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

I find it funny how people are quick to judge and jump all over the person who pulled the trigger. What about the kids who are not so great kids if they are breaking into peoples homes when they are home.


I want to make this perfectly clear to people because you all seem not to pay attention.


WHY DID THOSE KIDS PUT THEIR LIFE IN THE HANDS OF SOME STRANGER BY BREAKING INTO THEIR HOME.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

They could of stopped this from happening but their decisions lead to their demise. When i see a NO TRESPASSING sign anywhere I steer clear simply because the person who put it up might either call the police on me tell me off or shoot me. I do not know the kind of person i am dealing with.

Breaking into someones home in broad day light when someone is home is just asking for something bad to happen. Had the man not been armed what if those kids attacked the man killing him when he attempted to call the police..simply because they were scared and made another dumb decision to follow up their breaking and entering decision. where would this have stopped??? maybe the man could have just run them out you never know the outcome of such a situation. it would not be the first time that the some kids kill someone out of fear of getting in "ttrouble"

At the end of the day those kids took their lives into their own hands and place them in the hands of what sounds to be a very sadistic man. I think this is a scenario where bad people met and only one walked away.


Many of you people sound like you would get angry at a fire for burning you instead of getting angry at yourself for sticking it in there in the first place.

reply to post by milkyway12

If I was shot in the chest multiple times, I'd appreciate it if you'd finish me off

I would wish the same thing if that happened to me. But here's a part of his story that makes me think he's lying.

He shot her once with a high powered rifle. He was in his basement so Im guessing the rifle shot was from under 100 feet away. A 5.56/.223 (most common Mini-14 calibers) will cause a big deal of damage at that range. The compaint says he fired once he saw her hips moving down the stairs so Im guessing he supposedly shot her either in the stomach or in the legs. After that, his rifle jams, and he proceeds to go up to her and take out a .22 pistol and shoot her repeatedly in the chest at point blank range. At this point, Im just amazed that she's still alive. After that, he drags her still living body to another room and shoots her in the head.

Now... if he was really concerned about her having a weapon, why would he choose to drop his "jammed" rifle, and then decided to move into atleast arms length of the individual? If he was so scared about her having a weapon (maybe a knife?) then why put yourself at danger by getting so close to the supposed threat? Why not shoot the pistol from where he was sitting?

Originally posted by Annee

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.

No. The homeowner is being judged by his own statements, not on his looks. He admitted that he shot these people more than was necessary and that in one case he shot the girl under the chin, into the cranium. He admits he moved the bodies and and kept them hidden in his basement until the police came knocking -- because of a neighbor calling them. These were statements the police released and that the newspaper published. They were also in the criminal complaint that was filed against him, and which has been linked to, in this thread. So there is more than just a news story. So you are completely wrong in your assertion. But let's say, as you erroneously claim, that this is just a news story and no facts are in. Then why are all these people defending this guy with two dead teenagers in his basement when no other facts are known?

Obviously it is pointless trying to conduct a rational and coherent discussion with the likes of you on this thread because you don't bother to look into the details and facts of the matter, nor do you understand what others here, including myself, have written. This man has implicated himself in a double homicide and cover-up. Those are firmly established facts, anything you else you attempt to claim notwithstanding. The circumstances of how these two teenagers ended up in his basement are still a matter of conjecture. They could have, indeed, broken in, but hey also could have been lured in, forced in, or come in under other circumstances, i.e. a drug deal gone bad.

reply to post by defcon5


Setting a trap is different. This guy had been burgled six times so he was armed all the time to protect himself perfectly reasonable and rational. He wasn't lying in wait he did not expect his house to be burglarized that day he simply reacted to people breaking into his house one a convicted burglar the other a drug addict... THEY BROKE INTO HIS HOUSE. He didn't come to them they are responsible for what happened that day not him they set these cause and effect in motion not him! You can't threaten or harm someone and then even if they over react say oh it is his fault for over reacting when you were the one who initiated the harmful action!

