Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 271 posts

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#121

Post by cossatot »

A similar episode was the basis for the historical novel "Killing Mister Watson" by Peter Mattheissen, which is one of my favorite books.

A ruthless man named Edgar Watson, who had purportedly killed several people in Oklahoma and Florida, settled in the coastal Everglades of Florida (Chokoloksee area) around the turn of the last century and started a sugar cane plantation. He was known for the 'Watson payday' where, at the end of the harvest season, he would gather all of the drifters and ne'er-do-wells he had hired as fieldhands and gun them down. Additional bad behavior toward his neighbors lead to all of the town's men standing in line and gunning him down as he landed his boat on Chokoloskee Island one day.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#122

Post by kelnos »

vkou wrote: post #12
leetcrew wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it seems like a more extreme version of jury nullification. if it became widespread, it would essentially be the end of rule-of-law. but in isolated and rare situations, perhaps it's a beneficial escape valve? easy to suggest from my comfy office in a quiet suburb of course.

It's not a 'beneficial escape valve' when the community decides to, say, kill the n_______ who had the audacity to sleep with a white woman. Which is a far more common application of lynching. We should not be glorifying this.

The world is not black and white. Sometimes something that's awful and terrible in one context is a necessary evil in another.

I think that "physically terrifying (as in, can dead lift a couple hundred pounds like it's nothing) guy who has been convicted of multiple crimes but the police are too afraid/incompetent/paid-off to actually keep him in jail" easily crosses the bar of "I'm not going to feel bad if vigilante justice takes its course".

No one's denying that terrible things have happened in the name of vigilante justice. But this is not the same thing. Justice spoke, but enforcement refused to do its job.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#123

Post by mixmastamyk »

kemiller2002 wrote: post #96

So my family actually knew the sheriff from the next county over. He picked up McElroy a couple times for various things. (I think being drunk etc.). Now when this was explained, this was 26-27 years ago, so my memory is a little fuzzy, but he explained that the man was a monster of an individual. (like huge.) The guy could pick up a hog from the other side of the fence and just walk off with it. Dead lifting a few h…

Reminds me a bit of the series Gunsmoke, which I recently watched for the first time online. Surprisingly good. Time frame is earlier but the feeling of "frontier justice" resonates.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#124

Post by mixmastamyk »

tootie wrote: post #54
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #3

This is a review of the documentary covering a 'Town Bully' who had evaded authorities and continued to harm people repeatedly. In order to protect the community, a group of vigilantes murdered them, and the community refused to issue any statements to authorities regarding anyone's involvement. I think broadly, I wonder what the place of vigilanteism like this should serve. The sentiments to protect the community ag…

It sounds like the justice system was either non-functional or corrupt. He committed plenty of crimes that should have put him away for a long time yet didn't. If government isn't serving the people appropriately then it gets replaced. Hard to say if it was really justified here. Maybe a call to the FBI would have been more productive.

There was a federal investigation, but without witnesses stalled.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#125

Post by marktangotango »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #123
kemiller2002 wrote: post #96

So my family actually knew the sheriff from the next county over. He picked up McElroy a couple times for various things. (I think being drunk etc.). Now when this was explained, this was 26-27 years ago, so my memory is a little fuzzy, but he explained that the man was a monster of an individual. (like huge.) The guy could pick up a hog from the other side of the fence and just walk off with it. Dead lifting a few h…

Reminds me a bit of the series Gunsmoke, which I recently watched for the first time online. Surprisingly good. Time frame is earlier but the feeling of "frontier justice" resonates.

So much great writing in those old western TV shows. Check out Bonanza and Gunslinger if you have the chance.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#126

Post by cjohnson318 »

bitwize wrote: post #120
tomc1985 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with the mob on this one. As another comment put it, he was tried by a jury of his peers... if the justice system cannot help you then you have to take things into your own hands. Might be hard for all us city slickers on HN to fathom, particularly when these sorts of country towns are frequently mocked or derided by people like us.

Some states, like Texas, still have the "needed killin'" defense: if a person accused of murder can prove to the jury that the victim needed killin', the jury will not convict (or will convict on a lesser charge). You have to pass a high bar to need killin': generally the defense only works if the accused can show that while not in immediate danger of life and limb, they felt sufficiently credibly threatened by the v…

This is not a facet of Texas law, or reflective of law in any other state. Sometimes jurors choose not to penalize or convict a person for homicide in extenuating circumstances. This is more about the nature of trial by jury in America, than the specific legal code of Texas.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#127

Post by viburnum »

braythwayt wrote: post #6
neaden wrote: post #2

To be clear, community murders like this happened all the time in US history. The thing that makes this special is that the man killed was white and actually guilty of crimes.

100% true. This is the history of lynching in America. Community murders where nobody saw a thing, and the justification was always that the murdered person was a degenerate who would not receive what the town thinks would be adequate punishment under the law.

Lynchings frequently happened because white people wanted to steal land from black or native people.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#128

Post by LorenPechtel »

bitwize wrote: post #120
tomc1985 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with the mob on this one. As another comment put it, he was tried by a jury of his peers... if the justice system cannot help you then you have to take things into your own hands. Might be hard for all us city slickers on HN to fathom, particularly when these sorts of country towns are frequently mocked or derided by people like us.

Some states, like Texas, still have the "needed killin'" defense: if a person accused of murder can prove to the jury that the victim needed killin', the jury will not convict (or will convict on a lesser charge). You have to pass a high bar to need killin': generally the defense only works if the accused can show that while not in immediate danger of life and limb, they felt sufficiently credibly threatened by the v…

Sounds like Texas got it right. Normally the law expects you to go to the police if the threat isn't imminent--but that assumes the police can do something about it. Generally they can't.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#129

Post by LorenPechtel »

asfarley wrote: post #115
everdev wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the justice system cannot help you then you have to take things into your own hands Fortunately not many people seem to feel this way, maybe because revenge doesn't work as a criminal defense. People who have been wronged are usually highly emotional and it's hard for them to put themselves outside of their circumstances and view the incident objectively. Justice is supposed to be blind for good reason. If we al…

This article describes a situation where a bad person did bad things, and was eventually stopped. You are saying: "That was not the solution. But I don't know what the right solution is". How can you possibly know that there is an alternative without knowing what it is? I think what you are really saying is: "I have an ideological opposition to violence-as-a-tool which I cannot rationally explain". Or, "the consequen…

It stems from a fundamental faith that there is a good solution. Therefore, any non-good action is due to a failure to look hard enough for the good solution.

Re: ‘No One Saw a Thing’: When a Midwest Town Banded Together to Kill the Town Bully

#130

Post by dragonwriter »

bitwize wrote: post #120
tomc1985 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with the mob on this one. As another comment put it, he was tried by a jury of his peers... if the justice system cannot help you then you have to take things into your own hands. Might be hard for all us city slickers on HN to fathom, particularly when these sorts of country towns are frequently mocked or derided by people like us.

Some states, like Texas, still have the "needed killin'" defense: if a person accused of murder can prove to the jury that the victim needed killin', the jury will not convict (or will convict on a lesser charge). You have to pass a high bar to need killin': generally the defense only works if the accused can show that while not in immediate danger of life and limb, they felt sufficiently credibly threatened by the v…

It's not clear if you are referring to jury nullification here (which is not particular to Texas), to the reduction of murder to voluntary manslaughter by heat of passion (which is not particular to Texas), or to some actual special aspect of Texas law (perhaps some part of the operation of the imperfect self-defense rule under Texas law). Could you provide more detail?
Post reply on HN