Friday, July 26, 2013

"Dexter"-type murders have upstate SC riveted!

At left: Jeremy Lee and Christine Moody, of Lockhart, SC, charged with two counts of murder each. Photo from THE STATE.

The victim was a registered sex offender and his wife. Apparently, these two had a list of sex offenders they were working from, DEATH WISH/DEXTER style. Clint Eastwood, call your office!

Maybe we shouldn't be celebrating vigilante behavior in films, comics or (as in the recent case of George Zimmerman) real life. Maybe the wrong people are getting the wrong message?

From Go Upstate:
Investigation into Jonesville double homicide 'wide open'

Sheriff says more charges could be filed Friday
By Jenny Arnold

Even though two people are in jail, the investigation into a double homicide in Jonesville is still “wide open,” Sheriff David Taylor said Thursday.

Jeremy Lee Moody, 30, and his wife, Christine Moody, 36, both of 213 S. 1st St., Lockhart, were arrested early Wednesday and charged by the Union County Sheriff's Office with two counts each of murder in the deaths of Charles Marvin Parker, 59, and Gretchen Dawn Parker, 51.

Jeremy Moody has told investigators he targeted Charles Parker because Parker was a registered sex offender. Jeremy Moody had “no beef” with Gretchen Parker, but she was home at the time and was a “casualty of war,” Taylor said.

Authorities think the Parkers were killed inside their home sometime Sunday, with their bodies being discovered after a concerned resident called 911 after he couldn't get the Parkers to the door Monday night. Both Parkers had been shot and stabbed.

The sheriff's office plans to bring additional charges against Jeremy Moody and Christine Moody, likely Friday, Taylor said.

Authorities said Jeremy Moody may have seen himself as a vigilante, and told investigators that he had written down the name of another sex offender he had planned to kill on Wednesday. About 3:45 a.m., he and his wife were arrested at the home of his parents in Lockhart, before he could carry out the third killing, according to the sheriff's office.

Investigators are working to determine whether the Moodys are affiliated with any white supremacy or other hate groups. Jeremy Moody has a prominent “skinhead” tattoo on the front of his neck, along with the words “white power” tattooed on the top of his bald head. He also has an eagle and swastika and “Made in America” tattoos.

Jeremy Moody also has told investigators that he is involved in other crimes, including homicides. Officers are following those leads, although Taylor has said that Moody could be bragging. He wouldn't comment on whether there were any specific cases investigators were checking out.

“We're still going wide open, as much as we were yesterday,” Taylor said. “We're following up on the information he's given us, getting evidence ready to send to SLED and trying to identify her tattoos, what they mean and what groups they may be associated with.”

Taylor said Christine Moody’s Facebook page seems to link the couple to a white supremacy group called Crew 41, based in Nebraska. Jeremy Moody has a Facebook page under the name Jeremy Mengele, but there are few posts. He posted that he keeps getting banned from the social network.

On her Facebook page, Christine also uses the last name Mengele, the last name of German physician Josef Mengele, known for his inhumane medical experiments on twins and other prisoners at the Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II. The page also contains code numbers for words and phrases associated with the skinhead subculture. Christine Moody makes posts in which she is trying to recruit new members for Crew 41 and uses racial slurs.

Christine Moody identifies herself as a “skin byrd,” or female skinhead. In one post, she states, “The census bureau for the first time in U.S. History have declared that this year, more White people died than were born. The extinction of the White race is upon us. This is undoubtably one of the saddest posts I have ever made.”

Taylor said Christine Moody appears to be trying to recruit new members for Crew 41.

“This is the first time I’ve seen this group,” Taylor said. “We’re doing more research on it. We’ve been in contact with the FBI about it.”

Also on her Facebook page, Christine Moody claims to have cancer.

“We have been told she has cancer,” Taylor said. “Our medical staff has followed up on that.”
Even scarier: I am fairly certain I have run into these two before, back when I used to work at Greenville Mall. (They are, you know, kinda easy to remember.)

We will be talking about these two colorful characters today on our illustrious radio show, so tune in, live at five. (LIVESTREAM HERE)

In addition, another vigilante wacko, Michael Dunn, has murdered another black teenage male (Jordan Davis) in Florida, and is claiming (wait for it!) STAND YOUR GROUND laws, as his defense. We will be discussing that also.

The word for today is CARTE BLANCHE, boys and girls.

Usage in sentence: Since the Zimmerman verdict, the racists now believe they have CARTE BLANCHE.


Sevesteen said...

Stand Your Ground and Self Defense are NOT THE SAME, except in the media and in anti-gun propaganda.

