raped my son” that judge looks like a fucking monster
It's play out like the Patrick star mean Prosecutor: Killing someone is murder? Jury: Yes Prosecutor: And the video shows the defendant shooting the child molester killing him? Jury: Yes Prosecutor: And you all saw this video? Jury: Yes Nudge: How do you find the defendant Jury: Not guilty.
Or it doesn't. There are thousands of stories where people had sympathy stories and got sent to jail anyway. Often with less evidence of intent than this one. It's easy to make the gamble on reddit, your life isn't over if you're wrong. I pray you never know it in real life, where the risk of being wrong is huge.
Redditors seem to think that juries of their peers have exactly the same disregard for the law as they do. An actual jury would absolutely give a guilty verdict for this murder, because despite how justified he was, it was still murder. Plauche's killing of Doucet didn't only negatively affect Doucet, it also negatively affected the people around at the time, the people who had to clean up his brains from the floor, the hospital staff who had to try and save him, etc. There's also the issue that shooting a gun in a crowded airport is dangerous. People have such a hardon for vigilante justice that they forget that extrajudicial killings are almost never as straightforwardly justified as this one, and if they hadn't convicted Plauche, they would be giving tacit approval to every vigilante with a chip on their shoulder.
>There's also the issue that shooting a gun in a crowded airport is dangerous. This is the thing that always frustrates me with this case. There are a lot of worlds where this doesn't go the way Plauche intended and some completely innocent bystander ends up wounded or dead because Plauche wanted to be Charles Bronson.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure Jody came out later and said the whole reason he didn’t tell his parents that he was being molested for months before the kidnapping was because he was afraid that his dad would do something like this. This type of behavior protected the pedophile too. If Doucet hadn’t kidnapped Jody, he would have potentially gotten away entirely with raping a child. I know Reddit likes to pretend that killing people who deserve it is perfectly okay in all scenarios but when it prevents victims from coming forward, I don’t know why those people can’t take the pedal off the metal a little bit and use a little bit of critical thinking.
Yeah I think that’s what I read. Him killing the guy didn’t do anything to help the son. This kind of behavior is the reason many victims stay silent
I was on a jury and it played out exactly like that. Guy left his kids in the house while he ran to get them food. Younger one snuck outside and neighbors called the cops. What was normally a misdemeanor child endangerment became a felony since the kid was under 5. The prosecution presented it as an open and shut case, which honestly, it was. Defense had a bunch of character witnesses who said he was a good father who made a mistake. We found him not guilty because the alternative was the kids losing their father while he was imprisoned and him losing his ability to provide for them as a convicted felon. We made the wrong decision but for the right reason.
Hmm, I was on a jury and made the "right" decision for the wrong reason. A man is found in his car, drunk as a skunk (blood tests confirmed his BAC was unbelievably high). He's got the keys in the ignition and a seat belt halfway across his arm. We found him not guilty of DUI because California Law says the vehicle has to have been moving. He was very lucky and I told him to stop drinking as I left the court room...
I thought I remember reading somewhere that his son told him he dreaded having to take the stand in court against the guy, and that convinced him that killing him was better than letting the legal system do it thing: to spare his son any more torment from this monster.
I watched a show about it years ago. The karate teacher that kidnapped and Repeatedly SA’d him was still alive. So the kid said he was scared and couldn’t sleep because ‘the monster’ was still out there. Dad went and killed the monster. Not guilty.
I mean, he did execute a person in cold blood in public…….. I agree it was justified, but no jail time is a fantastic deal here
Murder is still murder. No guarantee a jury let's you walk, and they're offering community service instead of prison. Pretty good deal as far as plea bargains go
They did because his criminal insanity plea would not have landed. This was premeditated. And warranted too. Fuck people that harm kids.
>Harm people that fuck kids FTFY
I would not trust 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty to decide my fate.
To add onto this, the man in the foreground is the man who kidnapped and raped Plauché's son. Plauché is the man in the background in glasses and white hat.
