Skip to comments.Little Falls man describes 'finishing' teenagers with shots to heads
Posted on 11/26/2012 5:01:34 PM PST by TurboZamboni
click here to read article
Figuring out how we’ll get more news on this ~ sinking feeling this guy’s going to the nut house and that’ll be the last we hear of it.
Nice to post the chipper, friendly-looking images of the teens who were BREAKING AND ENTERING the man’s home - a home that apparently had been broken into many times before.
Yes, this old codger is nuts. But I have some real concerns about why these teens were breaking into someone’s home, day or night.
This is also why you practice your marksmanship under pressure. one shot-one kill. It’s really hard to explain “finish ‘em off” shots, when the law clearly states that you stop when the threat stops.
Note also that the girl was attending an alternative high school. These vary considerable, but are often used for "at risk" students with mental, psychological, and emotional problems; and those who have committed criminal offenses for which they are not currently incarcerated.
Some people are just jackasses. You sir, are a complete jackass.
There are waanabees everywhere.
Part of being 'civilized' is that we all agree to abide by certain codes, standards, laws, whatever.
In a SHTF situation, are you going to squander your medical supplies on marauders who would be triaged out anyway? Nope. Harsh reality.
But we're not in a SHTF situation.
Yeah, there are sickos out there who might fantasize about whacking bad guys or being big bad gunslingers. There are sickos who do more than fantasize.
If the SHTF, they will be some of the first to go, and it's likely they'll take some good people with them.
The rest of us have wrapped our heads around at least a few fragments of what that SHTF situation will entail if it happens, and pray every day we can haul civilization back from the brink.
You have to stay alive to do that, but you have to stay civilized somewhere in your core being, too.
Civility begins with 1.) NOT breaking into other peoples' homes and 2.) expecting dire consequences if you do. Alas, because we are becoming less civilized, people who break and enter into strangers' homes are more and more often given a free pass. No consequences but a liberal lawyer and judge who attribute the "mess up" to "corporate greed" and "societal pressures" rather than the individuals' choice to take a life threatening risk against his neighbors' property.
To all the little brats who mourn their buddys' loss, take it as fair warning: You break into someones' home, you'd best be willing to die for the privilege, whether it be slow and steady, or a single shot.
And with that I'll retire to read E.B. Whites' advice on use of the possessive apostrophe.
Finishing them off pushes the limits, at least within the last century or so.
No argument that the concept of private property has been horribly undermined, as has that of justice, by the people who try to tell us it is someone elses' fault.
The house is not that big and surely the girl would have heard the shots in the basement.
Why didn't she run as fast and as far as her little feet could carry her out of the house???
Why would she go down into the basement where the shots came from???
Something about this doesn't sound right.
There is a scenario which makes a lot of sense.
What if she believed that Brady had shot Smith and she came downstairs to see the corpse & discuss where & how to loot the rest of the house? Her coming down the stairs makes a lot of sense if that is what she thought.
My take on the whole thing is that killing the first one was justified. Smith knows he has multiple intruders and can't take a chance on leaving anyone alive behind him. Remember it is Smith's house and he is under attack at that point. Shooting the girl as many times as he wants, from a distance, is justifiable also. Even getting out the pistol after his rifle jams is OK.
The only thing not OK is the "finishing shot" .
yeah, i read more of how he described it. one i think he’s lying and two, there’s something wrong if you’re lying that bad about it.
Civility will in this case mete out some penalty, and that is a good sign. Thanks for the sensible take overall.
On another note - totally unrelated - civility enjoins us to solicit and publish the names of all who receive unearned benefits from the Federal Government, along with how much they receive, while at the same time requiring of them proportionate civil service, whether it be picking up trash, scrubbing sidewalks, or some other common good. If the recipients of this benefaction refuse the same, then they should be either held up to public ridicule, or imprisoned (to perform civil service under duress), or exiled.
What??? you think that emptying your clip into somebody makes you a conservative??? finishing somebody off who is gasping for their breath is the action of a conservative??? eating Thanksgiving dinner while a couple of kids die in your basement is conservatism??? maybe you should go look up the meaning of conservatism.
I didn’t say any of what you are saying I said.
I said that many here buy the liberal media spin on a gun case. I know 1 thing for sure and that is the liberal media will spin a gun case like this.
If you go to the linked source story of this thread, they have the file of the charging papers with the transcript of the shooter’s statement. His own words about what happened.
