Posted Aug 31, 2008 at 04:12PM by Chris Coker Listed in: Off Topic Tags: Slime
Ó

gavel - Image 1Twenty one years is simply nowhere near enough time for murdering an 18 day old child just because he interrupted a videogame, and how does this piece of slime get away with manslaughter? Pretty damn revolting stuff, makes you just shake your head and wonder what's going on with our legal system.

Details after the jump.

On Oct. 26th, 2007, Rene Edward Barrios was charged with looking after his girlfriends 18 day old infant who lay sleeping in the next room. Presently, the infant started to cry, sending Barrios into a rage, pausing the game, he went into the room, grabbed the child, shook him and then hit him before returning to his gaming session. By the time Barrios went back to check on the baby he was blue and unconscious, the poor child died at the hospital and Barrios was immediately arrested.

Barrios has plead guilty to manslaughter and will be sentenced to serve between 10.5 and 21 years in prison.

[Via The HD Room] Permalink  |   Email this  |   Linking Blogs   |   Digg It!

Bookmark / Find this article on:


116 Comments


Sort by:
   by Advertising -
   by MahSixFo - 2008-08-31
 » Dam

What A Wanker. Which Country Was This In?


   Re: sqrl175 - 2008-09-01
 » wow

well if it were in the u.s. they should ship the guy to texas, and have him play ikaruga hooked up to an electric chair and if he gets past the fifth level then he gets 21 years, if not, ZAP. and then we would all shake him too and give him a good ol amurrican curbing but instead of a curb we'd use a big honkin ps3. with don king as the promoter. that is all.

   Re: jacobian91 - 2008-09-04
 » @ sqrl175

dude...
nice lol

Yes, that would be a wanker. It was probably the US. I think most raging psychopaths live here.
   by Nineball - 2008-08-31
 » 21 years?! That's it?

He should get a lifetime of thugs and aryans running a subway up his a**. And they'd probably cut the guy's nuts off because they *really* don't like people that take liberties on kids in prison. That would be much worse than death.


   Re: mysterysword - 2008-09-04
 » ....

Well, he pleaded guilty, so he didn't get more time than that, and not to mention it wasn't premeditated.
   by CHUCKINGROCKSATSPACESHIPS - 2008-08-31
 » Sickening

This is the kind of thing that gives video games a bad rap even though the person that did this would have possibly did something crazy anyway if he was mad about something else. I hope he gets it in the face and rear hard in the slammer that piece of trash. Having children of my own really upsets me to hear this news.

   by NDWolfwood - 2008-08-31
 » omg

this a**hole deserves to be put in jail for life!!
i mean, killing his "girlfriend's" child????
Actually, i think he should get the death penalty.
What an a**hole!!

   by eggwonder - 2008-08-31
 » WOW...

You people make it sound like what he did was on purpose. He did do something terrible but im sure his intent wasn't to kill the kid. Some people just don't know that a rough shaking could kill an infant. In fact i didn't find out myself until a few years ago.(not by killing a baby)

All im saying is that you guys/gals are making it sound like he walked into the room and said "im gon kill you baby" and shook the crap out of it trying to do it. He just wanted the kid to be quiet. He knows he made a big mistake hence the reason he plead guilty.(just read it)


   Re: eggwonder - 2008-08-31
 » forgot to say...

if he killed the baby on purpose why would he take it to the hospital or even so much as check on the child and find it blue and unconscious?

   Re: kraft - 2008-08-31
 » ..

He didn't just shake it, he shook it and then hit the baby.

How do you think an infant like that would react to getting hit.

There's no reason ever to hit a 2 week old baby

   Re: eggwonder - 2008-08-31
 » hit...

hit can be interpreted too many different ways... it could have been a light slap to the bottom...

   Re: DeathAngel666 - 2008-09-01
 » Never!

it doesnt matter wheter he meant to kill it or not you just never hit a ****ing baby!

   Re: Person2 - 2008-09-01
 » doesn't matter if he didn't mean to

it don't matter if he tried or didn't try to kill the baby the thing is IT WAS A 18 WEEK OLD BABY,WHO THE HELL WOULD SHAKE LET ALONG HIT A NEW BORN BABY.