If the shotgun were real and was really used to threaten, then shooting back, or even shooting first is simple Self Defense. What escape route is available against a shotgun in those circumstances?

If this apparent idiot (if the news is accurate, he's an idiot, but I don't trust the news to be accurate) truly believed in the shotgun before he whipped out his own gun, self defense still applies if he can convince a jury that reasonable people would have had the same hallucination under the same circumstances.

In the more likely event that he didn't imagine the shotgun until long after the shooting was over, then neither self defense nor stand your ground makes his actions legal--except in the minds of people who want to use every questionable self defense shooting to further their claims that Stand Your Ground is wrong.

His excuses are ridiculous. If he thought his actions were valid, he should have called the cops as soon as he was safe.

John Wintermute said...

I found a list of criminals that has been monitoring bank accounts and internet business, they stalk and spy on all your computer activities ACAH 567, BJLJ 156, AYHK 771, BCCS 666, 4V 6026, 4V 6025, 88KP, 88KB, 88KL, 88KY, 050 EPM, 5S, M5S, BPHC 380,BEKX 968, BNWN 970, ALFP697, BKDS 839, BKBM571, BAJW 833, AYAR944, BLCN475, 1-901-821-0799, 416-710-0485, BRMY 528, BLAZ 333, 416-520-5886, 416-456-9100,647-284-3203, 905-471-6526, aany 313, 680 vaz, ALFE 785, BDNN 223, BFTR 243, AZCA 349, 915 RAN

Gorgeous Gregg said...

I'll concede that Stand Your Ground laws and self-defense are not the same. Of course, neither Daisy nor I are anti-gun. I don't own one and don't intend to get one, but I don't care if you have one.

When you start with the phrase "If the shotgun were real" and go on from there with what seems to be support for shooting someone because of what you think they are armed with, well, it gets hard to swallow. There is no room for if. If is why Trayvon Martin is dead. If Zimmerman had not been on the prowl looking for "punks" who "get away with it". If Zimmerman had followed any of the Neighborhood Watch rules. A hundred ifs, and all of them lead to Trayvon Martin having a chance to turn 18.

And don't you dare try to go after Trayvon Martin or besmirch his character. He did nothing wrong. NOTHING.

Judges and juries allow unarmed people to be slaughtered by vigilantes or actual police who suffer no consequences for the killings they did. I believe we are dealing with a racist system and an injustice system.

I appreciate that you're attempting to display reasonableness and judgement and restraint Sevesteen, but what may seem like logical arguments to you seem like excuse making to me. With the evidence pointing to killings of black men by police or cop wannabees every 28 days on average, I understand that folks are wanting to see solutions right now.

Sevesteen said...

Under certain conditions, the law allows you to shoot people based on what you think they were armed with, it doesn't matter what I think of that. There are countless cases of people shot while brandishing toy guns, with the shootings ruled self defense. That doesn't mean you can shoot anyone you see with a clear squirt gun, it means that if a reasonable person under those circumstances would believe their life to be in danger, it can be self defense. Rather than an exhaustive list of when it is OK, we've got "reasonable person".

At least one recent study shows that Stand Your Ground in Florida is more often claimed by black men, and is more often successful than when claimed by white men. (It's also possible that the claims are also in situations where it doesn't really apply, where simple self defense was all it took to get them off--Stand Your Ground applies to a very narrow set of circumstances)

I'm still not sure what parts of the actual law Daisy objects to, apparently I'm not going to find out without listening to the show.

Almost nobody claims to be anti-gun--they are OK with guns available to the right people, with different definitions of "right". But there's a history of gun control leaders using excuses to try to increase gun control however they can--using a case where Stand Your Ground is irrelevant as evidence that it shouldn't be law. Despite rifles overall being used in a disproportionately low percentage of crimes, because some of them are sensational, we shouldn't have scary looking guns with a "shoulder thing that goes up". (Google that to see Carolyn McCarthy make an ass of herself)

We need solutions for black men getting killed, period. Or people getting killed regardless of race. I'd love to see Chicago reduce the number of black men murdered to one every 28 days, no matter what race their killer is. You're like a drunk driving opponent focusing on Cognac-related accidents...

Politicalguineapig said...

The sad thing in the Parker killing is that there's only one mildly sympathetic character: Mrs. Parker. I'm going to hope she just had a major case of Stockholm syndrome. She had to have known about the guy's past.
The fact is vigilante justice is the only kind of justice that can be had against sex offenders.
The perps are a waste of space too, though, so don't think I'm defending them. Race supremacists are awful people even if they get one thing right.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Sevesteen, I think you probably missed an old post of mine, wherein I laid down some personal blogging rules/lessons of mine... which I shed (metaphorical) blood to learn.

