CNN: Sheriff: Father kills man sexually abusing his daughter

[Dan T.]

S.F. Couple Accused of Murdering Teen Daughter's Pimp

by Vivian Ho,Jaxon Van Derbeken, San Francisco Chronicle

A San Francisco couple whose teenage daughter was allegedly being pimped by a Southern California man tracked him around the state, failing at one attempt to kill him before shooting him to death near Candlestick Park, authorities said Wednesday.

Attorneys for the couple say that they tried everything to rescue their daughter from Calvin Sneed, a 22-year-old alleged gang member from Compton (Los Angeles County), but that they didn't kill him.

Prosecutors, however, say that when Barry Gilton and his longtime girlfriend, Lupe Mercado, couldn't get their 17-year-old daughter back through legitimate means, they turned to premeditated murder.

Gilton, 38, and Mercado, 37, appeared in court Wednesday on murder and other charges for allegedly shooting Sneed in the Bayview neighborhood in the early hours of June 4.

The couple have been together since middle school and live with their three other children in San Francisco. Their daughter disappeared some time ago and after searching for her, Gilton and Mercado discovered that she was turning tricks and that Sneed was her pimp, their attorneys said.

"They had gone out to local police agencies, agencies in Southern California - they had even tried talking to national organizations," said Eric Safire, Gilton's attorney. "Every place they turned to turned them away."

Eventually, they found out that the girl and Sneed were in North Hollywood, San Francisco police Officer David Nakasu said in the criminal complaint. On May 27, someone fired a 9 mm pistol into Sneed's car, and police believe that it was either Gilton or Mercado.

The complaint says Sneed was hit at least once. However, Los Angeles police Detective Thomas Townsend said Wednesday that none of the several rounds a single shooter fired into the car hit Sneed.

The shooter escaped, police said.

The couple's lawyers say their daughter accompanied Sneed to the hospital after the May 27 incident.

On June 4, Sneed was in San Francisco, driving his Toyota Camry at Meade and LeConte avenues at 2 a.m., when someone - prosecutors say it was Gilton - shot him with a .40-caliber handgun. Sneed crashed into a parked car and died a short time later at San Francisco General Hospital.

A few hours later, police questioned the girl at the Bayview Station, Safire said. On Saturday, her parents were arrested.

The daughter is staying with family members, as are Gilton and Mercado's three other children.

Sneed was a victim of a drive-by shooting in South Los Angeles last year, according to Los Angeles police. An appeal filed in a murder case involving a friend of his said that both the friend and Sneed were members of the Nutty Block Crip street gang.

Sneed's family could not be reached for comment.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/13/BAF01P1GIH.DTL#ixzz1xtIPtrXN

[Kosher Ham]

That's a bit of a different scenario there Dan.

Those parents were not reactionary based on impulse. They planned to kill this guy and are stupid for doing so.

[Going Commando]

Man, thats a tough one. Sounds like mental health admittance for 6 months or something to me with probation for a long time?

I'd probably do the exact same thing, but killing is killing. Right?? I dont know.

It's a horrible situation. That kind of violence is extreme. I think beating someone to death with your bare hands is beyond the pale. Something should probably be done, for that man's own sake.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 08:00 PM ----------

I hope the little girl gets the help she needs, but I'm sure she will be haunted. Innocence lost, very sad.

Seeing her father beat a man to death and then having him go to prison for it didn't make the situation better. What can you do though? It's a tragedy. The way this man must be feeling is unimaginable. To have that happen to your daughter, lash out and accidentally kill the man, then to feel the guilt of killing.

That's pretty much a life wrecking nightmare.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 08:11 PM ----------

I don't think you can send this man to jail though. That's unjust and it only ruins his and his families lives even more when they were truly victims here. Have to do something because that was a savage act. But what can be done?

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 08:23 PM ----------

Reminds me of this infamous incident from the 80's

He didn't do any time either and they got the whole thing on tape.

That's pretty ****ed up. Very different situation there, much, much worse IMO. His child wasn't in danger at that point, it was a premeditated revenge killing, and he could have easily shot or killed innocents during the shooting. Look at the angle he took the shot. He shot him while almost directly aligned with the camera man and the man escorting him. What if he missed?

[DC9]

I heard about this earlier in the week from the sports junkies... I would've done the same thing.

Now, legally, not so sure that the crime of passion law is still in affect over in Texas, but a few years ago, you could kill anyone within 10 minutes of a traumatic experience and not be charged with murder.

[Win4us]

Agree with the majority here in that the dad should def NOT see any jail time, Unfortunately with our ****ed up legal system will find a way to put him behind bars.

If someone did anything similar to my kids i'd probably react in the same fashion as the dad.

[Prosperity]

The prosecutor should prosecute

The defender should defend

The jury should nullify

[Edwardpena69]

That's a bit of a different scenario there Dan.

Those parents were not reactionary based on impulse. They planned to kill this guy and are stupid for doing so.