   Re: eddib - 2008-09-01
 » exactly

finally someone who actually thinks before writing down stuff like 'yeah, kill the ass..'.

you hear this stuff in the news all the time. It just shows that some people are not fit to have babies, mostly because they didn't have a decent education or were not given the chances they deserve, or just because they're plain stupid, ignorent, or addicts.
so yes, you could blame society, esp. in the states (don't know where this particular case was) where you still don't have decent healthcare.

I'm not saying this guy is innocent, but come on people, be realistic. by reading these comments, i wouldn't advice any of you to have babies, since you do do not seem to be able to see things in perspective.

blame society or whatever.

ps: i don't like babies, they ***** on my couch!

   Re: Auraomega - 2008-09-01
 » I don't care!

Honestly, I don't care if he meant to kill the baby or not, either way he did. What he did was pretty much like shooting someone in the heart just to inflict pain but not intent on killing, the outcome is obvious - the outcome is the same.

I'm 18, from the age 13 I've known how fragile babies were, firsthand, and I'm sure I knew beforehand that shaking a baby was lethal; this guy is 21, and his blind rage killed that baby.

Some people need to get their priorities sorted out, a game before a helpless 18 day old? Something is messed up there.

And, I'm not saying this is the case, but did it ever occur to you that afterwards he thought "Crap, I'm going to go down for murder, I'll take the kid to hospital make myself look good for court, may get less than a life sentance/death sentance". And when it came to court, ever thought that he realised that pleading guilty for something so obviously his fault would land him less time in jail?

   Re: itzzspencer - 2008-09-01
 » are

you freaking retarded? im going to throw you off a cliff and unintentionally kill you, therefore its okay

   Re: Nevers - 2008-09-02
 » @Itzzspencer

totally... nice point.

>to Topic<

I mean come on... you're 21 and you don't know that shaking a baby is lethal, let alone "hitting" the baby. Get this dumb a$$'s gene-poole off the streets, please....

How many years will this cost the guy? At most 21?

Now, how many years did this cost the child? Potentially 80-100, huh?

The guy will still have half his life when he's released and he's lucky to get that.
   by corytheidiot - 2008-08-31
 » dumb***

This is what makes games look bad. Stupid (AWWW!!!! No word harsh enough). Learn there is a difference between a recreational thing and life. Bust a control, like my brother has done so many times, when you get pissed. Don't take it out on people, let alone an infant. This joker needs to be dealt with execution style, but without the blind fold. He is not deserving of freedom after this.

   by kraft - 2008-08-31
 » ..

I hope he drops the soap

   by xxjunior01xx - 2008-08-31
 » What a...

*****head! That ***** should be sentenced for life. How can you do that to your girlfriends baby?!! Hope they ***** him up in prison for that!

   by Strodemstro - 2008-08-31
 » Umm...

What game was he playing?


   Re: phiyuku - 2008-09-01
 » In Jack Thompsons words

A baby killing simulator.
   by slack04 - 2008-08-31
 » arf arf

wooof woof bark bark. (insert angry comment here) bark! woof!!


   Re: NarooN - 2008-08-31
 » you can go to hell.

Doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. He didn't even have any business or legitimate reason to shake the baby violently, let alone hit it. I don't care if he plead guilty, that doesn't just magically erase what he did.

What he deserves is to be ass-raped every weekday with nothing but rusty pipes and beehives. No death penalty, just pure ass-rape.
   by Steven777 - 2008-08-31
 » Death Penanlty

Just kill him, no point in letting him rot in jail. Him sitting in jail would just eat away at our tax dollars, do the baby a favor shake the crap out of him and hit him until he turns blue. Then well know he's dead. As the saying goes "eye for an eye". If the dumbnut would have said that he didn't like infants he should have not been given the responsibility of taking care of the kid. It might have saved him from being subdued by Bubba and having to deal with a cocsandwhich (Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantamano Bay).


   Re: MyDixieNormous - 2008-08-31
 » an eye for an eye makes the world blind

Let him rot in prison and think about what he did, it would be much worse than death.

   Re: x0rcy5t - 2008-08-31
 » +)

I hope he likes extra mayo.

   Re: Eclipze_ - 2008-08-31
 » ...

Hate the saying an eye for an eye. Thats for immature people. A better saying would be two wrongs don't make a right.

I agree with eggwonder up there. I don't think the guy did it on purpose. He probably just doesn't know to what extent a baby can take. People are making it seem like he went in the room to kill the baby..