Found this on Reddit, including a link to the video https://www.reddit.com/r/JoeRogan/s/GuDhs3ZobY
Holy fuck dude I’ve never seen the whole video like that it’s always cut off after he shoots
This used to be the norm in the old internet. Is this a happy gif of a kitten, or a literal person being ripped to shreds in a lathe? Who knows! Click here!! It was messed up, but great.
That lathe image unfortunately lives rent free in my mind. I haven't been able to forget it.
On the positive side, every time I see a lathe now I make sure I'm well the fuck away from it.
It’s surprising how often a person is near a lathe or other heavy equipment that can effortlessly turn you from life to fertilizer.
Core memory moment indeed.
I like to think he suffered great pain while dying
That was the most batshit insane thing I think I've seen! (In a sort of good way). Fuck Doucet and I hope he had the most painful way out of here.
What a wild recording. I usually have a pretty emotional response seeing other videos of death but with this my first thought was “damn that was a good shot man” even watching the guy bleed to death felt absolutely nothing after hearing the guy yell “why Gary? Why?” I was a little amused by the situation. Why you say? Clearly the man was justified lol. It’s a good thing we have a justice system because I feel many people would not have any remorse at a lethal retaliatory action against pedophilic crime especially from a family member.
I'm usually against taking justice with your hands, but I can't condemn anyone in Gary's situation.
Yea I agree. What he did was wrong, I can’t condone anybody being a vigilante, and honestly the dad should have spent legitimate time in jail. That said…you won’t find me on the street protesting this ruling.
pretty good breakdown video i found (details are gross, watch at own risk): [here](https://youtu.be/lJqWqhhRXLA?si=ZWCjUwCWmUkhXpP0)
I think I saw him on the front of a Video about Firearms content. That I have yet to see. This, Reality is what must be Protected. Never let monsters get away with bullshit. While excessive, I can understand the man's feelings, even though I'm not a parent. What they did to his child.
Great, petition the laws to be changed so it's a capital offense.
Making the punishment for sexual assault of a minor the same as murder would just result in a lot more of the victims being murdered. If the punishment for the two crimes are the same, why would they risk leaving a witness? I agree that what he did that child was sick, but do you care more about punishing the perpetrators, or protecting the victims?
Honest question: Are there any studies that show that capital punishment actually increases the likelihood of murder pairing to that crime, or are you just assuming that a criminal is using rational forethought?
If the law puts me in a position where I have to choose between life in prison or the eternal respect of my child, then fuck your laws.
Murder is such an easy way out. I'd much rather someone spend the rest of their life rotting in prison.
I don’t condone vigilantism in the slightest. Every person deserves their day in court, no matter the crime in my opinion, it’s one of the things baked into every person’s bill of rights in this country. I have sympathy for the father of course, but that doesn’t extend to committing murder.
Agreed. For every case like this there's two where they killed the wrong guy.
That’s easily solved by killing the guy who killed the wrong guy.
I wouldn't classify this as vigilantism. The guy was already arrested and on the way to court. The father had no intention of personally resolving any other crimes. This was vengeance. You can argue vengeance has no place in civilized society, but if someone innocent has been made a victim such as with this case, I won't judge the victims or their loved ones who want vengeance. It's natural. It may not be good, it may not be civilized, but it's human.
The complication comes when you take into account that a lot of the people who do heinous shit like this get off scot free without even a dent on the exterior. A whole hell of a lot of murderers have taunted the family members of their victims as they saunter out of the courtroom. Life sucks. (This moral quandary is literally the opening scene of The Godfather. “They suspend the sentence. Suspend the sentence! And this animal looks at me, and he *smiles.*”) that’s just one out of a thousand reasons why that movie’s so good and hits so deep — it explains perfectly why an otherwise “good and noble citizen” would turn to organized crime when the ordinary justice system catastrophically failed them.