Originally posted by votan
I find it funny how people are quick to judge and jump all over the person who pulled the trigger. What about the kids who are not so great kids if they are breaking into peoples homes when they are home.


I want to make this perfectly clear to people because you all seem not to pay attention.


WHY DID THOSE KIDS PUT THEIR LIFE IN THE HANDS OF SOME STRANGER BY BREAKING INTO THEIR HOME.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

They could of stopped this from happening but their decisions lead to their demise. When i see a NO TRESPASSING sign anywhere I steer clear simply because the person who put it up might either call the police on me tell me off or shoot me. I do not know the kind of person i am dealing with.

Breaking into someones home in broad day light when someone is home is just asking for something bad to happen. Had the man not been armed what if those kids attacked the man killing him when he attempted to call the police..simply because they were scared and made another dumb decision to follow up their breaking and entering decision. where would this have stopped??? maybe the man could have just run them out you never know the outcome of such a situation. it would not be the first time that the some kids kill someone out of fear of getting in "ttrouble"

At the end of the day those kids took their lives into their own hands and place them in the hands of what sounds to be a very sadistic man. I think this is a scenario where bad people met and only one walked away.


Many of you people sound like you would get angry at a fire for burning you instead of getting angry at yourself for sticking it in there in the first place.

How do you know the two teenagers broke in? Oh yeah, because you're taking the word of a guy who confessed to having killed and moved the bodies, and then hiding them in his basement until confronted by police. And let's say this is what happened, the law does not allow a person to murder incapacitated persons -- even if they are in one's house, particularly not if they are not armed. The guy shot the girl multiple times, then moved her into his workshop and put another into her brain. That is an execution, not self defense. It is also tampering with a crime scene. That many commenters here are defending this is beyond the pale. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves, but you obviously don't have the gumption necessary for this.

Originally posted by buni11687
If he was so scared about her having a weapon (maybe a knife?) then why put yourself at danger by getting so close to the supposed threat? Why not shoot the pistol from where he was sitting?

For the same reason he dragged the first body out of view.
If he didn't know how many of their there were, he wanted to the next one to also walk into his ambush...

This was all about killing them and getting revenge for the previous break-in's he had experienced.

If he left the bodies laying in plain sight, the next person would have seen that and fled, and he would not have gotten justice on all his victims.

reply to post by hawkiye

As you didn't answer the question, I'll answer it for you.
He did it because he wanted to lure the next one into his ambush he had set up.
If he had wanted to deter them, then leaving the first dead body in sight is one hell of a deterrence.
He had this all planed out for the next time someone broke into his house, which again makes it premeditated murder.

reply to post by buni11687


It can't be argued what he did was not excessive. However, the teens were still posing a threat to his life and property by robbing and breaking and entering. Personally, depending on the situation, I'd execute you if I thought there were multiple threats so I don't remotely have to worry about the neutralized threat.

I don't think this guy should be charged criminally, but should be forced to under go a psyche evaluation.

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by defcon5

 

Setting a trap is different. This guy had been burgled six times so he was armed all the time to protect himself perfectly reasonable and rational. He wasn't lying in wait he did not expect his house to be burglarized that day he simply reacted to people breaking into his house one a convicted burglar the other a drug addict... THEY BROKE INTO HIS HOUSE. He didn't come to them they are responsible for what happened that day not him they set these cause and effect in motion not him! You can't threaten or harm someone and then even if they over react say oh it is his fault for over reacting when you were the one who initiated the harmful action!

I beg to differ. I dont know if you have a son but lets say you do. He is 21 goes to a bar and gets a lil to drunk. and wants to show off to his friends so picks the biggest dude in the bar walks up to him and pops him in the face. The big guy barely stunned pops him on the chin laying him out unconscious. He then starts kicking your son over and over in the head not letting up. Your son dies.

Your son started it, by all accounts it was his fault but, was the guy justified in killing when the threat had already been voided?