   Re: Steven777 - 2008-08-31
 » eye for an eye

murderers and rapists who have either plead guilty or have hard evidence to prove that they were the culprit should be given the death penalty. It would allow prisons to have more space for new convicts and would save money so we may hire more police officers. In my area, budget cuts are made more often than ever. People are losing their jobs and we are paying more tax dollars to balance the losses. Prisons are becoming more crowded so using the death penalty more frequently would benefit both the police force and help protect the American people.

   Re: StingBlah - 2008-08-31
 » ...

@Steven77: It's *****meatsandwich*

Also, giving death penalty to whomever pleads guilty is certainly a way to get more people to plead guilty...returd.

   Re: Eclipze_ - 2008-08-31
 » wtf?

Like I said, two wrongs don't make a right. So you'd rather kill people than pay some taxes? You'd rather kill people just for space in a prison? (and of course I don't mean you actually killing them yourself) That eye for an eye thing is exactly what I said it was, immature. Especially if it comes to people like this man that killed the baby, he could have done it by mistake yet people are wanting to put him to death..?

   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » awww :-D

you guys are so mature :-D youre all right. we should just let him go it was an accident.
GIVE ME A *****ING BREAK have ANY of you bleeding heart retards ever SEEN an EIGHTEEN DAY OLD BABY??? i dont care how stupid this freakshow son of a snake is, nobody is going to mistake an infant LESS THAN THREE WEEKS OLD for the type of person to live through a punch to the head. imagine someone TWELVE+ (12+) TIMES YOUR GODDAMN SIZE PICKING YOU UP, SHAKING YOU, AND HITTING YOU IN THE HEAD! damn people act like you did get hit in the head.
act like you got some goddamn sense people!

   Re: damonous - 2008-09-01
 » 'Mistake' or not: Baby is still Dead, right?

I so have to agree with Steven777 and dazmo on this. We breed the society that we tolerate. --In other words, if our justice systems show leniency for this type of behavior, it promotes to society at-large that "It's ok to be an $@#hole. You'll be punished, maybe --but you'll be free again someday to make another $@#hole decision." And, it's quite ironic how the 'bleeding heart brigade' thinks. Let's see: an 'eye for an eye' is uncivilized or "immature" (according to Eclipze_), but letting the guy get corked night and day for an entire lifetime (a fate "worse than death", per MyDixieNormous) is a humane and rational method of 'corrections'. It's said that Vengeance belongs to God. So, arranging the meeting is what's in order for this guy. Let God decide the punishment and whether this was truly a 'mistake' or the act of a soulless devil. --And, in so doing, not only does society benefit as a whole by not having to feed/maintain this guy's existence for 21yrs behind the slammer ....but it also benefits because A) he wouldn't be ABLE to make the same mistake again ever, and B) other people would think twice before letting their passions overtake them so easily without thought of consequence.

   Re: Eclipze_ - 2008-09-01
 » dazmo

You need to chill out and read what I said. Where did I say we should let him go because it was an accident? I didn't say that at all. All I'm saying is putting this guy to death, or calling him scum bag (like some are saying) isn't something we should do.

damonous: Your right that if it was a mistake or not the baby is gone. If you want to bring god into this then let me put it a different way. God is the one who is supposted to cast judgement on people, not other humans. God is the one who chooses when we go, so why should we have the choice to kill someone by putting them to death? Its not our place to "arrange a meeting".

I do believe that leaving them in the prison for 21 or more years would make him not want to make that mistake/action again. What our system does is put them in jail so they can see what they did and possibly change the way they are. So hopefully when they finally do come out they'll be better people and make better desicions. I see nothing wrong with that.

   Re: WarLord - 2008-09-01
 » Actually

The death penalty costs more than life sentencing in most cases (An average of $2 million per convict). Death penalty comes close, but you only pay a minimum amount each year instead of paying millions upfront.

   Re: Steven777 - 2008-09-01
 » Cost

I know that lethal injection can be pretty costly but believe it or not some states still allow the old fashioned firing squad, and hanging, and electric chair. Then we have the more modern methods of lethal injection, and Gas Chamber. I personally don't think I could ever shoot a man unless he threatened my life, so I would never be on a firing squad. Though from my studies in Criminal Justice, there are 5 members to the firing squad, four have blanks while one has a real bullet. Its at random who gets the bullet, this will help the people who are firing a bit of relief. This is not my method of choice, I'm just passing on some of my knowledge. The most humane way would be lethal injection because its the least painful and most effective but is spendy.
   by Vanaheimx - 2008-08-31
 » Uh...