The police refused to arrest the main for pimping out there 17 year old daughter. What else could they do? A lot of these girls aren't hookers but sex slaves, beaten and conditioned to do what there pimp tells them. I know they are both different situations but neither of them are stupid.

On topic though, I'm from Victoria, and it's very conservative here, very shoot first and ask questions later,, even if he does get charges pressed against him, I doubt any jury would convict him. Espicially in a small town like shiner (2200 people at most) where everyone prolly knows the family.

[twa]

The prosecutor should prosecute

The defender should defend

The jury should nullify

Lawyers......always wanting to keep employed

The grand jury should no-bill

[Skin'Em84]

I feel bad for the police and court systems in this situation. On one hand, they have a father doing what probably 90% of humans would do in the same situation. He defended his family, and I would've done the same. On the other hand, you can't allow vigilantism to go free. You have to charge him with something.

IMO, I'd charge the assault, drop it to like disorderly conduct or a noise violation (those punches were loud), or jaywalking or something, and give him 5 hrs of community service or a $50 fine. Then, once the case is over, I'd probably walk over to him, shake his hand, and tell him he's a hero.

It's like when you are working with kids, and the one kid just destroys a known bully in a fight. You have to punish the kid, but you are proud of him at the same time.

[HogNose]

On the other hand' date=' you can't allow vigilantism to go free. You have to charge him with something.

[/quote']

If our justice system won't come down hard on child predators then I see no problem whatsoever when a citizen takes it into their own hands and gets off scott- free. Punishment for child predators should be a public caning followed immediately with a death sentence.

If this father had not killed this guy then he would have been slapped on the wrist, given a short sentence, and would have ended up on a sex offender registry while living among us. Unacceptable.

[Redskins Diehard]

Interesting how people's definition of "due process" changes when they fundamentally are comfortable with the story being told. How about we have an arrest and send this to trial so WE can find out the facts?

[Special K]

Good luck finding a jury that will convict this guy...

Poor little girl. I'm sorry to hear she had to go through this

[Destino]

Interesting how people's definition of "due process" changes when they fundamentally are comfortable with the story being told. How about we have an arrest and send this to trial so WE can find out the facts?

Evidence suggesting guilt must exist prior to charges being filed and subsequent trial. Is there any evidence at this point suggesting that things played out differently than reported?

---------- Post added June-17th-2012 at 05:02 PM ----------

I feel bad for the police and court systems in this situation. On one hand' date=' they have a father doing what probably 90% of humans would do in the same situation. He defended his family, and I would've done the same. On the other hand, you can't allow vigilantism to go free. You have to charge him with something.

IMO, I'd charge the assault, drop it to like disorderly conduct or a noise violation (those punches were loud), or jaywalking or something, and give him 5 hrs of community service or a $50 fine. Then, once the case is over, I'd probably walk over to him, shake his hand, and tell him he's a hero.

It's like when you are working with kids, and the one kid just destroys a known bully in a fight. You have to punish the kid, but you are proud of him at the same time.[/quote']

1 - because this supposedly happened as a result of being caught in the act, in his home, against a family member I don't see how this can be viewed as vigilantism. The is clear cut defense. If this went down as reported the government charging anything at all would be wrong.

2.- I'm not a fan of punishing kids for fighting when they were assaulted by a bully. It's lazy and done to benefit adults and it offers no useful education. If a kid attacks another and gets his butt kicked, he should be punished no differently than had he won the fight. Authority shouldn't take interest in who won only who owns or shares responsibility. If they met somewhere to fight then they share the blame but bullies tend not to schedule their assaults.

[Skin'Em84]

1 - because this supposedly happened as a result of being caught in the act, in his home, against a family member I don't see how this can be viewed as vigilantism. The is clear cut defense. If this went down as reported the government charging anything at all would be wrong.

2.- I'm not a fan of punishing kids for fighting when they were assaulted by a bully. It's lazy and done to benefit adults and it offers no useful education. If a kid attacks another and gets his butt kicked, he should be punished no differently than had he won the fight. Authority shouldn't take interest in who won only who owns or shares responsibility. If they met somewhere to fight then they share the blame but bullies tend not to schedule their assaults.

Response:

1- Touche. You bring up a good point.

2. Having worked with kids for a long time, and not being a parent, I'm looking at this as a teacher/daycare provider/camp director POV. Unless there is first hand/trustworthy first hand (you see the kid instigate, your employee sees it) you will never truly find out who started it. You may know, but you have to prove to the parents that their angel is a bully. Hence, you normally punish both kids for starting the fight, and have 0 tolerance for fighting. Rereading what I posted, I may not have stated that opinion clearly.

You leave it to the parents to give their kid a pat on the back for standing up for themselves.

[twa]

Interesting how people's definition of "due process" changes when they fundamentally are comfortable with the story being told. How about we have an arrest and send this to trial so WE can find out the facts?

I think much of the difference is the natural disgust bleeding thru that overcomes our objections to a life being taken

you saw the reverse with the other story..it is rather natural to want to protect the young (both consciously and subconsciously)

[HogNose]

Interesting how people's definition of "due process" changes when they fundamentally are comfortable with the story being told. How about we have an arrest and send this to trial so WE can find out the facts?

