It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"You're dead," Minnesota Homeowner Told Teen Burglar

page: 21
48
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Can you please explain to me how a "long" history of victimization justifies shooting a wounded and incapacitated person in the head? I don't think it does.

Should someone with a mental disorder receive a lesser sentence for molesting a child as someone who has no mental incapacity?

Also, it should be acknowledged that Smith only even reported ONE previous robbery.




posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Again .. that's all for a court to decide.


Flyers, are you saying that if a court finds him guilty you will totally accept and agree with that verdict? If that's the case what is the point of this thread?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: knowledgedesired
He waited until he saw her then he shot her because that is what he wanted to do...Kill her.



That is what you are suppose to do.

If anyone wants to rob my house while I'm in it I will shoot to kill.
#

Which is fine but that isn't the issue here, is it?

Had he "shot to kill" in the first instance, he would be fine now and not in court. The fact he shot them, wounded them, dragged them around to save his carpet and then finished them off with "clean, kill shots" (his words) is what the issue is.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
So in this hypothetical situation can you please answer the two questions at the end?

I thought I just did .... is it justifiable to shoot him in the head ... and can the person leave the scene ....

- Shooting in the head ... that's up to the court to decide. If the person still felt threatened because of being the victim of multiple crimes and/or he had to be sure that the person wasn't going to get up ... then yes it's justified in his mind and the court acknowledges that. The court will take all things into consideration and decide. We aren't walking in the shoes of the shooter, so we don't know the situation, only the court can figure that out.

- Leaving the scene ... as far as I know a person isn't supposed to leave a crime scene. I don't know if it makes a difference if the person is a perp or a victim (Like a rape victim doesn't get in trouble for leaving ... that kind of thing). I said previously .. he shouldn't have moved the body and of course he should have called the cops. Thats' a separate issue from if it was okay for him to pull the trigger to begin with. This second part ... he didn't do this correctly. No question.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Flyers, are you saying that if a court finds him guilty you will totally accept and agree with that verdict?

Yep.

I learned with the Zimmerman trial ... it's fine to discuss and think it's going to go one way or another ... but real facts come out in court that can easily change the entire situation. You've gotta accept the facts as they come in during the case in court.


If that's the case what is the point of this thread?

Just the usual discussion on an internet chat forum.
What's the point of any discussion thread?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: stirling
.you seem to lack sound moral judgement

Says the anon guy on the internet who knows nothing about me.

and how did you feel about that?

I think nothing of it .. you are irrelevant.

Phsychiatry is just another con game abused by those who seek power over others....usually perpetrated upon the defenseless....

You spelled psychiatry wrong.
Don't worry, maybe it'll be on your spelling test in school next year.

Wanna get on topic? A retired old man, who has been the victim of repeated violent home break ins and thefts, shoots two intruders dead. Self defense and justified ... or murder?
Ive been on topic and watched you grind your personal axe for pages....you resent something a great deal I assume....
For you info I am also a retired old man of 68 and I coudnt imagine reacting in such fashion to these dying people that I just shot.....
There is a line that sane humans refuse to cross even under great stress....obviously you do not agree......
No threat....no more shots......MURDER MOST FOWL , by an empty hulk of humanity....IMHO
I spell well enough for you to understand anyways.....as If that strawman was the point....


edit on 23-4-2014 by stirling because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
So in this hypothetical situation can you please answer the two questions at the end?

I thought I just did .... is it justifiable to shoot him in the head ... and can the person leave the scene ....

- Shooting in the head ... that's up to the court to decide. If the person still felt threatened because of being the victim of multiple crimes and/or he had to be sure that the person wasn't going to get up ... then yes it's justified in his mind and the court acknowledges that. The court will take all things into consideration and decide. We aren't walking in the shoes of the shooter, so we don't know the situation, only the court can figure that out.

- Leaving the scene ... as far as I know a person isn't supposed to leave a crime scene. I don't know if it makes a difference if the person is a perp or a victim (Like a rape victim doesn't get in trouble for leaving ... that kind of thing). I said previously .. he shouldn't have moved the body and of course he should have called the cops. Thats' a separate issue from if it was okay for him to pull the trigger to begin with. This second part ... he didn't do this correctly. No question.





The court isn't going to ask the question "was it justifiable in Smith's head?"

If that was the standard than a whole bunch of serial killers would just walk. Instead they will ask "would a reasonable man have done the same thing in that situation?"

