Outrage after popular students are found murdered in man's basement after 'they robbed his home on

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by milominderbinder

The only "evidence" that these two kids were "robbing" anyone come from the unsubstantiated allegations of the same creepy old guy who was hiding the bodies in his basement.

So you're determined to judge the owner of the home by his appearance.

Ted Bundy anyone?

NO. The commentor is determined to judge the matter by the facts, unlike all of the people accepting this guy's story at face value. Yes, the guy looks creepy, but this is not the only or main reason we are questioning the facts of the case.

What FACTS? All we have is a news story - - which often tend to be completely wrong.

There has not been an official investigation yet.

Yet the home owner is being judged by how he looks.

two parts...

1) Facts

Two people dead
gunshot wounds
in basement of house day later


Homeowner claims burglary

If they can not prove they were kidnapped or coerced, two burglars dead... lethal force authorised


Prosecutors have a habit

Stacking charges
Ignoring the law
Trying to pollute the Jury pool pre-trial




2)Issue

Was deadly force authorized...

-Yes

Excessive

-Two on one
-previous burglaries
-time of crime

-Not excessive

the two kids would be alive if they had not Been in the house... fact

now add in one is a recovering druggie
one had record of previous burglaries


Taken all together...

Lethal force is legal, because of homeowners right to defend his property.

Misdemeanor charge improper disposal/ handling of human remains... should be waived due to trauma of homeowner

I would recommend to homeowner to sue the parents for emotional damage, cost of bullets, legal fees, any items broken or damaged during break in, and pain and suffering

Originally posted by Bixxi3
it amazing how irrational people get when they fear there freedom and life. He should of called to police as soon as possible after the shooting. Im sure hiding the bodies has hurt his defense.

i don't know this guy's circumstance but i'll tell you this much.. if i had the slightest inkling that my family was in even the smallest jeopardy i would shoot until my clip was empty then i would reload. the evil of man is horrific and i wouldn't hesitate a second to kill anyone in my home without permission so i can't comprehend when you say "irrational" you obviously have never had the fear of harm done to a family member and i thank God for that but if you or anyone else thinks i or any rational person could take the time to call a first responder and wait for them while God only knows what the intentions are from someone breaking into your home that's just crazy to me.

here is a pdf of the criminal complaint for smith.
at the very least there has been a crime scene investigation,
and you can see the statement smith made as told by investigators
Smith Complaint

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
The bloodlust of some people in this thread is disgusting.

Quite so. Most of them good Christians, no doubt...

reply to post by hounddoghowlie
Thanks for sharing that and the statement he made by his own words speaks for itself. I hope he burns for this. He executed a couple kids and laughing? He'd just shot her with a .223 rifle and put her down. I wonder if it wasn't more like hysterical crying, knowing she was about to die? The last of his own statement is what made me sick...and I'll leave that for everyone else to read. It's the last paragraph of page two. He killed them with all the care or concern of putting down an animal. If he's supposed to be representing anything positive, I'm on the other side of it.

Reading his own words kinda reinforces a bad feeling and my first comment on the thread at least assumed the opening conflict was warranted.....but with the male? Thats a big maybe. On the female? Thats a Death Penalty Capital Murder in my mind or it ought to be. Laying in Wait is the special circumstances to specifically apply. He ambushed her.

Not even close to excusable and ...his own words. Wow. I really do feel a bit ill.

It sounds like after his gun jammed the teens made fun of him and he shot them to try and prove something. This adult has low self esteem, to let some kids get to him. A momentary lapse of judgement, I mean stupidity and then two dead kids.
Did they deserve to die for b & e ? No. Even back in the day, they would have just gotten their hands cut off:0

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
I don't get the mystery, besides the guy trying to cover his ass and not calling the cops ASAP.

They broke into his house in the middle of the night. People die doing that. Always have, always will.

/end of story.

If he executed them then he may need psychological help. That is not normal. Either way though, they signed their own death sentence.

When I did dumb things as a kid, I risked my life in most cases. Had I had a little less luck, not been as well accompanied as I was, and not been smart enough to wiggle myself out of bad situations, I would be dead.

When you live doing retarded crap, you meet your maker. It is literally that simple. Most people snap out of it and get with the program before they die. It is not a guarantee though. Some die before that epiphany of your stupidity.

edit on 27-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

Your post is typical of the pro-shooting posts: COMPLETELY IGNORANT. This event supposedly happened at noon, according to the article and the shooter. It is not dark at noon. People are making excuses for this guy. He executed these two people and then kept them hidden in his basement until police knocked on his door, responding to a call from neighbors. We don't even know if the two kids really broke into the house or not.

