So they were guilty in your opinion......OK
And you're defending the shooter's explanation for not contacting the authorities until after Thanksgiving day?........
Posted on 11/27/2012 7:59:37 AM PST by Uncle Chip
LITTLE FALLS, MINN. - Insisting the case crosses the line from self-defense to a cold-blooded double execution, Morrison County authorities filed second-degree murder charges Monday against a 64-year-old man who killed two teenage cousins after they'd broken into his home on Thanksgiving.
This woodsy central Minnesota town of 8,000 was jolted as the gruesome details spilled out in a criminal complaint, alleging Byron David Smith put a handgun under the chin of wounded and gasping 18-year-old Haile Kifer for what he told police was a "good clean finishing shot."
Smith, who according to a friend and a relative had endured previous break-ins, sat shackled in an orange jail jumpsuit as County Attorney Brian Middendorf accused him of "cold-blooded murder of two teenagers under circumstances that are appalling and far beyond any self-defense claim."
Sheriff Michel Wetzel said Monday that he believes the teenagers were committing a burglary but said Smith's reaction went beyond legal protections of Minnesota law that allows crime victims to use reasonable force to protect themselves and their property during a felony.
"We understand and respect that right exists, but what happened in this case went further," Wetzel said. "The law doesn't permit you to execute somebody when there's no possible way the crime can continue."
And the law requires people to notify police, said Wetzel, who learned about the shooting from a neighbor the next day. The sheriff said the reason Smith gave for never calling police was "it was Thanksgiving and he didn't want to bother us on a holiday."
Hamline University School of Law professor Joseph Olson, who has studied self-defense laws, noted that the number of Smith's shots will make it difficult for him to claim self-defense in court.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
“Intimidate and worry” are Strib code for “Democrat gun haters lived in the area”...
In the case of the male intruder, it may be accurate that he killed him in the midst of a break-in.
In the case of the female intruder, it may be accurate to say he wounded her in the midst of a break-in.
What is clear is that after he wounded her, he then murdered her after he was no longer in danger.
if by “murder” you mean “psychopathic rage monster who eats kittens on the weekends”
He is certainly pathological, as his own attested behavior demonstrates. There is no need for wild speculation as to his pathology when we have his own words.
Maybe you should go to the homeless shelter pick up a few drug addicted youth take them home with you and show them the right path so they don’t end up getting shot?
Obviously there is, or you wouldn't be posting.
Not exactly correct. A moral person defends his home - using deadly force if necessary.
If you don't, then you are allowing them to victimize other people later.
So if a homeowner shoots an intruder and then calls police and the intruder receives medical attention and recovers, and the intruder is eventually released from prison and goes back to a life of crime - should the homeowner who shot him be criminally liable for the intruder's subsequent crimes because the homeowner failed to kill him?
you have no duty to retreat from within your home
No one on this thread is arguing that any such fictional "duty" exists.
If they run, you can't chase 'em. If they are outside, you can't shoot at 'em.
Correct.
Once they break in, you are within your Rights to kill them.
Not true. Once they break in you are within your rights to use deadly force to end the threat. There is no right to kill a human being who is no longer a threat to you (for example, an unarmed woman lying on the ground with bullets in her gut and chest).
Advisable too as MN has a long history of people defending themselves and being sued into the poor house via civil suites from the criminal.
This is a new twist to your argument: that avoiding financial hardship justifies murder.
If avoiding poverty is a justification for murdering someone, why isn't it a justification for burglarizing someone?
Moron.
Life is hard. Life is harder and shorter if you’re stupid.
The kids were the epitome of stupid.
In this case, it was avoiding being killed by a couple of thieving drug addicts armed with the lead pipe they used to break in with in the first place...
You just never get tired of being wrong do you.
stmedia.startribune.com/documents/Criminal+Complaint+-+BYRON+SMITH.pdf
Being stupid is not a capital offense. The killer had a right to defend his home, and shooting the intruders was justified. However, noone with a clear head and rightly formed conscience can argue that he had the right to take that last shot on either of them. That’s murder, pure and simple.
When the woman was lying on the floor bleeding from multiple gunshot wounds, was she swinging a lead pipe at him? I ask because he forgot to mention that part to the police.
You just never get tired of being wrong do you.
If I were wrong you would refute me, rather than making comments of that caliber.
It would be instructive to hear those interview tapes...
Correction. Dying from multiple gun shot wounds. Even in his statement to police, he didn't euthanize her out of malice but because she was already on the edge of death anyway and wanted to "end her suffering".
Don't go away mad, just go away.
That's his story.
He's not a medical professional and had no way of knowing if she would survive or not.
But he did make sure that no medical professional would ever make that assessment while she was still alive.
Don't go away mad, just go away.
It's an open forum. I'll stay.
Feel free to put forward an argument that holds water at any time.
Having been ripped off and many thosands stolen, I have no sympathy either.
And this guy had been hit six times.
Burglars in my house may very well end up dead.
Shock shock shock.
It happens.
Better to self train with the shovel and a muzzle. After all these news stories, you’d think folks would know better.
After multiple break-ins, you think you, or anyone else would be forgiving?.
...allow druggies to rob you EIGHT times....then let some judgemental ass-wipe on a message board tells you to “just shoot ‘em in the shoulder”, cuz it’s kinder, even though the Keystones don’t even train that way (ask the family members of druggies and over 100 DOG owners)
NO SYMPATHY here. Get your life together on your own damn dime. I will send your parents a mirror, though, since it’s apparent they were too busy being your BFF to actually be a PARENT and teaching you RIGHT from WRONG.
He says eight times.
But he only filled out a police report once.
Better to self train with the shovel and a muzzle.
It appears that this was his original plan.
Then he realized that he would have to dispose of two adult bodies and a car without anyone noticing. Not as easy as you imply - ever try to dig a ditch in a Minnesota winter?
If he had followed your advice any further, he would likely be up on 1st degree murder charges instead of 2nd degree.
So they were guilty in your opinion......OK
And you're defending the shooter's explanation for not contacting the authorities until after Thanksgiving day?........
A “jury of his peers” didn’t buy it either. He was convicted. The case was in Oklahoma.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.