15-year old Stabs Bully 11 Times at Bus Stop, Gets Away With It

[Rallus]

Murder is never justifiable in my books. It seems whenever something like this pops up on the Escapist I see people rushing to the bullying victim's aid and saying that him taking the life of another person is justified. Bullies don't always stay bullies but this 15 year old is forever going to be a murderer, that person he killed is still dead because of him and no amount of justification is going to bring that person back.

Here I thought the fact he got away with it was sickening, but some of the responses here are downright revolting. Can some of you honestly sit there and think that the human right to life is so easily put aside?

Maybe some of these anti-gaming fellows are right, maybe gaming does cause people to become so insensitive towards human life that they don't even realise that 16 is very young in comparison to how old people live for, people can change in 70+ years.

Sure some of you might have been bullied in the past and I'm sure at some point you really wished them dead (admittedly so did I at first in my time in school), but is it worth taking away somebody's life, when they have so much time to atone for their actions?

 

[Pinkamena]

I'm glad he fought back against the bully. But stabbing him 11 times? That's just a little too much...

Says "Ms. Pinkamena" here

I find irony in such odd locations...

You shouldn't stab a person/pony more than 9 times! That is not proper stabbing etiquette.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

You've obviously never been bullied, and don't say you have because you clearly have not.

So you were? And that makes you an expert at telling who has ever been bullied?

Being bullied is something you grow out of just like bullying others is. There is no way you could tell if I was bullied back in high school.

I will say that I have been picked on and I have been beaten up quite a few times in the course of my life. But I almost always fight back, because even if I lose I know I at least tried. I've also picked on others and started fights just like every other average person. But I've never even considered shooting or stabbing anyone. Ever.

This bully most likely tormented the kid for months, even years, and if they boy had to carry a knife to ensure his safety then good on him.

By the article, it is impossible to tell, so this whole statement is just conjecture. Neither of us truly knows to what degree the bullying was being done, but I can't imagine it was anything too unbearable if the kid didn't tell anyone.

However, one question, what are some "Non-Lethal" was to stop a bully effectively, remember you aren't allowed to use force because that always has potential to kill.

I'm not allowed to use force because that always has potential to kill?

What does that even mean?

There are two types of force. The dark side and the... no wait... I mean lethal and non-lethal. Lethal force is when the act involves a high risk of death or serious bodily harm.

Some non-lethal forms of defense:

Fighting back (A lot of bullies pick on the ones they know wont fight back. If you get in a good punch or two, he might just back off.)
Involving authority figures (This can be anything from a teacher to the police depending on severity.)
Tasers (If you have money.)
Mace (If you don't.)
Etc.

 

[Rottweiler]

"Murder is never justifiable in my books."

I absolutely agree. Except this wasn't MURDER. People keep repeating it like that will make it true. Murder has strict definitions, it is NOT 'any time someone kills someone else'.

Please stop using the term until you're using it correctly.


"It seems whenever something like this pops up on the Escapist I see people rushing to the bullying victim's aid and saying that him taking the life of another person is justified."

Yet, where were you when Mr. Saavedra was systematically beaten in the past? Where were you when that punk beat other kids- oh, Saavedra was far from the first I'm sure- until they were so despondent they committed suicide to escape?

But, god forbid a bullying thug should die accidentally (there's absolutely no indication Saavedra intentionally killed Nuno, BTW- no matter what his parents are claiming) and there you are, crying for the vicious thug.


"Bullies don't always stay bullies"

Nope, but the damage they do lasts forever, sir. It far too often ends in the complete destruction of their victim's lives...but clearly that's unimportant to you, so long as he gets the second chance his victims don't get.

" but this 15 year old is forever going to be a murderer" NOT A MURDERER USE THE TERM CORRECTLY ,
"that person he killed is still dead because of him and no amount of justification is going to bring that person back."

Nope. On the other hand, what responsibility in this matter are you admitting the Bully had? Any? Or is the fact he more or less accidentally died because a younger, weaker boy defended himself from assault with a pocket knife ever going to become clear to you?


"Here I thought the fact he got away with it was sickening, but some of the responses here are downright revolting. Can some of you honestly sit there and think that the human right to life is so easily put aside?"

Absolutely not. I vigorously defend the human right to life.

For example, I defend *Saavedra's right to life which Nuno tried to take by physically assaulting him.*

Where's your defense? I notice you very carefully avoid noticing that Nuno was brutally assaulting Saavedra at the time, so your bias is just as disgusting to me.

When you start defending the *actual* victim, I'll listen. Until then you're in the 'Blame The Victim, Save The Criminal' category and thus contemptible to me.


"Maybe some of these anti-gaming fellows are right, maybe gaming does cause people to become so insensitive towards human life that they don't even realise that 16 is very young in comparison to how old people live for, people can change in 70+ years."

And what's wrong with *you*? You have spent an entire post defending a sadistic, assaulting bully and placing blame on an abused younger child. What is wrong with you???