Keep your opinions out of your article. It's very unprofessional.

THe point of news is to give it from a neutral standpoint.


   Re: x0rcy5t - 2008-08-31
 » Who cares if its "unprofessional"

I wouldn't have given this from a "neutral" standpoint either, its too sickening.

   Re: TheLastGuitarHero - 2008-08-31
 » ...

Yeah man who cares really? So the guy gave his opinion, it didn't affect the article none, and from what I can tell, everyone is agreeing with him anyway.

   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » wow

so what your saying, vanaheimx, is that there could be people reading this article and taking this piece of ***** immigrants side? ***** it then. . . im moving to canada.

   Re: Vanaheimx - 2008-09-01
 » Uh...

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.

The point of a news article is to give it from a neutral standpoint so the reader can make up his/her own opinions about it.

I said that, not "there could be people reading this article and taking this piece of ***** immigrants side? ***** it then. . . im moving to canada. "

   Re: Auraomega - 2008-09-01
 » Uh...?

I'm sorry, but I doubt even the most reserved people out there could post this kind of news without putting the guy in a bad light, theres no way of making this look "neutral" as you say. Honestly, thats like saying "This guy killed a 18 day old baby, but thats ok I'm not going to say what I think of him because, heck, this is the news and opinions aren't needed"... Yeah, like THATS ever going to happen! News is always has opinions in it, and in this case I'd ask for nothing less.

   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » lawl

the point that is lost on you, vanaheimx, is that anyone who would read a report like this and NOT be off the same mindset as the author obviously is does NOT need to be reading newspapers. he DOES need his cage lined with them though.

P.S. you are misinformed about the goal of any news reporting agency in the United States is not to deliver unbiased accounts of news stories, it is to illicit funds from other comapnies who wish to advetise with them. fostering emotion from the readers is a good way to have them keep reading, and thus, expose themselves to more advertisements. in short, this is a prime example of a good news story.
though you might call it "manipulation", a better observation would be that articles like this make a handy filter for intelligent people to easily weed out the morons among them.

   Re: Vanaheimx - 2008-09-01
 » ...

It's actually very easy to write from a neutral stand point. "On Oct. 26th, 2007, Rene Edward Barrios was charged with looking after his girlfriends 18 day old infant who lay sleeping in the next room. Presently, the infant started to cry, sending Barrios into a rage, pausing the game, he went into the room, grabbed the child, shook him and then hit him before returning to his gaming session. By the time Barrios went back to check on the baby he was blue and unconscious, the child died at the hospital and Barrios was immediately arrested."

As you can see, the second half of the article was written from a neutral standpoint. I just thought the first half was unprofessional.

I'm sorry that offended you.

Barrios has plead guilty to manslaughter and will be sentenced to serve between 10.5 and 21 years in prison."
   by Extreme_Dude23 - 2008-08-31
 » 21 years...

that's it? this douche should be put away for life


   Re: Binary - 2008-08-31
 » ..

and take Anger Management class's daily.

   by xxSuiseiseki - 2008-08-31
 » .

Que Jack Thompson.


   Re: eaglebaize - 2008-09-01
 » *plays batman theme*

DANANANANANANANA THOMPSON!!!
   by whaleshark - 2008-08-31
 » This is

One sick *****. hope he rots in hell. I cant believe he got away with 21 years. I hope to god that the devil himself rapes his lifeless corpse in his tombstone. Poor child :( And this is when we need a lawyer that is able to put a Douche bag like this man in jail for life. or even better, get him killed. God bless to the child. May he have a happy life in heaven. :( Good hopes to the remaining family, and hopefully this scum will rot with the rest of the scum on earth.


   Re: eggwonder - 2008-09-01
 » sorry...

i didn't wanna rain on your parade but you said heaven. The bible says everyone is born into sin. the child therefore goes to hell even though it was too young to accept god into its life.

Like i said, i didn't want to rain on your parade but u brought the afterlife into this. Also i just remembered that the man has time to repent or be forgiven of his sins and still go to heaven in the 15-21 years in jail he has.