I am a reasonable man. I would not have executed the two intruders after they lie bleeding after being shot multiple times and falling down a flight of stairs. I would have called 911 and had the police and medics come.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Can you please explain to me how a "long" history of victimization justifies shooting a wounded and incapacitated person in the head? I don't think it does.

You are welcome to think that. But the courts recognize that a long history of victimization does indeed push people beyond their limits and when confronted by the perp, many times the victim will hit back in a big way. Women who are beaten by husbands who go on to kill them for example.

Should someone with a mental disorder receive a lesser sentence for molesting a child as someone who has no mental incapacity?

Hypothetical off topic ... and I have no idea what the court would say with that.

Also, it should be acknowledged that Smith only even reported ONE previous robbery.

Some sources are stating multiple in home invasions ... and this was at least the third one by the Brady fellow who died. This is the same kind of thing that happened with the Zimmerman trial. Different sources claiming different information. Then during the actual trial the real facts came out. Everyone got surprised.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: stirling

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: stirling
.you seem to lack sound moral judgement

Says the anon guy on the internet who knows nothing about me.

and how did you feel about that?

I think nothing of it .. you are irrelevant.

Phsychiatry is just another con game abused by those who seek power over others....usually perpetrated upon the defenseless....

You spelled psychiatry wrong.
Don't worry, maybe it'll be on your spelling test in school next year.

Wanna get on topic? A retired old man, who has been the victim of repeated violent home break ins and thefts, shoots two intruders dead. Self defense and justified ... or murder?
Ive been on topic and watched you grind your personal axe for pages....you resent something a great deal I assume....
For you info I am also a retired old man of 68 and I coudnt imagine reacting in such fashion to these dying people that I just shot.....
There is a line that sane humans refuse to cross even under great stress....obviously you do not agree......
No threat....no more shots......MURDER MOST FOWL , by an empty hulk of humanity....IMHO
I spell well enough for you to understand anyways.....as If that strawman was the point....



Yay! Another reasonable man!



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
The court isn't going to ask the question "was it justifiable in Smith's head?"

The court takes into account victims who are pushed past their limits and who get back at the perp. Like I said ... women who are beaten by husbands and who end up killing in self defense because they think it's the only way out. I have NO IDEA if this man was at that point .... only a psychologist could determine that.


I am a reasonable man.

Everyone acts in a different way when they are repeatedly victimized. It's easy for us to sit here and say 'we'd do this or that'. But if it was reality, and if we were walking in the old mans shoes, our behaviors may be different than we think they would be.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   
I own a 12-gauge shotgun. If you're unknown to me and inside my home, you'll probably end up minus one head.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Can you please explain to me how a "long" history of victimization justifies shooting a wounded and incapacitated person in the head? I don't think it does.

You are welcome to think that. But the courts recognize that a long history of victimization does indeed push people beyond their limits and when confronted by the perp, many times the victim will hit back in a big way. Women who are beaten by husbands who go on to kill them for example.

Should someone with a mental disorder receive a lesser sentence for molesting a child as someone who has no mental incapacity?

Hypothetical off topic ... and I have no idea what the court would say with that.

Also, it should be acknowledged that Smith only even reported ONE previous robbery.

Some sources are stating multiple in home invasions ... and this was at least the third one by the Brady fellow who died. This is the same kind of thing that happened with the Zimmerman trial. Different sources claiming different information. Then during the actual trial the real facts came out. Everyone got surprised.



Can you give some examples of these claims? Seems like empty rhetoric to me.

Are you also claiming that courts never make mistakes? You are 100% to accept a verdict without question after it's been handed down? What about people who've been proven innocent after being on death row for 20 years?

It seems to me you have an affinity for ignoring the details..



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Also, I've been in some pretty hectic and chaotic situations. I've always thought of other people and never let my rage take over.

I can't say I've been in this exact scenario, but I can say that in other high-stress scenarios that required quick action I have kept my cool.

I cannot imagine myself EVER EVER EVER killing someone who lay there bleeding. As others have said, he was able to drag them off of his carpet on a tarp BEFORE finishing them off.

That fact alone disproves any notion that he felt a continued threat to his safety. He was grudge killing them at that point.

And a bunch of people are totally ok with that. What a great world we live in!