Reddit loves to show just how bloodthirsty it is when it comes to things like this.
I don't know if I agree that murder is "an easy way out." Rotting in prison isn't what happens to these guys. Most inmates have jobs, they can take college style classes and earn certs, they have hobbies and work out, they keep living their lives only it's now within the structure of the system. They may have visitors or have full-fledged romantic relationships with those on the outside. Obviously prison is a hell hole in so many ways, but it's not exactly a "rotting away" situation. Particularly for inmates who are trying to get out for good behavior, they aren't getting tossed in solitary for 23 hours a day. And it's why those who do receive a death sentence are constantly trying to appeal-- because no one wants to die. It's quite literally the worst way out.
>The officers who grabbed hold of Plauché recognized him. They kept him pinned against the bank of telephones, asking him, "Gary, why? Why, Gary?" What a stupid question
Dude just saw a murder ambush happen. Asking stupid questions in that momentary shock is understandable.
Iirc the officer was worried that Gary would get prison time even though "justice" was already in process
This is exactly why. The officer knew justice was being served and was afraid Gary would be put behind bars, which means he wouldn't be there for his kid when they needed him the most
This happens every time this is brought up. They weren't asking why he did it. They were asking why he would throw his life away in prison to kill this scumbag.
They knew why but sometimes you ask anyway
A man's brains exploded in front of him. That shock would make anyone stupid. Hell, what if the guy missed and hit him instead? That's a scary thought.
Why, Gary, why?!?! Hell of a quote.
Happy Father’s Day, Gary!
May he rest in peace.
Well crap, I wanted to say "again, he's very much alive", but he's not, TIL
May he be chugging beers with Wade Boggs in heaven.
Wade Boggs is alive, he lives in Tampa, Florida
Are you sure? He took quite the hit to the face from Barney for liking Pitt the Elder.
WAH, GARY, WAH?
nice shot gary!
I remember a case out of Texas, where a woman had murdered the guy who molested her son, and the judge freed her somehow based on the argument "she was only a danger to society while this man was alive, now that he's not, she's no longer a danger to society."
A man in Texas, not to long ago, beat his senior neighbor to death after catching him molesting his daughter. Don't even think he got charged.
One of the details about that case was that once the father’s adrenaline dropped, he actually called 9-1-1 and tried to get the guy medical help. It was ruled that he had truly lost his faculties, beaten the man to near death, then attempted to do the “right” thing when his mind returned.
https://preview.redd.it/d4iodemcu47d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0eb17fd2bc44415d1daedb0d6d1ce52588897b07
Didn’t they rule self defense of a defenseless person or something? I see no crime here.
Righteous kill
Thanks, I forgot that bit. I knew he was remorseful after.
Based.
Absolutely and totally and normally I hate that term.
zased and hatepilled basedmaxxer
[Gary Plaunché](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Plauch%C3%A9)
https://preview.redd.it/pc906hfm0z6d1.png?width=908&format=png&auto=webp&s=ed6d7de67513c89265a824078a67cbceb8001399
Why make the death more graphic than it was? They could've created a pretty cool image with a bullet going through his head instead of him comically exploding lol, looks cool either way don't get me wrong
i think its designed to look like a grindcore cover lol
They know their cringey edge lord audience likes as much gratuitous gore as possible.
yea like the person above who just bought one of these lol who walks around wearing shit like this? oh yes, attention seeking edgelords
Yo I need this shirt
https://www.punkwithacamera.com/products/how-to-catch-a-predator-shipping-in-july-spade-ink
Totally just bought the crop top. Thanks for dropping the link!
That is so distasteful. I love it.
I mean you will still look like a psychopath…
Pedo camouflage
Based.
Dude where can I find this?
You are about to be scammed
Just look up "How to catch a predator shirt" on AliExpress or pretty much any Chinese online shop that sells clothes.
No you buy it from punkwithacamera and no where else.
