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

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
a reply to: macman



Also, there are categories under which objections must be made. Can you please point out which category an objection by the defense against the prosecution asking Mr. Smith to give his OPINION on whether or not the intruders were incapacitated would be made?

Sir my google box is broken could you repeat the question.

originally posted by: TinkerHaus

Also, there are categories under which objections must be made. Can you please point out which category an objection by the defense against the prosecution asking Mr. Smith to give his OPINION on whether or not the intruders were incapacitated would be made?

This is very simple. If the prosecution is asking the defendant or witness a question that would could be viewed as an answer that is professional in nature, like asking the postman how to fix an aircraft engine, the defense would object on grounds that they are not an expert in the matter.

Something tells me it took you a bit of time to google this on your own before coming back.

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Something tells me you can't without first doing a bit of googling..

Sure sure.

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
If you cannot do this off the top of your head, and your courtroom experience is merely being a witness to a trial that probably was nowhere near as significant as this, I would ask that you recant the claim that you somehow have more experience and therefor your opinion carries more weight in this matter.

Well geez Dad, thanks for trying to set me straight.


But......I don't think it took.

I was discussing this case with my veteran husband (an MP) last night.
He agreed that Smith went too far.

We had quite a conversation about it....
I've already presented what I suspected he would do in this situation;
and he agreed with my assertions.

But on the other hand, we were wondering why that girl, having heard gunshots, would then go down the stairs to see what happened....
stupid. If you hear gunshots and are not suicidal - get out of the house/area.

Obviously the guy was a PTSD mess...and what he did to those kids was brutal.

Some people are just trigger-happy and have itchy fingers.
It's a shame. Yes, the kids were stupid. Did they have to die? No. Did he kill them execution-style? Yes.
Does he regret it?
My thinking is nope. He's probably delighted. And NO AMOUNT of justification for this setup will suffice.

Has anyone delved into whether or not these kids were on drugs, or had a death-wish? A pact?
Yes, they were stupid. Earlier I mentioned Bonnie & Clyde. Kids do stupid things; dramatic things. They don't have the capacity to think things through....

But it wouldn't surprise me if these kids were on a suicide-pact. This world is hard to deal with and the future looks grim indeed. Do we know anything about their family? (Aside from that they were cousins, known in the area, and into sports, from what I've read...) Maybe they had reasons to push the envelope, and a history (genetic or experienced) that made them unconcerned for their lives.

Guess I ought to view the video and do some further research.

a reply to: daskakik

OK, it's back on again. You earlier said he straight up manipulated the situation and wasn't acting like he was afraid, then you said you couldn't know for sure. Now you're once again saying the facts indicate he manipulated the situation and wasn't afraid...you're the one who's all over the place.

If things are as you say and he "set up" the criminals then he had to have known that moving his truck would result in a B&E. There's no evidence that Mr. Smith is psychic so how did he know that moving his truck would result in a B&E? Did he call the kids and let them know that the truck wasn't in the driveway? No he didn't. That leaves one other possibility. He was being watched by a gang of criminals who he knew had guns (because they stole at least 8 from him as well as several thousands of dollars) and despite several court appearances over a 2 1/2 year period by several of the youthful scumbags directly related to the break-ins in his home, were still free. He moves his truck and doesn't have to wait very long at all for Tweedledee and Tweedledum to come wandering into his home. You say he wasn't afraid, I say his actions were consistent with those of someone who was afraid and the events of Thanksgiving 2012 clearly show that he had very good reason to be afraid.

a reply to: Goteborg
Meh, I'm just pointing out where the facts don't seem to match the guys story. I'm sorry if you don't understand what a conspiracy theory is.

2 1/2 years and they were still free? Seems like that would have made the guy want to take matters into his own hands.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Goteborg
Meh, I'm just pointing out where the facts don't seem to match the guys story. I'm sorry if you don't understand what a conspiracy theory is.

2 1/2 years and they were still free? Seems like that would have made the guy want to take matters into his own hands.

You haven't explained what "conspiracy theory" you're advocating. The only thing you've done is misunderstand what people here are talking about. There's no doubt he was laying in wait for the thieves and that he executed the girl, he had too much gear at the ready, but even if that point were being debated here that's still not a "conspiracy theory".

Since you obviously don't know what's going on here now I really am done with you. Good Day, I say Good Day.

If Im on the jury he walks. Dont care about the last shot.
He would be in a civil court or looking over his shoulder the rest of his life
if they had lived. Fear the gun owner is the message sent.

originally posted by: Goteborg
You haven't explained what "conspiracy theory" you're advocating. The only thing you've done is misunderstand what people here are talking about.

Conspiracy (in simple terms): coming up with and executing a secret plan. In this case, carrying out a premeditated murder and making it seem like an unplanned incident and self defense.

There's no doubt he was laying in wait for the thieves and that he executed the girl, he had too much gear at the ready, but even if that point were being debated here that's still not a "conspiracy theory".

So, you agree but don't think that is what is being debated here?