But let's say they did, then by rights this guy could shoot them. But to continue shooting them after they are incapacitated, and in one case shooting the person under the chin into the brain is outright murder. The guy should have called 911/the cops as soon as he shot them both and seen that they were no longer a threat. He didn't do this. He is guiltier of a much bigger crime than these two kids might have committed. I am astounded by the blood-thirsty stupidity of the vast majority of respondents in this thread.

reply to post by smilesmcgee




The way the story reads the gun jammed after he had already killed the boy and put him in the basement. Then he shot the girl once and then it jammed. The dead boy wasn't laughing when his gun jammed and I doubt the girl with a bullet hole in her chest did either but thats just me. Maybe some people laugh and make jokes while bleeding from the chest and lying in their own blood.

Strict

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


How do you ambush someone in your own house? They broke and entered his house had they not this would not have happened. His statement that he put the gun under her chin for a clean kill shot along with hiding the bodies for a day is why he is arrested on second degree murder. He was justified in shooting them both just not that last shot to her chin. still he was scared and traumatized so it was done under duress in the heat of the moment. My guess is it will get pled down to manslaughter on the girl. Still it is the kids fault for breaking and entering his property...

Originally posted by ANOK
Property is not more valuable than life, so life should not be taken to protect it. If the mans life had been threatened then that's a different story.

Property may not be more valuable than life, but what about the idea of property? Is the idea of property rights more important than life? A car may not be more valuable than a life, but is the idea that the car should not be stolen more valuable than the person's life? Given this question, is a person defending the property, or the idea of property?

was there any signs of forced entry? did these people know each other before this? is there a possibility that the homeowner was on drugs?

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by caladonea

 

What if? lmao Ok. What if...... they were part of a gang, there was more of them coming in or the old man thought there might be so he was making sure that those he hit could not come after him as the others came at him? Remember HE did not got to them! They both came down the stairs to him. What if there was more? What if the others were armed as well? You can play the what if game on both sides.

What we KNOW is the window was broken, he had his home broken into before, he DID NOT GO HUNTING THEM but instead waited for them to come to him, and they did not belong there and he did. As to his thoughts we can not accurately figure them out but I would be interested in the OTHER times his house had been broken into, the number of home invaders, what the police told him about the home invaders then, plus other items. To me it sounds like he was expecting that to be his last stand and did not really expect to survive it.

NO. All we know is that he has admitted to shooting each of them twice, the second shot for each of them after they were incapacitated, and then he moved the bodies and waited a day to call the police -- and even then the police came because of reports by neighbors of suspicious activity. He called a friend and asked about a lawyer. These are not the actions of an innocent man. You are taking his claims at face value, without any investigation of what actually happened.

Thank God...

Another person with some common sense.

Yeah, and that's something sorely lacking in WAY TOO MANY ATS'ers.

Someone here described it right on the mark as "internet commando" mentality. That people can't seem to differentiate between self defense and cold-blooded murder is beyond me. And the people saying these teenagers deserved to die -- what heartless, blood-thirsty, self-righteous fools. Nobody knows for sure that they even broke into the house. And making allowances for his not calling the police and hiding the bodies? These people have no moral compass, and even less of an understanding of the law and social mores.

reply to post by defcon5

He's walking around in his house at night with his rifle, and a 22 revolver....
That says he was laying in wait, making this premeditated. You are only supposed to shoot someone if you are in fear and cannot escape. He's saying he was in fear, but its obvious that he is just saying that because he knows he has to in order to get off on Castle Doctrine.

I walk around in public armed I rarely go anywhere unarmed so if I shoot someone who tries to rob me am I lying in wait? No of course not! You can't lie in wait in your own house if you shoot burglars or if you defend yourself against a threat that's ridiculous and he has every right to be armed at all times in his own home.

He is not lying or he never would have told the cops what he told them. He's telling the truth because he is too stupid not to keep his mouth shut. He should have just said they broke in I shot them several times because I was scared to death it was all a blur and then shut up and not said another word. He was scared under duress and that is the reason he acted so stupidly afterward and did the chin shot to the girl.

I agree the chin shot to the girl was excessive however that does not trump the fact that they were intruders in his home unlawfully and he had every right to defend himself against an unknown threat. If I was on his jury I would never convict him of anything despite his heat of the moment stupidity.

reply to post by hawkiye


It may have been excessive but he didn't force the teens to rob him. So, if the teens weren't doing what they were doing, they would be alive right now.

You should be in perpetual fear if you think about robbing someone.

I read about 8 pages of this thread before I left for work earlier today, and wow this thread has gotten huge. Im very pro-gun and pro Castle Doctrine, but I sure has heck dont defend this guy.

My opinion at the moment - This guy should stay in jail for a long time.