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Having heard about this case in the first place the following can be stated:

The problem is that both sides were in the wrong. The first is that the 2 teenagers were no strangers to trouble, did not run or try to escape when the first gun shot was heard, instead they were calm and ended up getting killed for it. Most normal people, when they hear a gun shot, tend to run from it, to avoid getting shot or hit. They choose to ignore the fact that they were in danger. The property that the shooter lived on, was not in a suburb, nor was is it in a city, but out in the country, surrounded by acre’s of land around it. So these 2 criminals, decided to trespass, and then turn around break into a home, and subsequently got shot.

While I can understand the home owners frustration, as his home, his private domain had been broken into before, there were police records. Chances are the police did know who was suspect and did nothing, or the investigation was very slow. The 2 teenagers, were in trouble, having done this time and time again. They were not good children.

What the home owner did, that was wrong in this case, separating this from being self-defense and murder, is that the home owner, committed a coup-de-grace on the teens. He took the justice into his own hands. Had he shot, and wounded, or shot them to incapacitate, not a problem, perfectly acceptable. But to state,: “Now you are dead.” Takes it to another level, and removes all thoughts of it being self-defense, and into the area of manslaughter.

The fault lies with society, the first is the parents who knew that these 2 were out doing wrong, the signs were there, and the parents should have intervened earlier. The fault lies in the society where it finds that a parent can not punish their child, thus allowing for children to do what they want, without care or concern for the consequences. The fault lies with the police, for all of their policies, and records did not realize that it was the same 2 people doing this and choosing to ignore the fact that they are going to repeat. The fault lies within the laws, and the fault lies with the homeowner, who decided to take justice into his own hands. It is a shame and a waste. 3 families are forever linked and ruined.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Can you give some examples of these claims?

What? that women who are beaten kill their husbands and the court doesn't nail the women? Seriously? Comeon. It's in the news all the time. I'm not going to go rummaging around. This is common knowledge.

Seems like empty rhetoric to me.

whatever dude.

Are you also claiming that courts never make mistakes?

Where exactly did I say that? No where.

You are 100% to accept a verdict without question after it's been handed down?

I already said so. The information on this will come out in court ... either way. Why the heck wouldn't I accept it? I don't care one way or the other. This is just a discussion.

What about people who've been proven innocent after being on death row for 20 years?

No kidding. That's why I'm against the death penalty and I tell people to read the book 'Actual Innocence' by Barry Scheck.

It seems to me you have an affinity for ignoring the details..

Again .. whatever dude. I'm not the topic



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:25 PM
link   
From: www.myfoxtwincities.com...


THE AUDIO



The recordings pick up as 17-year-old Nick Brady breaks in. A a window shatters, then a couple of extra pieces of glass are broken out. Footsteps can be heard in the house, and he heads for the stairs.

Boom.

Brady is hit. He lets out a groan as he tumbles down the stairs.

Two more booms sound -- quick, fast and lethal.

“You’re dead,” Smith says.

Next, Smith can be heard working with his tarp, then reloading.

For some 11 minutes, Smith says nothing else. There’s some heavy breathing and some movement in the house, maybe coming and going from the basement. But then, there are more footsteps inside the house – this time from 18-year-old Haile Kifer.

Her footsteps travel to the same basement stairs where Smith was waiting, and another piercing boom sounds from the rifle. Haile lets out an “Oh God” as she tumbles.

Smith’s rifle then jams. He says, “sorry about that” as Haile emits what sounds like a faint sigh. Smith then unloads the .22 revolver, muttering “bitch” while shooting several more times.

Before the recording stops, moments later, there’s one last gunshot. This is what Smith termed a “good, clean finishing shot” as Kifer appears to still be barely alive.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I don't thing a Coup de Grâce qualifies as self defense.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Also, I've been in some pretty hectic and chaotic situations. I've always thought of other people and never let my rage take over.

Well good for you. Really. I'm happy for you.
But everyone reacts differently. And the court recognizes that.
Like I said ... women who are victims of spousal abuse who kill their abusers ... etc.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

You're against the death penalty but you're totally ok with a guy murdering two people that lay dying in his basement?

I'm seriously confused.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
You're against the death penalty but you're totally ok with a guy murdering two people that lay dying in his basement?

I'm against the death penalty because it's not necessary. And I'm totally okay with someone defending themselves against violent crime in their own home and using lethal force to do so if required. People have a right to defend themselves. I'm also understanding of the fact that people can reach a psychological breaking point from being victimized and that they will take extreme measures to protect themselves ... measures that rational 'non abused' people don't understand.

Nothing confusing about it.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join