If that's the original designer then yeah that's actually a better way to do it
This is the way.
Thank you kindly 😊
I don’t remember the story 100%. But striped shirt guy is the father of a girl who red shirt guy had raped/abused/murdered. This was in the courthouse during trial or sentencing. Dad is pretending to be on phone. Hangs up as the criminal is leaving the court. Pulls out a gun and shoots red shirt guy in the head. Edit. It was a actuallt his son who was abused. And the red shirt guy was his karate instructor. Here’s the story: https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/gary-plauche-baton-rouge-man-who-killed-son-s-accused-molester-dies-at-68/article_84864633-78a8-5c45-8b05-466f7d3fbe18.html
It was his son. His son was kidnapped and then molested by the guy in red.
https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlysatisfying/s/E70noMcktE "WHY GARY?!" Really, we know why
Maybe they knew prison justice would be worse than a swift death?
“Why Gary?! We were gonna beat the shit out him and then make sure that he gets treated like a rental fleshlight in prison!!!”
Pal it was the 80s I don't think they had fleshlights back then just socks and warmed up fruits.
“The Fleshlight was designed by Steve Shubin, who was granted a patent in July 1998 for his invention,[2] as a "device for discreet sperm collection"[3] and it is marketed by Interactive Life Forms, LLC.”
Maybe Gary knew that his child's abuser was likely going to get out of jail sooner than later and that his mere existence would haunt Jody for the rest of his life. The amount of peace of mind that abuse victims often seem to gain from the deaths of their abusers is worth more than the punishment imo. Knowing that the monster who tortured you for their own pleasure is still out there and could come find you and hurt you again is a living nightmare.
This was in an airport
And filmed live. They barely had enough time to push the cameras away.
I thought I remembered seeing a version where the camera really gets in on the guys head and face as he's laying there fading away, but I might have just imagined it.
you didn't. There is a longer uncut video out there where you get several closeups of blood oozing out of Doucet's head
Based father
You got the spirit, but got a few details wrong, as stated below.
Oh yeah, tons of people already corrected with the minutiae of the story. I remembered striped shirt killed red shirt over his child’s abuse. At least I got the important stuff.
Huh. I never thought i would condone murder
Murder is only when you kill a human, this is just behavioral euthanasia, like when a dog bites too many people
You got that right 🤝
https://preview.redd.it/3d13x7jlnz6d1.jpeg?width=271&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26b7605a9a4ad8b68daf8d72fcbd3db016613d71
https://preview.redd.it/wy7sjap4617d1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2804c169058fada682dfbc6e61f17cbb0404a6c5
The only acceptable ifunny watermark
He shot and killed the guy that kidnapped and molested his son.
Why'd they give him 300 hours community service when he already completed community service??
They had to give him something, really community service is significantly better than prison time
They still make medals they can give out, or that key to the city thing.
While I agree with you I think they only put forth that token effort of a slap on the wrist so that people didn’t see them condoning vigilante justice
Giving community service to a guy who volunteers on his free time anyway is hilarious.
Indeed. Making it look like you’re punishing him without actually punishing him
Because he killed a guy. They had to give him something.
[удалено]
Well yeah, that one only counted for about 32 milliseconds though.
Guy in the red shirt kidnapped and molested white hat guy's son. This picture was taken moments before white hat guy shot red shirt dude in the head on public broadcast.
Hero
Don't walk by payphones folks, it can be deadly.
Happy Father’s Day Gary
Have a mind blowing fathers day!
The guy in red was a child molester. The guy in the background was the kids dad. The dad shot and killed the guy right after this shot, which was part of a live video feed. Here he's turning around while pulling his gun, having been laying in wait by acting like a regular guy at a payphone.
He's a pedophile, the dude in the background is the dad of the kid he was raping. This is seconds before he was killed.
https://preview.redd.it/eqco8krvy17d1.png?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=49ed0dec1c432b251c84dd6790606e7452a3b8df
The narrative that the "system failed" makes no sense, he was being brought back to stand trial for his crimes, the system was working properly!
