Father Acquitted for Revenge Execution of his Sons' DUI Killer

[Locutus]

David Barajas and José Banda Jr.


A Texas father was found not guilty Wednesday of gunning down the man who killed his young sons in a drunken-driving accident. It took the jury three hours to acquit David Barajas, who was charged in the shooting death of 20-year-old Jose Banda Jr. in December 2012. "I thank God. This has been hard on me and my family," Barajas told reporters. "It's been a lot of weight lifted but I'm still very hurt."

An intoxicated Banda struck Barajas and his two children while they pushed the family’s disabled truck down a road, just 50 yards away from their home in Alvin, south of Houston. Barajas’ children — David, 12, and Caleb, 11 — were killed. Amid the chaos, authorities charged, Barajas went home, retrieved a gun and went back to the wreckage to shoot Banda in the head. But investigators never recovered a gun and didn't have an eyewitness to the shooting. Barajas’ attorney, Sam Cammack, said his client’s only focus the night of the crash was trying to save his sons’ lives and that someone else killed Banda.

The prosecutor Jeri Yenne said she had no regrets about bringing charges. "We believe that Mr. Barajas committed the crime and we also know the jury did not believe that beyond a reasonable doubt. We respect that," she said.



Texas Dad David Barajas Acquitted of Murdering Man Who Killed Sons - NBC News

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Don't blame him. Glad he got off.

 

[QuebecCanadian]

Don't blame him. Glad he got off.

He was acquitted because they had no proof. IF he did it, and I would not have a hard time believing he did then he was wrong. Killing Banda was murder.

 

[Goober]

He was acquitted because they had no proof. IF he did it, and I would not have a hard time believing he did then he was wrong. Killing Banda was murder.

Do you have children?

 

[damngrumpy]

I am not the least bit happy this is serious. No they had no proof that is the only reason.
Couldn't find the weapon convenient. Soon we will adopt revenge killings just like the
Middle East and soon after we wouldn't be safe sleeping in our own beds.
Oh and about what happened? I had a brother killed by a drunk driver I also have a
grandson who was disabled for life hit by a drunk driver when he was 8. Yup I know
how it feels alright and taking the law into your own hands is not an answer in fact it
can make the future even worse. I don't think they pressed this as hard as they might.
Of course where it happened has a lot to do with it too

 

[Goober]

I am not the least bit happy this is serious. No they had no proof that is the only reason.
Couldn't find the weapon convenient. Soon we will adopt revenge killings just like the
Middle East and soon after we wouldn't be safe sleeping in our own beds.
Oh and about what happened? I had a brother killed by a drunk driver I also have a
grandson who was disabled for life hit by a drunk driver when he was 8. Yup I know
how it feels alright and taking the law into your own hands is not an answer in fact it
can make the future even worse. I don't think they pressed this as hard as they might.
Of course where it happened has a lot to do with it too

Assumptions and personal bias, no evidence and again no evidence.
No trace on him of shooting a gun. No residue what so ever.

 

[WLDB]

Do you have children?

Having children doesnt change the fact that whoever did shoot the guy committed murder. As was noted above, he was found not guilty because there wasnt evidence, not because the jury thought he did it and that it was ok.

 

[QuebecCanadian]

Do you have children?

3 daughters. I also have zero tolerance for drunks.

But going home and getting a shotgun to blow a drunk`s brains out makes him a different kind of psycho. The guy that beat the kid trying to molest his son? Yes! That I get. Heat of the moment, raw emotion. Going home to get a gun? No.

Do you have children?

Have you ever driven drunk?

 

[SLM]

This was a murder, plain and simple. I can possibly understand the anger that would drive someone to such an act, not that I'd commit it myself, but on a certain level I can understand taking out the person who killed your children. But understanding it doesn't make it okay, nor does it make it not murder. I think that when it comes to your kids you do what you feel you have to do but stand up and take your medicine for it.

 

[Goober]

Having children doesnt change the fact that whoever did shoot the guy committed murder. As was noted above, he was found not guilty because there wasnt evidence, not because the jury thought he did it and that it was ok.

Yes it does. people lose it. Again no evidence just assumption.

 

[QuebecCanadian]

Assumptions and personal bias, no evidence and again no evidence.
No trace on him of shooting a gun. No residue what so ever.

The title of this thread implies what we all think. Even you because you believe it would be justified.

 

[wulfie68]

As a father, this type of scenario is my worst nightmare. I can see the father being insane with grief and doing it.

My wife worked with police for a couple years, and says this sounds like the cops probably agreed with the father's actions and didn't want this guy charged. They could do a token search and not find a weapon or witnesses, and if the father was distraught and possibly covered in his sons' blood, that would be an easy excuse for not doing gunpowder residue checks.

Yes, all of the above is theory and supposition, but who will ever know the truth now, unless someone else really did do it and comes forward/is found out somewhere down the road?

Now am I comfortable with someone taking the law into his own hands like this? No. But do I blame him? Its very hard to.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

He was acquitted because they had no proof. IF he did it, and I would not have a hard time believing he did then he was wrong. Killing Banda was murder.

I am aware of why he was acquitted. I am happy he was. IMHO Justifiable Homicide. Also I think you could argue temporary insanity. Like I said, glad he got off.

ETA: This assumes he actually did do it. Seems odd if he did they would not find the weapon. Also seems odd he would be able to leave the scene and return unnoticed (no witnesses) and also dispose of the firearm.

 

[taxslave]

Either way justice was served.

 

[Praxius]

Even if he did shoot the guy..... Good. Everybody who drinks and drives should be fk'n shot. Everybody knows by now you just don't do it, yet some still do it anyways, then try to make excuses when they're caught or kill someone, and what's worse is that many still don't get it and do it again and again.


Someone shot and killed the drunk driver and would be considered murder? Sure is.... And operating a vehicle while under the influence and killing two kids should also be considered murder.


Killing them wasn't intentional?


It was intentional to get drunk.


It was intentional to drive while drunk.


And it was intentional to do all of this being fully aware that it's illegal to drive drunk, being aware of the risks and doing it anyways


No sympathy.

 

[BaalsTears]

If the father didn't kill the drunken driver he probably has a good idea who did.

 

[QuebecCanadian]

Even if he did shoot the guy..... Good. Everybody who drinks and drives should be fk'n shot. Everybody knows by now you just don't do it, yet some still do it anyways, then try to make excuses when they're caught or kill someone, and what's worse is that many still don't get it and do it again and again.


Someone shot and killed the drunk driver and would be considered murder? Sure is.... And operating a vehicle while under the influence and killing two kids should also be considered murder.


Killing them wasn't intentional?


It was intentional to get drunk.


It was intentional to drive while drunk.


And it was intentional to do all of this being fully aware that it's illegal to drive drunk, being aware of the risks and doing it anyways


No sympathy.

Agree 100%. 2 murderers.

 

[Goober]

The title of this thread implies what we all think. Even you because you believe it would be justified.

The title means squat. Did everyone on this Thread, excepting myself. PM each other and agree on the OP title.
Where did I justify it?

If the father didn't kill the drunken driver he probably has a good idea who did.

Exactly, someone else could have done this.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

This isn't jury nullification, it's lack of evidence. Got no problem with that. The state has to prove its case. No gun, no witnesses, sounds like the state was going on motivation alone.

 

[QuebecCanadian]

The title means squat. Did everyone on this Thread, excepting myself. PM each other and agree on the OP title.
Where did I justify it?



Exactly, someone else could have done this.

When you asked me if I have children you implied that I would be justified in doing the same thing. If I read that wrong, my bad.