BTW what sicko leaves two bodys in the house and doesn't call 911 immediately. No normal person would do that.... Something is off with this man. And this coming from a gun owner who would shoot someone in a minute if they broke in, the difference is if i dont kill them and they are no longer a threat ill hold them at gun point till the cops arrive. I wont walk up to them stick the gun in their mouth and blow there brains out.

I swear on the internet i always get the vibe so many people are itching to shoot someone. You have all these people with CCP saying they would dread to shoot someone. I say half of them are lying through there teeth and like the cops who shoot harmless dogs are just waiting for a excuse to unload on someone and test their toys.

If the threat is subdued without killing someone why kill them? Do you get bonus points or bragging rights?

reply to post by defcon5


I havent thought about that. That's a pretty good point. Star for you.

It's still pretty hard for me to believe a 17 year old, 110 lbs (ish) could take a 5.56/.223 round to the stomach or leg, multiple .22 rounds at point blank to the chest, and still be alive.

If that is what he really was doing, I still dont understand why he decided not to call the police that day and it took a neighbor to alert them the next day.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by hawkiye

 

As you didn't answer the question, I'll answer it for you.
He did it because he wanted to lure the next one into his ambush he had set up.
If he had wanted to deter them, then leaving the first dead body in sight is one hell of a deterrence.
He had this all planed out for the next time someone broke into his house, which again makes it premeditated murder.

edit on 11/28/2012 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)

i answered the question just fine. You ignore the fact they initiated the threat to him. You interject your speculation you have no idea and neither did he if they would see the body and flee OR see the body and come down the stairs guns blazing...

What you and others are saying is if someone initiates a serious threat to you or your family and you over react in defending yourself it is your fault. You could not be more wrong it is these kids fault period! THEY BROKE IN THEY INITIATED THE UNLAWFUL CONFRONTATION by violating his rights and posing A threat to him period he is not obligated to asses whether the threat is lethal or not. That is the purpose of the castle doctrine he can lawfully assume anyone who breaks into his house is there to kill him. IF THEY WERE NOT THERE THEY WOULD BE ALIVE! Thy initiated the whole thing by committing a felony against him THAT MAKES IT THERE FAULT!!!

Well first of all, how do u know they robbed him, especially when he is hiding the body, something doesn't sound right. His word against the dead.

reply to post by ker2010


That wasn't a very good analogy to use with this incident.

His son was obviously subdued and this was in public. The son didn't break and enter. If you punched me in the face at a bar, i wouldn't kill you, but you'd be maimed for a long time, if, of course, I wasn't knocked unconscious or silly.

I hope the coroner and crime scene investigators in this case are competent. I don't believe the guy's story and I think the scene and bodies should be examined carefully. The bodies might tell police if anything else was going on in that house.

Originally posted by amfirst1
Well first of all, how do u know they robbed him, especially when he is hiding the body, something doesn't sound right. His word against the dead.

The kid was a convicted burglar the girl a drug addict. He did not know them pretty good bet they were there to rob him at the least since they broke in...

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by ker2010

 

That wasn't a very good analogy to use with this incident.

His son was obviously subdued and this was in public. The son didn't break and enter. If you punched me in the face at a bar, i wouldn't kill you, but you'd be maimed for a long time.

It would be hard to maim someone when your layed out lol.

Im still trying to find a logical legit reason he didn't call police immediately if things went down like he said.

reply to post by milkyway12

Personally, depending on the situation, I'd execute you if I thought there were multiple threats so I don't remotely have to worry about the neutralized threat.

You and Defcon brought up something I didnt think about ,so star for your post to.

Again, I still dont understand why he didnt call the police after this happened.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Annee

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.

No. The homeowner is being judged by his own statements, not on his looks.

Dude - - I'm not the one who referred to the homeowner as a "Creepy Old Guy".

reply to post by ker2010


I corrected my post. I have metal plates forming half of my jaw any way. Can't feel anything.