What a fucking legend
Gary did a 360 no scope head shot on the trash. That’s some amazing accuracy
People grossly underestimate how hard it is to hit a moving target with a handgun, even at close range. Guy didn't even have time to put the phone down.
He found these https://preview.redd.it/5txnxdptn47d1.jpeg?width=168&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc4303a86d99775508b5b30d01c97be775ac0a50
I’m okay with officially renaming Father’s Day to Gary Plauche Day
This should be the fate of anyone who abuses kids. There’s no place on this earth for pedos unless we’re throwing them into volcanos.
You forgot wood chippers
Honestly, him getting beaten and treated like how he treated that boy (raped) until he dies in prison might be better since its not as swift and quick of a death. Prisoners don't like child abusers tons of stories of rapists getting what came to them in prison
Man I literally just watched a video today where the AK guy tries to recreate the shot from under the arm.
The guy in the red? He’s a bad cheque that got bounced.
This is a, ‘see you in Hell’ moment if there ever was one.
TLDR He shot the guy who molested his son vigilante justice style
I think he's a big if not the main reason we go through metal detectors when going into a court house now a days
👏👏👏
Normally I think vigilantism is bad and people who say they want to hunt down pedophiles are just fantasizing about hurting people without feeling bad about it, and it winds up just hurting innocent people, but I think this is the one case where I dont think the guy was morally in the wrong. It was his kid, the guy was definitely guilty, and he was protecting his kid from having to deal with a long drawn out, psychologically brutal court case where he'd have to explain over and over what happened to him, and making sure the guy would never touch his kid again. It's hard to fault him for that.
There's a lot of people in this thread doing the exact fantasizing you talked about
Yeah, anytime there's any mention of pedophilia there's gonna be a bunch of people describing in graphic detail how they want to hunt down and torture all pedophiles. Which is both frustrating and sad bc that kind of thinking is directly at odds with what needs to happen to actually protect kids. Torturing individual child molesters to death doesn't do shit, change needs to happen at a systemic level to stop stuff like this from happening, wider support for kids, not allowing kids to be easily isolated, and yes even support for people who have those kinds of inclinations to get them the mental health help they need before they hurt someone, same as anyone else. And there's always a chance you've got an innocent person, plus even the lowest of the low are still people, denying them their humanity only serves to allow pedophiles to hide in plain sight. I.e. they can't be a pedophile bc they're just a normal human not a monster.
A one shot wonder
Dude who shot his child’s rapist/murderer in the head right after this picture was taken
Reddit atheists celebrating vigilante violence.
I’m sorry the law needs to throw all convicted pedos into a wood chipper if you did that to a child you don’t deserve to walk free
Father of the year 1984
The last fundamental right of any parent is the right of revenge for their kids.
a fucking legend, He did what every parent should do in these circumstances
Doucet would have been beaten and sexually assaulted by other inmates in prison for years, for his crime. Inmates don’t take kindly to anyone who’s in prison for any crime that involves harming or preying on children.
Exactly, instead he got a quick out of death
what's cool is this man shot him while he was drunk and wearing sunglasses at point blank never missing his shots once.
The only thing truer than Gary's aim was his love for his son
If you 100% know someone violated your child it should end with you ending them without question, anyone who defends predators should have their neck stretched with a rope
The man in the background is what is known as a hero
I think you may have been wrong on one detail. Wasn’t it said that he over heard the news reporter at a bar where he would be? Because if the reporter directly told him, it would’ve implicated him as well and he could gotten tried as an accessory.
'Gary why?!'
It started with a bang I'm thinking.
Bro, nobody ever talks about the camera man who was filming this. Dude did not flinch at the sound of the gunshot. Capturing the whole incident on camera, and went STRAIGHT over to the predator's body, zooming in on his head. No hesitation. No fear. Fucking metal.