It's #6 here. I don't like to ARGUE about guns at length. Lesson learned.

I give my opinion, but I won't argue at length, which is to ENGAGE. If I think I can keep it light, then I will... if I sense the gun-fan is getting unduly agitated, I back off and usually allow them the last word (IF they are gracious and do not break the first rule of DEAD AIR: don't insult me).

You have always been fairly polite and have never been nasty and gratuitously insulting, so you are allowed. But that doesn't mean I necessarily want to reply... accept when I do.


Sorry, no offense. But feel free to comment any time the subject interests you.

PS: Why do I allow SOME insults to stand? Because as in this thread , I think the wackiest and far-out insults can sometimes make the insulter look far worse than they do the insultee (me).

Also, if its funny and well-done, I might leave the insult up, just out of admiration for good writing.

Sevesteen said...

I try to avoid trolling, although I'm not always successful at controlling myself. (there have been lots of times I've written something here, then just closed the page without clicking "publish" because it would contribute more heat than information)

Too often people don't want to rationally discuss, they only want to score for their side. I don't want to just score points for my side, I want to actually understand people who think differently than I do and ideally have them understand me at least a little. Probably there's a subconscious thought that "if only I could make them understand, they'd have to agree", but agreement isn't my main goal.

I don't consider self defense or SYG a gun-only issue, although it's obviously related. Most of the objections to it appear to be knee-jerk, based on ignorance of what the law actually does, or based on a general antipathy to self reliance--"just let the police handle it". I would love to hear a reasoned objection from someone who either understands the law, or who can show me that I don't understand it.

One of the problems with "engaging the gun nuts" is that there are almost no places to discuss gun policy that aren't essentially an echo chamber. There are a tiny handful of gun control blogs that allow even slight dissent--and several that appear to will only publish a small percentage of dissenting comments, while allowing almost anything supporting their position. This includes anti-gun articles on blogs that are typically about other subjects. Many that appear to be even in comment moderation won't or cant' defend their positions. Some of them are willfully ignorant--despite devoting a good portion of their lives to restricting guns absolutely refusing to learn anything about them. Understandable for amateurs, but not from politicians or officers of the Brady Campaign for example. Anyone willing to discuss remotely fairly is likely to get overwhelmed.

And I consider myself more of a freedom nut than a gun nut--It's just that gun rights are half of a great litmus test to see how likely it is that a politician deserves my support. The other half is marriage equality--any politician supporting both is far more likely than average to deserve my support.

(and could you please consider deleting John Wintermute's spam comment?)

DaisyDeadhead said...

Sevesteen, have you tried Mike B's blog?:

My only issue with his blog (as with so many blogs!) is that he seems to be at a remove. He is not writing from experience, since he lives in Italy. (He is an expat) Laci the Dog, one of his bloggers who has commented here, is British. Therefore, I feel like they don't really know how dicey it can get over here, where we can appreciate a song like "Gimme back my bullets"... (Like, you know, *why* we have a "neighborhood watch" in the first place, right?)

But he is comprehensive and pretty fair.

The trolls I got initially came from his place, and he does not usually ban them until they get especially disruptive, as they ARE wont to do.

I've read several good discussions over there, but admittedly have not been reading too much lately--he could have cracked down since I was a regular reader. (Another problem is that his commentariat sometimes seemed like it was ALL gun nuts; he may have attempted to remedy that in some way.)

Check him out.

PS: Some spam amuses me, for some reason. That one is weird enough that I will leave it there. Does he get paid to post that all over Google Plus or what? Fascinating. As a former call center worker, I notice those area codes are (literally) all over the map, even Canadian.

Apparently John doesn't know the NSA has been doing that already. And damn, I am sure they wouldn't let anything bad happen to us, right? ;)

Sevesteen said...

I don't remember how I wound up here, it could be via MikeB. I used to comment on his blog. I don't remember the exact details, but I left with a public statement that I wouldn't be back. (I've done that on a couple of blogs, the public statement is for my benefit so I'm less tempted to return)

As I remember it, Laci the Dog was part of the problem--He is just plain rude and nasty--I would not allow anyone to act like that on my blog (if I were still active) even if they agree with me.

I think his followers are almost all gun nuts, and that is most of what drives him to continue--he doesn't care that much about the subject, but being one of the few gets him lots of attention.

It isn't so much that I'm seeing the spam, it is that he's somehow benefiting, (probably some sort of Google Page Rank scheme, making some other web site show up higher in Google results) and leaving it encourages more of the same elsewhere.