Since you obviously don't know what's going on here now I really am done with you. Good Day, I say Good Day.

I looked into this case when it first broke.

There is one police report on record and this was in October. He was so scared from the other seven break-ins that he didn't even report them. 2 1/2 years of going to court? I don't think so.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I actually came close to being involved in a home BE when i was around the same age as these kids. I didnt go through with it mostly because at the last minute i had a strong feeling of empathy for the other human beings but i also saw a real possibility of getting shot by a very justifiably scared person defending themselves in their own home in the middle of the night so i said no ill sit this one out. Well these 2 went the other way and they went back again and again and....... If i had done that and got shot that would most definitely be on me and not the old man who keeps getting robbed

originally posted by: LadyJae
I'm not so sure you're right, nextone:

I was correct. This purpose of this isn't for protecting your 'property'. It's for protecting your 'person'. In your own quote it states, "Tennessee law provides a person the presumption that they have a “reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury." This when someone is breaking into your home when you're in it.

originally posted by: TDawgRex

originally posted by: nextone

originally posted by: TDawgRex

a reply to: nextone



In my State, I can use lethal force to prevent my car from being stolen. And I would. I refuse to be a victim.

No, you cannot. There is not a single state in the U.S. where you have that right.

You really need to read up on laws.

No, I do not. You cannot shoot someone because you look out a window, for example, and see someone attempting to steal your car. Not in a single state.

originally posted by: yuppa


Actually if someone is threatening your livelyhood by breaking in your barn which will cause your life to suffer you can. Although you have to verbally warn them first then. Who is to say that after the barn they are not coming for you next?

Actually, no, you cannot. If you look out your house window and see someone breaking into your barn, you cannot shoot them, not in any state. If you walk into your home one day after coming home from work and someone just ran out the other outside door with your stereo, you also cannot shoot them.

a lot of brainwashed 'merican gun loving people up in this thread.

i don't agree with killing people, ever. It's not right and one day civilization will look back on us as a bunch of savages. That man undoubtedly planned to murder the thieves.

Regardless that there was a crime being committed, murder can not be justified in any case. Rehabilitation and help should be used instead. Shame on this man for killing two young people with their entire lives ahead of them.

Karma will catch up with him. Ironically, he probably will live out his life without guilt just because a man-made law justifies his murder. Ridiculous. Murder is murder, end of story.

In the state of Minnesota, if someone enters your home by force or break in and you are there, you have the right to defend yourself if they are coming in, in a threatening manner. You HAVE to be in fear for your life when you pull the trigger.

It does not sound to me like he was afraid, just wanted to catch and kill them.

My guess is that is what the prosecuting attorney will attempt to prove.


And now that I have read the article...lol

yep, that is what they are trying to prove.

See, this makes me terrified of anyone breaking into my home. First of all, I'm extremely well armed (multiple mk18's (short barreled m4) with supressors, multiple handguns in .357 mag, 9mm nd .45, and one very accurate long range suppressed sniper rifle), so essentially if anyone gets into my house their f**ked BIG TIME. I keep the glock 17 and the mk18 by my bed btw.

In short, I'd probably either Mozambique the motherf**kers, or I'd let my emotions get the better of me, and toy with them. Essentially wounding them, and then shooting them in the balls or something, for which I would most definitely go to jail for, or at the very least have my guns taken away, which are some of my most prized possessions. I am american after all.

Bottom line is, you never know how you're going to react when the SHTF. Personally, I don't think the guy did a damn thing wrong. I actually applaud his actions.

a reply to: 11:11

That's a cool story and all, but the laws within the US, removing this case, bring legal protection to those of us that will defend ourselves and not depend of LE to stop and catch after a violent crime has been committed and the justice system to *snort laugh* rehabilitate such people.


I do like this fairyland you reside in, where criminals are reformed and become the do-gooder you pine for.

a reply to: JohnnySasaki

Goes to say that I personally wouldn't just shoot and call the police.

Just make them disappear.

If more people had the fear that they broke into a house, they would be killed, the less people would do break-ins.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

Goes to say that I personally wouldn't just shoot and call the police.

Just make them disappear.

If more people had the fear that they broke into a house, they would be killed, the less people would do break-ins.

I have agreed with you to this point.

But I would draw the line here. They were still human and a legal process still needs to be done IE a investigation.

My rules are:
1) Don't shoot someone running away
2) Don't torture them for fun
3) Co operate with local Authorities.

If I follow those 3 I shouldn't have a problem in a court of law. Just argue I feared for life and limb.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

Goes to say that I personally wouldn't just shoot and call the police.

Just make them disappear.

If more people had the fear that they broke into a house, they would be killed, the less people would do break-ins.

That's what I was thinking, especially since I have suppressors. Nobody has to know. The making them disappear part might take some ingenuity. If I had a boat, it would be a lot easier, as I'd just go Dexter style. Beings I don't (yet), I'd have to maybe re-watch some episodes of Breaking Bad, lol.

a reply to: crazyewok

4). Double tap all home invaders so there aren't any hindsight questions that can be asked.