"Sure some of you might have been bullied in the past and I'm sure at some point you really wished them dead (admittedly so did I at first in my time in school), but is it worth taking away somebody's life, when they have so much time to atone for their actions?"

Hard question. First, stop assuming that in this case Saavedra intended to kill Nuno. Absolutely none of the evidence supports that.

*This* is the most likely truth:

After plentiful, well witnessed incidents of violence against him, Saavedra has a pocket knife. 3" blade. He is in no way capable of physically defending himself from Nuno, who knows this very well and gets a sick, sadistic pleasure out of physically assaulting the smaller boy.

Finally, after every attempt to escape has failed, Saavedra (obviously having no form of hand to hand training) is PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED- remember that? Nuno physically assaulted him?- and flails away with his tiny knife. In the process, 99% probability of sheer accident, he does enough damage that Nuno dies from it.

Now take your 'murder' claims and back them up or stop. The truth? A bully was accidentally killed. His killer (NOT murderer) has to live with that, and the bully's family who MAYBE should have kept their son from being a sadistic bully, is claiming their son's complete and total innocence and trying to put all the blame on a scrawny 14 year old who their son apparently routinely assaulted. MAYBE they should put the blame where it deserves to be.

 

[Tax_Document]

You've obviously never been bullied, and don't say you have because you clearly have not.

So you were? And that makes you an expert at telling who has ever been bullied?

Being bullied is something you grow out of just like bullying others is. There is no way you could tell if I was bullied back in high school.

I will say that I have been picked on and I have been beaten up quite a few times in the course of my life. But I almost always fight back, because even if I lose I know I at least tried. I've also picked on others and started fights just like every other average person. But I've never even considered shooting or stabbing anyone. Ever.

This bully most likely tormented the kid for months, even years, and if they boy had to carry a knife to ensure his safety then good on him.

By the article, it is impossible to tell, so this whole statement is just conjecture. Neither of us truly knows to what degree the bullying was being done, but I can't imagine it was anything too unbearable if the kid didn't tell anyone.

However, one question, what are some "Non-Lethal" was to stop a bully effectively, remember you aren't allowed to use force because that always has potential to kill.

I'm not allowed to use force because that always has potential to kill?

What does that even mean?

There are two types of force. The dark side and the... no wait... I mean lethal and non-lethal. Lethal force is when the act involves a high risk of death or serious bodily harm.

Some non-lethal forms of defense:

Fighting back (A lot of bullies pick on the ones they know wont fight back. If you get in a good punch or two, he might just back off.)
Involving authority figures (This can be anything from a teacher to the police depending on severity.)
Tasers (If you have money.)
Mace (If you don't.)
Etc.

If you could actually, you know, read, you would know I clearly stated, "You are not allowed to you force (COMMA) because THAT always has THE potential TO kill."

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

If Dylan had died as a result of a tazer or from respiratory trauma caused by pepper spray, what would you say then?

"Wow, that's extremely extremely unlikely considering non-lethal weapons like that go through more rigorous testing than most automobiles."

Nevermind weapons, a single blow to the head or chest can kill someone. When you are rolling around on the ground fighting for your life you are not going to stop and count stab wounds. What if wounds 1-10 were superficial and did nothing to stop Dylan's assualt?

Is this kid a terminator? HE GOT STABBED.

Have you ever been stabbed?

By the third or fourth stab, if he wasn't dead, it's pretty likely he would have given up. I can't say that for sure, but if the knife went fully into his body ANYWHERE more than once, I can say for sure that he at least backed the fuck off. Adrenaline only takes you so far.

At your level of assumption, one could easily claim that Jorge was merely trying to stab a deadly spider that was crawling on Dylan's chest.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

If you could actually, you know, read, you would know I clearly stated, "You are not allowed to you force (COMMA) because THAT always has THE potential TO kill."

No, I got that.

See, here's the exact quote again.

remember you aren't allowed to use force because that always has potential to kill.

You were insinuating that all force is lethal because it has the potential to kill. However this is incorrect.

Let me say this again.

Lethal force is an action with a HIGH RISK of fatality. This does not include tasers, mace, fists, or a baseball bat. Yes they all have the potential to kill, but they are NOWHERE NEAR as likely to cause fatality as a knife.

 

[ecoho]

Murder is never justifiable in my books. It seems whenever something like this pops up on the Escapist I see people rushing to the bullying victim's aid and saying that him taking the life of another person is justified. Bullies don't always stay bullies but this 15 year old is forever going to be a murderer, that person he killed is still dead because of him and no amount of justification is going to bring that person back.

Here I thought the fact he got away with it was sickening, but some of the responses here are downright revolting. Can some of you honestly sit there and think that the human right to life is so easily put aside?

Maybe some of these anti-gaming fellows are right, maybe gaming does cause people to become so insensitive towards human life that they don't even realise that 16 is very young in comparison to how old people live for, people can change in 70+ years.