When children are involved it's a whole different ball game. If you violate a child then it is game over. I'm comfortable with anyone murdering a pedophile.

[mistertim]

I agree with those who say that its unlikely they would ever find a jury that would convict the guy of anything major. Be that as it may it is still one person killing another so they have to have a thorough investigation and come to a conclusion on how they wish to proceed. This is obviously a very emotionally charged issue/case based on the heinous nature of the allegations of the sexual abuse of a child as well as, specifically in regards to prior thread responses, the fact that many here have young children as well.

One thing I have to wonder about, and I believe it was stevemcqueen who brought it up, is the nature of the killing. As far as I'm aware it isn't that easy to beat a person to death with your bare hands; at least not in a short period of time. Sure you could land a "lucky" (for lack of a better word) blow or two that would cause irreparable damage and a relatively quick death but I think the chances of that are generally slim unless the father was a trained combat specialist or something. So I wonder exactly how long the dad beat the guy until deciding it was enough; remember, he died at the scene, not in the hospital days later or anything. Obviously in this sort of situation there is going to be a severe emotional reaction to what the dad saw which I'm sure influenced his reaction but it could still hamper a self defense case if the investigations conclude that he likely beat the guy for 20 minutes after he was already unconscious or something of that nature.

Also, don't take what I am saying above as my being against his right to protect his child with force. I completely believe that he has every right to do that. I'm just hoping this doesn't get even more gruesome.

[twa]

It is only as hard as you make it, humans are rather vulnerable

[Redskins Diehard]

I think much of the difference is the natural disgust bleeding thru that overcomes our objections to a life being taken

you saw the reverse with the other story..it is rather natural to want to protect the young (both consciously and subconsciously)

When children are involved it's a whole different ball game. If you violate a child then it is game over. I'm comfortable with anyone murdering a pedophile.

I don't disagere with either of you. I was pointing out the relative nature of "due process" and how ludicrous I find it to be that we put someone on trial to find out the facts.

To this case....I would be shocked if a grand jury returns an indictment. That aside, I feel a tremendous amount of sympathy for the young girl and the father. Not only did they experience this abuse but I suspect the young man will have anguish over killing this man. As much as people tend to think they would kill him with relatively little remorse killing a person is not a "natural" act for most "normal" people.

[Thiebear]

Redskins Diehard: With a 13/9/2 yr old: No chance i'd feel guilt for saving my baby girl.

It's currently my only function in life is to ensure their health and safety.

No different than a justified killing as a soldier to protect those of us at home.

Enemies foreign and domestic.

[mistertim]

Redskins Diehard: With a 13/9/2 yr old: No chance i'd feel guilt for saving my baby girl.

It's currently my only function in life is to ensure their health and safety.

No different than a justified killing as a soldier to protect those of us at home.

Enemies foreign and domestic.

That isn't a very good comparison for the opinion you're trying to get across seeing as how a lot of soldiers who have had to kill in the line of duty end up with severe emotional/mental stress over it and oftentimes require years of counseling.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Agree with the majority here in that the dad should def NOT see any jail time, Unfortunately with our ****ed up legal system will find a way to put him behind bars..

What makes you say that?

Self-defense and defense of others have been acceptable affirmative defenses in Western law since The Romans.

The only issue here is:

a) was he really acting in defense of his daughter (I don't always believe the first news reports) and

at what point did the beating change from defense to pre-meditated murder.

( is kind of tricky here, but he's in Texas so he should be ok.

[Redskins Diehard]

That isn't a very good comparison for the opinion you're trying to get across seeing as how a lot of soldiers who have had to kill in the line of duty end up with severe emotional/mental stress over it and oftentimes require years of counseling.

Yes, I agree. I'm not saying he should "feel guilty" but there is a good chance he will. Your point is spot on. And it doesn't even have to be "severe" emotional stress. And if he experiences it hopefully he will realize that he did the right thing.

[NavyDave]

Interesting how people's definition of "due process" changes when they fundamentally are comfortable with the story being told. How about we have an arrest and send this to trial so WE can find out the facts?

I can't perceive of even a bleeding heart liberal upon finding their daughter being violated, react with a naw I'll just restrain him until police and or help arrives and let a jury of his peers find him guilty of raping my little girl, instead of doing exactly what real Fathers would do on impulse /instinct.

[RiggosMohawk]

The only issue here is:

a) was he really acting in defense of his daughter (I don't always believe the first news reports) and

at what point did the beating change from defense to pre-meditated murder.

LKB you bring up a good point that I had been thinking of, wrt deadly force. The reports don't say anything about him using any type of weapon, which gives credit to the statement that he never intended to kill him. Personally I don't think of striking with just a fist as classic deadly force, more like 'defensive force'. Before all your classicly-trained ninjas chime in with your claims of martial arts skills, deadly force is defined as the force that you know, or should know, would cause a substantial risk of death or serious injury. Fist striking seems iffy to me.