   Re: Vanaheimx - 2008-09-05
 » lol.

Tell that to the baby's mother.

That is insensitive, but it's funny in a way.
   by Doom_master1122 - 2008-08-31
 » Hope he rots in hell

21 years isn't good enough. He needs death penalty. I'm a person that votes death penalty back in all states for scum bags like him, but no, the government rather slap wrists and send them on there way.

I'm not looking for an argument, but for the people who say, "2 wrongs don't make a right," or something similar... Well think in someone else shoes. If you had a child or someone dear to you killed by some scum bag, I'm sure you would want them to have the death penalty, for claiming the life of your loved one.
Think about that.


   Re: Eclipze_ - 2008-08-31
 » I am thinking in others shoes.

And I would not want to put the guy to death. Especially considering this could have been a mistake. Either way killing the guy wouldn't benefit me in any way (it wouldn't bring the child back). And this "scum back" could have been a member of my family that did it on accident (which it most likely was in this case). Its not like he was some random guy who walked into the house and killed the child, he was asked to watch the child by someone (family I would think).

The saying an eye for an eye sums up to one word: Revenge. Two wrongs don't make a right, and killing this guy would do nothing beside have another death.
   by eaglebaize - 2008-08-31
 » =

Please understand that I by no means support this person's actions. In fact, if he killed my child (I don't have any, but still), I'd probably deal with him myself. He might not even make it to the authorities, let alone prison. That being said, I feel that some of the people commenting on this article are going a little overboard. Some of you are sounding pretty violent yourselves. I mean, we don't even know for sure if this guy really had intentions of killing this infant. Yes, it was bad to even so much as lay a harmful finger on the child, but seriously. Can't we just chill and give more thoughts to our comments before posting them? I apologize if I somehow offended anyone.


   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » . . .

*****

   Re: eaglebaize - 2008-09-01
 » lawlz

You used bad words. However on a more serious note, that seems like a slightly immature comment. Oh well... all I meant was that some of these people are sounding like animals. I know a baby died, which is a horrifyingly terrible thing, but some of the comments on here sounded a little bit on the sick side. Also, if the the convicted man really did mean to kill the baby because he lost control or something, wouldn't it be a more powerful punishment for him to mentally rip himself apart in prison rather than let some guy "do the job" for him? The mind is a powerful thing, but it can be quite a scary form of torture if you think about it.
   by Binary - 2008-08-31
 » ...

man if I was the father of the baby and a huge guy. I would of pick that scumbag up and shake the ***** out of him just see how he like it.


nah I rather just shoot the bastard and get it over with.

   by lexcavaj - 2008-08-31
 » i've read somewhere before that...

according to studies, a baby's cry is that powerfull and stressful that it is even used by the army for torturing and/or disabling an enemy. that being said, i think this may have played a role with the man's action leading to the very unfaithful tragedy. stress from both the game and the baby's cry may have been too much for his not-so-stable/capable mind. true, what he's done is unimaginable and unforgivable, but we also have to see it in a different angle. again, i am not defending this scumbag, im just providing another overview of the incident.


   Re: Binary - 2008-08-31
 » ...

-blinks-


WOW

   Re: Auraomega - 2008-09-01
 » ...somewhat agree

I can somewhat agree with a babies cry being stressful, its the same as seeing a loved one unhappy, and being powerless against whatever is doing it. But, after all the times I've been stressed (working, games, etc) and having a baby crying around me, its never made me even come close to lashing out, I know people are different, but I still find it hard to imagine anyone under enough stress to shake a child and then hit it, however hard that hit may have been.
   by lavino - 2008-08-31
 » I sure hope justice comes in a form as...

his new boy friend called BIG AL likes to keep dropping his soap and ask Rene to pick it up. All he will choking in jail will be someone's chicken and lots of it.

   by ALLOUTKILLA - 2008-08-31
 » error

Where it says "pausing the..." I think it should say game not "gam"

   by pspsampsp - 2008-08-31
 » mmm

i dont think he should be put to the death penalty (NDWolfwood and others ) as the death penalty is unfair as its been proven that white people , rich people and women are less likley to be put to death even if theyve commited exactly the same crimes as someone else and i was just wondering what would everyone be saying if a women done this , owuld you say she was probably stressed or has a mental illness or would you say exactly the same thing ? i think what he done is right but maybe he couldnt get the baby to stop crying and didnt know what to do as it is pretty stressful when a babys crying cause when was looking after my little sister i didnt know what to do when she started crying and i just wanted to stop her crying anyway i could but luckily i didnt shake her or anything i just yelled which i shouldnt have done but i did because i was stressed.