That is not media spin and the shooter’s story is hinky from beginning to end.
Yep, that's the same thing that cooked that Oklahoma City pharmacist's goose, just a year or two ago.
“and he wouldn’t be having any trouble.”
Thats what happens when you are a nut. You HAVE to talk about it. You LOVE to tell your story!
And yes, he would be having trouble, even with a lawyer. Trouble comes when you have bodies wrapped in tarps, dragged around, you don’t report it until the next day when the cops are knocking on your door, investigating an odd abandoned car belonging to the kids who had been reported missing.
The girl has a rifle shot down low, is peppered with a slew of 22s at algles showing he was standing above her. Oh, and a nice staight up shot under the chin.
Also, the 223 through the guys head, down into the floor.
It’d take quite an amazing story to explain all the evidence that must have been left in that basement, and have it all add up to self defense, justified.
Nuttery and Crackpottery.
Imagine the rest of the State Department. We came, we saw, he died..
Brady did not have a gun.
There is a scenario which makes a lot of sense.
That is even worse than the scenario than the one that Smith tells.
Do you really think that this former security officer for the State Department was cowering in the basement when he heard glass breaking upstairs???
It would have taken some time to break all the glass away from that window before they could have crawled through it. And what would he be doing all that time -- curled up in a corner??? No way. He would have been up those stairs and on top of them in a second with guns drawn.
If he had been burglarized 8 times as he said, he would be angry not fearful. He had probably decided what he would do if he ever caught the burglars.
And why would kids burgling a house be looking down the basement for valuables??? The first place they go for valuables is not the bedroom, or living room, or den, or someplace upstairs -- but they go immediately to the basement??? Hardly the place for valuables for most people.
No way this guy just hid in the basement like a church mouse while someone walked around upstairs. He went upstairs with his gun, brought them down the basement where his tarp was, and executed them.
He didn't want to execute them upstairs because it would have made a bloody mess so he used a tarp even in his basement.
He probably thought that getting rid of two bodies from his basement would be easier than it was. They were probably too heavy and too bloody for him to drag upstairs. So he concocted this story and called a neighbor to call the police.
Not how you get from the shooter’s own statement to what judges and prosecutors may have said. One of these is not like the others.
The man’s own story, in his own words, doesn’t pass the smell test.
If it went down as he described to the police, there was probably enough incriminating physical evidence that lawyering up would have been a less than optimal option. It's likely it would not have taken Dexter to impeach his story.
After what he did, the only rational option would have been to have disposed of the bodies and gone on as if nothing unusual had happened. And hope that the kids hadn't told any of their friends they were planning to rob that old codger in the big house at the end of Elm Street. Because if they had, you can bet the cops would have come knocking with a warrant, substantially raising the clean-up standard.
But this old coot was hardly rational, having apparently been driven over the edge by previous break-ins.
And gunowners will do the same thing — spinning themselves silly trying to justify a 2nd degree murder under the cover of self defense.
Not all of the State Department is up to the standards of Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.
That guy turned out to be a nutcase also, a fake war hero who had never been in a war, he also had a bandaged arm and stories of the shootout in the store that day, the evidence showed that there was no shoot out though, only his firing, no wound either.
He was robbed in October of GUNS, gold, and cash. Guns were in the basement. He may have initially assumed that they were armed, given that “they” stole guns in October (they knew to head directly to the basement...so may well have been involved and returning for more loot).
It was probably self defense initially, the rest was retribution for the original crime. If they were guilty of the original robbery (likely)...they were truly stupid, white trash druggies. You might get away with robbing someone who has a bunch of guns ONCE...but have to be a complete idiot to try it a second time.
How stupid do you have to be to say that to law enforcement investigators?
He should do serious jail time for stupidity alone.
The correct statement is, “It happened so quick... I was scared to death and just kept shooting. I need to talk to my lawyer now.”
Nope. That's what they have criminalists for. If his statement is truthful, he's toast. Given the likely physical evidence, there is no story he could have given that would have left him in the clear. Outside chance of insanity, but that's about it.
His best option was Home Depot bright and early Black Friday. Saws! Contractor cleanup bags! Detergents. Bleach!! (Just ask Det. Fuhrman.) And, of course, silence! Stone wall silence!