Sure some of you might have been bullied in the past and I'm sure at some point you really wished them dead (admittedly so did I at first in my time in school), but is it worth taking away somebody's life, when they have so much time to atone for their actions?

killing somoen is never a good thing and the kid probibly feels horrible for it but you know what? he was FULLY within his rights to defend himself and by doing so killing the other boy. now if other people had actually tried to do something before it got to this point it might not of happened. Now i dont know if you were bullied but i was. I know how the whole telling teachers or such ends, they get 5 of their friends to come in and say you did such and such and they did nothing and guess what? you get suspended and THEN your ass kicked it only ends when:
A. you beat the ever liveing shit out of them
B. you pull a weapon and use it
or C. they almost beat you to death and they go to prison because someone might have seen it happen.

 

[Rottweiler]

"Wow, that's extremely extremely unlikely considering non-lethal weapons like that go through more rigorous testing than most automobiles."

No, actually there's statistics on 'non lethal weapons' killing people. That's why *officially* they are referred to as 'Less Than Lethal', not 'Non Lethal'.



"Is this kid a terminator? HE GOT STABBED."

No, he was *wounded* with a *knife*. The NEWS says 'stabbed' but I sincerely doubt the accuracy of that. A more truthful account will most likely admit that there were 8 or 9 superficial cuts and two more serious ones.

"Have you ever been stabbed?"

Yes. If you count over time, I have been stabbed...4 times. All of the times I've been stabbed, it was in conditions where everyone involved was flooded with adrenalin and I didn't even feel the wounds. That's actually very common, where wounds which do not do massive tissue damage (like, say, small knife wounds) aren't even noticed until the adrenalin wears off.


"By the third or fourth stab, if he wasn't dead, it's pretty likely he would have given up."

Interesting how *none of the witnesses* say so. After all Nuno had friends there, surely they would have stepped in if he'd given up? No? Then what are you even basing this on?

Also, do you even know how *difficult* it is to do serious injury with a three inch pocket knife? Also, since Nuno wasn't naked, he had the protection of whatever clothing he was wearing, which would seriously impede such a small knife.


" I can't say that for sure, but if the knife went fully into his body ANYWHERE more than once, I can say for sure that he at least backed the fuck off. Adrenaline only takes you so far."

Interestingly enough, the eyewitness accounts in the case don't agree with you. And again, you clearly have not researched blade wounds- they are in many cases surprisingly painless, especially under the influence of massive amounts of adrenalin.

We won't even discuss whether Nuno was under the influence of Drugs, since his family is doing their level best to demonize the kid he was assaulting and claim their son was an angel who was only trying to squash a mosquito on Saavedra's head. I doubt any evidence of drug use will surface because everyone will try to make the dead kid look innocent (since he's dead.)

"What the hell are you talking about?"

He was mocking your massive assumptions- that Nuno would 'back off' (which witnesses would have seen) or 'given up' (which witnesses would have seen also).

So, since none of the witnesses reported any of that, it indicates your assumptions are incorrect.

 

[Bat Vader]

I applaud the teen for standing up and defending himself from the bully. At the same time I do think stabbing someone twelve times in the chest is a bit overboard. I am wondering if the teen lost control of himself and didn't realize how many times he stabbed him until it was to late.

Hopefully this teaches bullies not to pick on people.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

And it's quite possible that both are also illegal in the State of Florida, especially for minors. Neither are considered a tool, like a 2" pocket knife IS.

Both tasers and mace have the potiential to kill. Tasers especially.

Where does it say the knife was 2"?

Also, damn near everything has the potential to kill if it is used to that purpose. However, by American law, ALL personal defense weapons go through an assload of tests to prove that they are EXTREMELY unlikely to kill.

A judge ruled on this case after hearing both sides presented by what I assume were well-educated and compentant lawyers. The only higher authority is God himself.

You assume too much. Competence is rarer than you may think.

Or you... the all-knowing, all-seeing internet denizen sent from beyond space and time to save us all!

Let me be the 1st person to welcome and thank you for gracing us with your presence...

I appreciate you acknowledging my intellectual superiority, but I think we should stay on topic.

OOH OOH! I just thought of another non-leathal means of defense! You whip out a pocket knife and say "back the f*ck off or I will stab you!". When that fails, you commence with what can only be a more leathal means of defense.

I give up...

Google "Lethal Force"

 

[Iori Branford]

This does not include ... fists, or a baseball bat.

Anyone still basing their view of the conflict on sports/movies/games/"common sense":
Just Google one punch kill [https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ix=ieb&ie=UTF-8&ion=1#q=one+punch+kill&hl=en&safe=off&site=webhp&prmd=imvns&ei=TwcIT7H8Neri0QGc0ZHLCQ&start=40&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=9f861847d203cf39&ion=1&biw=1920&bih=955].
I wish so many results weren't news articles.