'I'm going to slap him … should be fun': 10-year-old boy ate dog food, bound to chair with zip ties and was murdered by his father

To strap a child to a chair and force him to eat dog food and abuse him is reprehensible. To take twisted pleasure in this act is a sign of profound vice.

Allegedly, Joshua Smith had been displeased with his son’s performance in school and subjected him to rounds of the start of physical force. The boy Braxtyn, who later died suppsedly at the hands of his mother, Jem Bean and grandmother Mistie Latourette, reveled in the idea of doing Braxtyn harm.

All of this paints a picture of irrationalism. No matter how poor the boy’s grades had sunk to, it still did not give license for his own family members and the people who are supposed to love, support, and protect him to disregard him and degrade him literally to the level of a dog.

And people care more about dogs than this family did about this young boy. They neglected reality and found themselves pleading guilty for their crimes. Where was the thought? Where was the selfishness? Both had left the building. And before checking out, the trio ensured that the boy would sustain a weight of about forty eight pounds, seven pounds under normal weight for a boy his age.

The lack of value for their own grandson and son’s life is just horrendous. This horrific display of complete and utter disdain for Braxtyn should be a reminder that when you throw away your moral compass, morality eats you whole. Even if they had not been found out about their crimes of ziptying the boy, they would have lost in the courts of their own souls. They would not have been able to function at the level of human beings knowing they committed such an act. It’s almost refreshing to them to get caught.

Beam mentioned that she said her husband’s texts were full of “sarcasm.” There’s no sarcasm in feeding dog food to an already ailing young boy. That’s the tragedy. While maintaining their guilt, they still retain a vestige of an excuse where there is none. All of the distortion and evasions that had to go into this case spell a family that preyed. They preyed upon their own kin and for what? Dominance? Insecurity? Both? More? Their transgressions ought not be taken as simple acts to silence a youth underperforming in school. In fact, their actions ought to show just how evil people can be when they’re not rational or selfish.

If they had used reason, they would have seen that such acts are detrimental to the mind. If they were selfish, they would have regarded this boy’s life like their own. The combination of these two elements remains to be a problem in the society at large and in specific incidents like this. Nobody wants to be called irrational and absolutely no one wants to be called selfish, seriously. People do unreasonable things and say they’re just being silly. Sure, people will play and say they’re selfish because they want someone for themselves or that they don’t want children or some other foolishness.

With Braxtyn’s case, he had to endure physical punishment at the hands of those who should have been there to nourish and nurture him, not bind him and force him to eat food meant for canines. His death came at a cost. He, in death sadly, projected the image of a group of people who could have been the saviors and protectors over Braxtyn’s life. Instead, they became monsters and committed an atrocity so heinous it’s difficult in even putting it in words.

The absolute lack of thinking in this case is so thorough. Their punishments will all be too lenient even if they’re given the penalty of life in prison, it will not rectify their actions. They’re not going to live down their wickedness.