   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » wow

wtf.
yeah i believe you, you seem to be the type who'll run your retarded mouth to an infant without thinking about the consequences.
then again i guess i could assume you are illeterate as well as racist so no one can hold it against you for not reading the article.

   Re: Vanaheimx - 2008-09-01
 » And...

You seem the type that will be a complete d*ck to someone.

   Re: Auraomega - 2008-09-01
 » Same argument, different point

This same argument, about certain classes of people get different sentances, it stands with all things, time in jail, death, etc etc. Its not just death, so your argument is defunct, it either states no argument at all, or states that we should ditch the legal system altogether because certain people are more likely to get leniant sentances.

   Re: WarLord - 2008-09-01
 » This same argument, about certain classes of people get different sentances, it stands with all things, time in jail, death, etc etc.

Thats true, but unlike time in prison, the death penalty is final. There is no coming back from that and there is no way to be reimbursed for it if a mistake or misjudgement were to ever have been discovered.
   by OverlordXenu - 2008-08-31
 » .

How could that piece of ***** scumbag interrupt a guy playing a video game??? I'm glad he got rid of that baby.


   Re: Binary - 2008-08-31
 » Dude

GET THE ***** OUTTA HERE!


How could you say something like that. You go burn in *****ing hello you stupid son of a *****.

   Re: Neo-Tech - 2008-08-31
 » Idiot

What's more important, a baby dying or playing your video games? ....Baby dying. You probably have no care for children or other people, you always thin games comes first, well it doesn't.

   Re: Vanaheimx - 2008-09-01
 » Ha ha.

That first comment is the funniest I've read. Right in front of "What game was he playing?"

   Re: Dragoon - 2008-09-01
 » Lord Xenu!

I'm glad to see you here, and I support your opinion fully!

The baby should have just shut the f*ck up!

My only regret, my lord, is that I am unable to +rep your comment anymore!

   Re: rokard111 - 2008-09-01
 » W.T.F...?

Dude, if thats what you are thinking, get off the the internet, don't post pathetic, and cruel comments like that, die of a painful slow death, and rot in hell, coz both YOU and the guy that killed the baby are just a pair of F***faces!

   Re: eggwonder - 2008-09-01
 » i can agree with this guy a lil bit...

if the baby didn't cry, then the fatal shaking wouldn't have killed it. Now im not glad the baby is gone but not crying around an idiot would have been a brilliant idea for the baby.
   by Neo-Tech - 2008-08-31
 » What is this?

This is absolutely ridiculous, 21 years and that's it? It should be at least a minimum of 30 years, and a full 30 years. Because after 20 years he will come back out again and you never know most of the time people do it again.


   Re: Soupman - 2008-08-31
 » uh..

***** 30 years he should get life.
:( poor baby

   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » look on the bright side

as if ther is one. . .
but anyway. . . at least when he gets out video games will be so advanced theyll make his head explode. . .

   Re: Meseria - 2008-09-02
 » really now...

Why do you think the man is such a bad person? He made a big mistake but one person already died we shouldn't kill another with years in prison. I would bet my home that the man will not do it again because he didn't have intent to do it in the first place. Thats why he received 21 years because the prosecution couldn't prove intent to kill. It was just a random spike of rage. Do you deserve to rot in jail forever if you push a guy who calls your mom retarded and he just so happens to trip over a root, hits his head on a bar and dies? Thats involuntary manslaughter and you'll be going to prison for a while. The guy isnt a bad person, he just picked the wrong choice when confronted with stress and a baby.
   by RobertSze - 2008-08-31
 » What an insane world we live in!

http://www.skyos.org/?q=node/645

   by Silver-Tiger - 2008-08-31
 » ....

wow..... that's just sick....

   by Soupman - 2008-08-31
 » ?

it says this happened on oct 26th, 2007.

why is it getting posted now almost a year later?
has this guy been out of jail this whole time?