First - he executed somebody. Minnesota has the Castle Doctrine, but I dont think the Castle Doctrine says you can "execute" an individual. Shooting someone, then walking up to them and putting multiple rounds into their chest, then putting the gun to her head and executing her? That is way way way too far.

And this is the part of the "execution" that is morbidly horrible. As another poster has already linked the Complaint, Hounddoghowlie, Complaint

Smith shot the girl "several times in the chest", and then he drug her to his office workshop. The complaint states that he said she was still gasping for air, and then he chose to shoot her "under the chin and into the cranium"......

That is sure as heck not a self defense shooting. Dragging someone you already shot with a high powered rifle (mini-14), and also shot them in the chest multiple times at point blank range (a .22 will do massive damage at that range), and then shooting them in the head after you drag them to a different room? That is horribly disturbing.

Second - He didnt even tell the police about it! He says it's because he didnt want to bother the police on Thanksgiving......You friggin killed 2 people!!!!! Plus, one of those was executed!!!! What the hell, I mean it took a concerned citizen to tell the cops that something may have happened at this guys house. If that citizen didnt call the cops, would these 2 kids be on the missing persons list forever?

......He moved the bodies "apparently" (crime scene has been tampered with), didnt call the police after it happened......Seems to me that all there is at the moment is just his word. There's still some forensics, but since he moved the bodies, there's not as much as there could be.

Over a day had passed since her murdered these 2 kids. Was it really a break in? Was it a drug deal gone bad? Could he have made up a story during that time? Absolutely.

If something other than his story happened, then why not take that day time-span, create a break in story, break one of your own windows, and then tell the story he has presented?

Im thinking his story is bs and made up, but even if what he said was exactly what happened, he should go to prison for what I described above.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by caladonea

 

What if? lmao Ok. What if...... they were part of a gang, there was more of them coming in or the old man thought there might be so he was making sure that those he hit could not come after him as the others came at him? Remember HE did not got to them! They both came down the stairs to him. What if there was more? What if the others were armed as well? You can play the what if game on both sides.

What we KNOW is the window was broken, he had his home broken into before, he DID NOT GO HUNTING THEM but instead waited for them to come to him, and they did not belong there and he did. As to his thoughts we can not accurately figure them out but I would be interested in the OTHER times his house had been broken into, the number of home invaders, what the police told him about the home invaders then, plus other items. To me it sounds like he was expecting that to be his last stand and did not really expect to survive it.

NO. All we know is that he has admitted to shooting each of them twice, the second shot for each of them after they were incapacitated, and then he moved the bodies and waited a day to call the police -- and even then the police came because of reports by neighbors of suspicious activity. He called a friend and asked about a lawyer. These are not the actions of an innocent man. You are taking his claims at face value, without any investigation of what actually happened.

I can't disagree with that at all. In fact it reminded me of this:

Back at his hotel, Kennedy complained at 2:55 a.m. to the hotel owner that he had been awoken by a noisy party.[3] By 7:30 a.m. the next morning he was talking "casually" to the winner of the previous day's sailing race, with no indication that anything was amiss.[3] At 8 a.m., Gargan and Markham joined Kennedy at his hotel where they had a "heated conversation." According to Kennedy's testimony, the two men asked why he had not reported the accident. Kennedy responded by telling them "about my own thoughts and feelings as I swam across that channel ... that somehow when they arrived in the morning that they were going to say that Mary Jo was still alive".[15] The three men subsequently crossed back to Chappaquiddick Island on the ferry, where Kennedy made a series of telephone calls from a pay telephone near the crossing. The telephone calls were to his friends for advice and again, he did not report the accident to authorities.[3]

You're conflating this with the infamous Chappaquiddick incident, huh? First off, you're confusing me with someone who would defend Ted Kennedy for his actions in that matter -- which I don't. But moreover, it is one thing to drive off a bridge/road drunk, and which results in your passenger dying and your not reporting it; it is another to ambush -- at best -- two persons in your home, fist shooting them and then giving them killing shots while they are incapacitated, and then hiding their corpses in your basement. The former case is manslaughter and failure to report the accident; the latter is two-count murder and hiding of the evidence. Kennedy was clearly guilty of drunk driving and manslaughter, and didn't report it out of fear. This shooter is clearly guilty of a double homicide, and didn't report it because he knew this was the case. He, however, very intentionally killed these two teenagers; Kennedy didn't do it intentionally as far as I have ever heard.

reply to post by buni11687


If I was shot in the chest multiple times, I'd appreciate it if you'd finish me off ... otherwise my death is going to be very agonizing.

By the way, hearing someone die is not exactly fun or a pleasant thing to see, hear, or smell. So, kill them as quickly as possible.