I think it would be fair enough to ask some sort of work from those on welfare, but in the current state of affairs, the unions would either demand membership or have a sh*tfit, there would be an ungodly number of victim claims for harassment or whatever, and actually getting any work done on Uncle Sam's Plantation would be tough, unless it involved an opportunity to rip someone/something off.
Even getting these people to clean up their own neighborhoods might be a challenge. Granted, not all would be that way, but I'd wager a significant number would.
Winston Wolfe. "I solve problems."
And, I dare say, Mr Smith's problem was probably a lot easier than the one Mr Wolfe was called upon to solve. Less mess (probably). And less time pressure ... Although, on the other hand, Mr Smith's problem was real, whereas Mr Wolfe's was merely in the mind of Quentin Tarentino.
Look at MaxMax, who apparently believes that if someone breaks into his home in the dark and wakes him up, he will be able to get off a killing head shot at a moving target. No one who actually knows how to handle a firearm thinks this way. Not even if they are an expert marksman. That's a cinematic mindset, to put it mildly.
There's one question I have about this incident: the psycho's supporters keep repeating that he had been burgled 8 times previously. Is this documented? Or is this simply another aspect of his story?
That scumbag had plenty of boosters here as well.
Only one was reported to police and of course there is no evidence that these kids were involved.
But you see he was a gunowner. That gives him immediate "conservative" status.
He then offed two people in his home. That gives him even more "conservative" credibility.
By those standards serial killers should be the heroes of all gunowning conservatives.
What makes these people think that liberals don't own guns and don't use them.
Hmm. I assume that was the one which reported "guns, gold and cash" as stolen.
Some preppers (certainly not all) advise their compatriots to fraudulently report theft of firearms and gold in order to conceal them from confiscating authorities when the "SHTF."
I wonder if he had ever been burgled.
But you see he was a gunowner. That gives him immediate "conservative" status.
But it's all so confusing.
He is a retired federal law enforcement officer, so he's a "JBT" and we're supposed to hate him.
But he also sounds like a prepper, so we're supposed to love him.
All kidding aside, his story obviously does not hold water and his behavior is clearly beneath contempt.
It is frightening that he has so many supporters here, on a moral level.
It is also frightening on a practical level - championing filth like this is exactly the kind of thing that creates popular antagonism to our 2A.
Even the sherriff says the yutes were in the process of burglarizing. That’s not disputable.
Some Skittle fans are suggesting something different. (possibly delivering Thanksgiving day ‘Meals on Wheels’?)
The sherriff says they broke and entered.
While they were probably burgling him before he murdered them in cold blood, sometimes a teenage boy and a teenage girl have been known to sneak into a home that they think is empty for purposes besides burgling.
Yep, and that guy is serving life now, on a 1st degree murder conviction.
Man, he was a creepy guy.
And a $1M+ insurance policy, as well as the names of at least 2 defense attorneys on retainer who have agreed to take your case in such a situation.
What I laugh at the most is how many people are on the run. Assaulted for their color (white), assaulted for their religion (Christian), assaulted for their riches (they worked their asses off and life for), assaulted for their core beliefs, assaulted for their heterosexuality (monogamous), assaulted on EVERY FRONT, who STILL want to hang on to something that IS ALREADY GONE. Don’t wait for a total STHF scenario where it somehow “makes” it ok to slaughter the wastrels stealing away YOUR life. The WAR IS ON. Yeah, let us try and “hold on”. That is what I want for my kids and grandkids. If you don’t make a stand you just leave it for them to fight. When I think about my kids or grandkids being slaughtered because they tried to hold on to “civilization”. Well... I’d just soon as not leave it for them.
And sometimes they get shot for their EFFORT. Stop making excuses for people who, aided by sh+! for brains enablers like yourself, got something they ACTUALLY DESERVED.
Yeah - the usual delivery method is slipping in/breaking a window and crawling through...
Yet another example of the “Trayvon Martin treatment”...
A couple of corrupt punk kids are shot dead upon breaking into a man’s home (a man who had been victimized repeatedly), and are made into some “sweet kids”... completely ignoring the reality of their chosen lives.
Trayvon was a gangsta wannabe who spoke and acted like a crack-headed thug.
These two so-called “victims” were following the same life plan as Trayvon and they too paid the price with their lives.
So now, society has to make an older fellow who was pushed over the edge of sanity by being victimized, into some deranged killer.
Knowing the law isn’t normally important, self defense covers most normal person’s actions, and there is no law that protects psychotic killers, like this guy is, or that druggist 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.