   Re: kraft - 2008-08-31
 » ..

just googled it, i couldnt find any answer to what he's been doing all this time but i'm guessing he hasnt been in prison yet.

as to why its being posted nearly a year later is cause it jsut became news that his sentence will proceed on september 30th
   by hairycanary2 - 2008-09-01
 » Wtf

It's pretty messed up what he did . The ignorant people in here say things like "poor kid ", and "god is going to do this", and ranting the man to get raped by pipes and men themselves . WTF if wrong with you people ? You call yourself religious and turn your backs to show no remorse to a human . If you do believe in god then he will forgive all and that is something that takes a better man to do . Pray for the people's family and for the man to get what he deserves. It was something that HE did and will pay for it .
God bless the family, the man and the child that rest's in peace .


   Re: Sephiroth86 - 2008-09-01
 » Don't go preaching

your religion. Not everyone believes in such things as a God.
I think anyone who could raise their hand to a child, of any age, needs to be kicked to within an inch of their life, and left to rot in prison for the remainder of it.

   Re: Dragoon - 2008-09-01
 » Boo hoo

Your take on it is wrong as well.
Are we all not God's children? What is a child persay? I am but a child to a 100 year old, as it is all relative.

Are you gonna beat the sh*t out of the kids at school that beat me up because I'm ugly? They're just kids too.

   Re: Sephiroth86 - 2008-09-01
 » It seems you misinterpret

Allow me to rephrase.
I think any ADULT who raises their hand to a child (in the general meaning of the word) should be... (read previous comment).

Now, as for "are we not all God's children?": As far as I'm concerned, no. 'God', to me at least, is a fictional character, for want of a better term.

And finally. If you were beaten up at school for being ugly, that's your problem. I'm sure those kids would have been dealt with appropriately. There's not exactly the same age difference between school children, as there is between a fully grown man and a new born baby is there?
   by PS3 OUTSIDER - 2008-09-01
 » when i come to power

when i become leader of the world people will be punished by the way they heart there victims.


   Re: dazmo - 2008-09-01
 » lol

woah there, Saddam! you're gonna heart everyone to death!
   by T D - 2008-09-01
 » ...

O_O

I am seriously surprised he got away with manslaughter.

RIP.


   Re: God (Unregistered) - 2008-09-01
 » The law

He got manslaughter because it wasn't premedidated. If he had the intention of killing the baby before shaking/hitting it then he would've gotten first degree murder.

But in all seriousness.. when the case is this extreme.. first degree murder should be used. I mean, the child is a few weeks old.. any harm inflicted on the baby that could and does lead to a fatality should be grounds to treat a case as first degree murder. Maybe they should start handing out pampflits to new parents that state this just so we can make this legit.

Manslaughter does not carry a life sentence or death penality.. but in all fairness.. this guy could be walking around in 21 years on the street while'st that baby should have been enjoying its 21st year of life on this planet... life is brutal.

   Re: eggwonder - 2008-09-01
 » it was manslaughter...

he did not... i repeat did not try to kill the child on purpose. He wanted the baby to stop crying and was probably losing in the game along with other stresses and did not know what to do. He then probably in a panic and rage did the only thing he thought would shut it up. shake it. At no point in time did he say f this baby i am going to kill it. so it is not and should not be considered first degree murder. for it is not murder it is in fact manslaughter and got the title it deserves.

Btw... WTF does this have to do with my ps3 or psp? why am i reading about an idiot who just so happened to accidentally kill a baby by shaking it. The hit is negligible because the shaking probably killed the baby. This has nothing to do with games besides the fact that the man just so happened to be playing a game. I shouldn't come to a game news site/blog seeing horrific mistakes/crimes. I should see future game titles,homebrew,new developers,speculation of new games,cheats for games, and game statistics. Whoever wrote this article is also a scumbag for writing an article that is biased and then saying the man who could have just been dumb is a scumbag for most likely making a mistake in judgment and killed the baby by shaking it.


Add QJ.NET
Add to My Yahoo!
Google Reader Subscribe with Bloglines
Add  to your Kinja digest Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader Add 'www.qj.net' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
Subscribe with SearchFox RSS del.icio.us www.qj.net
Add to Technorati Favorite! Add to My AOL
furl! it Stumble for Treehugger!

 Username: 
 Password:
Forgot password
New user registration



Categories
Emulators
Titles
Archives