Father Wants to Eat Flesh of His Son's Murderer

MSNBC - The father of a five-year-old boy slain in 1975 has vowed to murder the man who did it "as aggressively and painfully as he killed my son" if he is released from prison early.

John Foreman told WPRO-AM radio that he blamed himself for accepting a plea deal that saw Michael Woodmansee convicted of the second-degree murder of his son Jason in South Kingstown, Rhode Island.

Woodmansee was sentenced to 40 years in prison in 1982, but the plea bargain deal allowed him to be released early for good behavior. This could happen as soon as August, the Providence Journal reported.  

In the interview, Foreman claimed a journal kept by Woodmansee, which has not been released by police, details how the killer had eaten the young boy's flesh.

"I do intend, if this man is released anywhere in my vicinity, or if I can find him after the fact, I do intend to kill this man," Foreman added.

"I cannot think, I cannot sleep. All I think about is trying to find a way to get this man to kill him," he told WPRO-AM.

Foreman said he wanted to kill Woodmansee "as aggressively and painfully as he killed my son."

He said he remembered only one detail contained in the journal, that Woodmansee "ate the flesh of my son."

I got nothin' here.  Blank mind.  Writer's block.  I know the stories fucked up, sad, wah wah wah blah blah blah - it happened in 1982. Fuckin' 30 years ago.  I know I'd want vengeance for a case like this too, but that's not what I care about right now. Whoever the journalist who detailed this story fucking sucks.  Leaves so much shit unanswered.  The father wants to kill his son's murderer "as aggressively and painfully" and his son was killed - I get that part.  However,  does that mean he wants to fucking eat the murderers flesh when he's still alive? Or will he kill him first then eat his flesh?  Cuz that's two completely different scenarios.  Death A- the murderer will obviously be in excruciating pain.  Death B- the murder won't feel shit.  That's why this shitty journalist needs to get into more detail about the actual death of the son.  Was the fucking kid dead or not when his flesh was eaten?  I mean we learned this shit way back in fucking elementary school.  Gotta answer the who, what, where, when, why and HOW motherfucker.  Completely left the "how" part  out. 

I guess, thanks to this asshole "writer" having a serious lack of writing skills, will just have to wait and see how this situation unfolds.  Getcha' popcorn ready.