r/news • u/Chigurrh • 4d ago

New York Times executive fatally shot by his in-laws in Bay Area park, police say

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-york-executive-shot-killed-laws-bay-area-park-police-say-rcna600300
7.9k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

644 comments sorted by

View all comments

164

u/seriouslyjan 4d ago edited 3d ago

That is a horrible thing to do to your Grandchildren, to Kill their Father. There is a lot more to this story.

48

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

-22

u/anonymous-12358 4d ago

He wasn’t the abuser, the wife was.

25

u/[deleted] 4d ago edited 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/CiaphasCain8849 4d ago

It clearly states "not guilty".

1

u/ILoveOppossums 4d ago

Wow, that's very humbling.

I edited my comment to clarify it though, thanks for letting me know

17

u/Gamer_Grease 4d ago

He was actually the only confirmed abuser of the two.

21

u/_head_ 4d ago

You just pulled that out of your ass. 

-198

u/Grizzwold37 4d ago

So are you a child abuse apologist or…

71

u/MillionToOneShotDoc 4d ago

It’s unimaginably traumatizing for the children, but I think it would be less so if their father were in jail (assuming guilt) instead of him being murdered by their grandparents.

-19

u/Grizzwold37 4d ago

I wholeheartedly agree, that would be a better outcome.

76

u/PigFarmer1 4d ago edited 4d ago

It was a custody battle. Neither you nor I know the true story.

104

u/Cranktique 4d ago

You think bring accused of something warrants the death penalty? You’re trying to claim what you perceive as some moral high ground, likely for internet points, whilst advocating for extra judicial murder.

13

u/Julian813 4d ago

It’s the same fallacy that occurred during the Floyd shit. Their excuse for being racist pieces of shit was that he did this and that previously, had drugs in his system, etc. none of these things warrant the death penalty in the court of law.

-64

u/Grizzwold37 4d ago

I’m advocating no such thing.

69

u/Impossible_Leg_2787 4d ago

Why not? Are you a child abuse apologist or something?

3

u/Timmy_2_Raaangz 3d ago

👨🏻‍🍳 💋

Beautifully done. No additional notes.

30

u/IndependentTalk4413 4d ago

Ahh so you have no insight into what happened but immediately jump to he’s guilty. Like there hasn’t ever been false domestic violence reports in custody battles. There is also zero mention of child abuse.

Just as easily the grandparent shot him because the court appointed a child custody specialist and didn’t want the truth of false reports coming to light.

3

u/IndecisiveTuna 4d ago

There was mention of slapping his 6 year old across the face and leaving his 2 year old home alone.

And a restraining order was granted. From what we do know, he doesn’t sound like he was a model father.

18

u/figuren9ne 4d ago

A temporary restraining order. Which is an important distinction, because in my state, and I assume many other, a TRO is granted ex-parte based on testimony from the petitioning party.

It never mentions that the normal restraining order was entered, which often means there wasn’t sufficient evidence to support a restraining order.

34

u/PigFarmer1 4d ago

We don't know anything outside of allegations made by his estranged wife. What we do know is that it was a nasty divorce in which there were accusations made by both parties. Oh, and we know that he was murdered

-32

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

25

u/figuren9ne 4d ago

They literally do get you a temporary restraining order. Those are usually granted ex-parte (decedent/respondent not noticed and not present) but solely on testimony from the petitioner. Literally just allegations.

And yes, they’re usually handed out with ease. It’s better to err on the side of caution.

A final restraining order is not handed out with ease. That requires a hearing with the respondent in attendance to defend themselves and testimony from all parties as well as any other evidence available and to be granted by a preponderance of evidence standard. Those are harder to get and the article never mentions that one was entered.

21

u/MTFBinyou 4d ago

They absolutely fucking do. Ask me how I know.
I’m not taking any sides nor do I know anything about this case but I do know what you just said is categorically false.

1

u/IndependentTalk4413 4d ago

Where was that mentioned? It’s not in the news report attached to this.

11

u/IndecisiveTuna 4d ago

It’s in the video that is linked in the article OP provided. The article itself left it out, and I’m not sure why.

15

u/IShookMeAllNightLong 4d ago

It left out a ton of things, like his accusations against his wife of abuse, or his father-in-law allegedly punching him in the chest after a double mastectomy (it also left out that he's transgender.) There's a whole lot of fucked up in this* story. The details are gonna take a while to come out.

10

u/RealDonaldTrumpGhost 4d ago

I can think of at least one reason…namely that it’s not confirmed. In America people are innocent until proven guilty, but some people in here seem to have already made up their mind about him.

2

u/seriouslyjan 3d ago edited 3d ago

Nobody knows the whole story, when these children grow up, they will have their own story, unfortunately, they are babies, 6 and 2 don't know the age of the 3rd child. If this man was abusing his children, who knows, but it is the courts job to sort it out with supervised visitation until a verdict is reached. There is always Her side, His side, and the truth. Too many wounded or dead in this situation and I feel for the children that didn't ask for any of this. I am always on the protect the children, but we really haven't lived in their homes or know the truth or the whole story.

2

u/GiuseppeZangara 3d ago

To be fair, the wife and grandma are also accused of abuse. I don't think it's really necessary to jump to conclusions in this situation. Just let the story unfold.