Posted on 04/29/2014 1:57:58 PM PDT by TurboZamboni
LITTLE FALLS, Minn. (AP/WCCO) — The Little Falls, Minn. man who shot and killed two teenagers after they broke into his home has been found guilty of all four counts of premeditated murder. After roughly three hours of deliberation, the jury found 65-year-old Byron Smith guilty of two counts of first-degree murder and two counts of second-degree murder for the shooting deaths of 18-year-old Haile Kifer and 17-year-old Nick Brady.
(Excerpt) Read more at minnesota.cbslocal.com ...
“Let me guess the composition of the jury.”
I am uncertain as to what you are implying. Morrison County is nearly 100% white, with a population who are mostly descendants of Germans, Poles, and French Canadians. There may be some others who could have been on the jury, such as a Native American of the Ojibway/Chippewa Tribe. But, basically the folks in Little Falls area are a typical rural Midwestern group of people.
Summary execution?
A number of details.
He parked his truck several blocks away and turned off all his lights, because he was sure the intruders only entered homes they were certain were empty of people. He also bought tarps to use as shrouds before he moved his truck.
He rearranged the furniture in his basement so he could fire from concealment, and he stayed in his hiding place with his cameras, food, drink, and reading material for at least six hours.
While he was waiting he had audiotape running, in which he could be heard practicing what he would say to the police and to his lawyer.
He had the intruders under video surveillance before they entered the home, and watched them for a long time searching for valuables, which he had already secured down in the basement.
He did not call the police.
When the first teen came down the basement stairs, he fired at him from cover. After he went down, he walked over to the gutshot teen and said calmly: "you're dead" and then fired a killing blow. Then he wrapped him up in a tarp and hid his body in the next room, went back to his hiding place and waited for the girl.
When she came to the top of the stairs and called the boy's name, he shot her and she fell down the stairs. He walked up to her and calmly said: "Oh, so sorry about that." Then he shot her twice more in the chest.
Then he wrapped her up in a tarp while she was still breathing.
He went into the next room and got a new weapon, and then took a minute to place a gun under her chin and whisper abuse to her before he finished her off.
Then he made himself some dinner, watched some TV and went to sleep. The next morning he got up, went about his usual routine and asked his neighbor if he knew a good lawyer.
His neighbor called the police, not Smith. He just sat there with bodies in his house for over 24 hours.
Byron Smith was convicted by the evidence he himself had gathered with his recording equipment. This recording established a timeline for each shot he fired and proved that he not only ambushed those kids but he then executed them as they lay wounded in his home. But not for the recorded evidence, he could have sworn that they came down the stairs together, they pointed an object at him he thought was a gun, he feared for his life, he fired until he ran out of bullets, and he could have stuck to that story with no one alive to contradict it.
Mr. Smith committed several crimes here and he was stupid enough to record himself doing it, so in my humble opinion he fully deserves the sentence he received.
But he made the prosecution's job supremely easy.
Sven,Ole,Lena, and the Lindbergs.
You obviously know absolutely nothing at all about the case but ignorantly make statements
that continue to support this fact. Listen to him in his own words during questioning. Read the accounts of the situation before making any further statements. To do otherwise simply keeps you ignorant of the facts of the case.
Ill go one further...the next time a cop responds to a b/e and the perp is subdued and the cop puts a shot into the skull of said perp I expect u to fully defend that cop. The perp broke the law right? Deserves what they got?
The verdict should have been either one or the other, but not both. The judge’s instructions were faulty. It can’t be both. The jury was supposed to determine guilt or not guilty, and if guilty, degree of guilt. They punted. Ergo, prima facie there is reasonable doubt about guilt. This is eminently appealable.
In the article it states that there were Facebook pictures of Brady with guns. I haven’t seen any of them anywhere on the internet. I would have liked to see them.
These were discrete acts and the judge's instructions were fine.
But I hope Smith spends every last penny he has in the world on appeals, and then dies in prison.
If Minnesota law is anything like the law in the states where I am admitted to practice, an appeal will only result in vacating the two convictions for second degree murder, leaving the first degree murder convictions intact.
A bunch of things. He audio and video recorded the event, and not only shot one of them, but dragged him into another room and shot him again. And this was just the tip of the iceberg, because he fouled up again and again.
He called them “vermin”, which showed their was an emotional context to this, thus clearly premeditated.
“It was anything but reasonable and rational.”
You’re going to have to explain that to me. Two young, healthy kids invade the home of a 65 year old man. He shoots them both and kills them.
I don’t care what he said in the heat of the moment, those boys were dead the minute they crossed the threshold.
What should be looked at on appeal is this: Mens rea should not apply to the Castle Doctrine. That they invaded the home with the intent to commit a crime is all that should be needed to establish the appropriateness of deadly force in the defense of the same.
You pop up, see two people in your bedroom, pull the gun next to your bedframe and kill both. Is anyone, including the court here, implying that I have to establish the intentions of those invading the home, or that I have to establish and document my state of mind BEFORE I can act to protect myself?
What a day. A man has just been fined $2.5M and told he must sell his property - and he committed no crime at all. In fact, a crime was perpetrated on him.
My wife had her wedding rings stolen today. I feel like I’ve been raped. I called 911. The nice officer called and took my statement over the phone, gave me a case number, and told me, “Sorry”
My FRiend, had I caught the guy red handed, I’d have used my shotgun and blown the perp out of his socks. My Mens Rea? You want the one that isn’t going to result in ThoughtCrime, or you want the truth?
The truth?
“I was scared out of my mind and in fear of my life, officer. The rest was a blur and I don’t remember much. Afterward, there were two dead bodies and five spent shotshells down on the floor in front of me. I’m still frightened, and I feel physically ill and I need to see a doctor immediately.”
Everything else you might be thinking, feeling, or wondering about is a lie. Everything in between the quote marks is the truth, and you should recite this truth word for word to the officer that arrives on the scene. You should recite as much as loud as you can while you are blasting away so that the 9/11 operator can clearly hear you tell her or him the truth too.
When you get to the doctor, tell them you have a giant pain in your chest, that your arms are tingling, and that you feel like you are going to pass out.
This will ensure that nobody or nothing is going to speak to you for a good four to eight hours prior to your LAWYER showing up.
If ANYBODY asks you ANYTHING, you just keep repeating: “Chest pains, need doctor.”
This man is going to jail because he felt violated, he felt like he was victimized, and he felt like his government had failed to provide any disincentive at all to those who would seek to invade his home, threaten him, and take his property.
There is NOTHING reasonable or rational about the feeling you get when you are faced with home invaders. He should sue his attorney for malpractice. You can’t read the minds of the people who were callous enough to invade you home with the intent of committing some violent act. What makes it reasonable to read into the verbal statements of a 65 year old man whose house has been invaded by TWO people (outnumbered).
Uh no...Maybe someone else has the time to explain the obvious to you.
I don’t care what he said in the heat of the moment
There was no "heat of the moment."
He never raised his voice.
He was calm and collected from start to finish.
Everything was meticulously planned for maximum psychological effect.
Only one was a boy.
Again, you should probably familiarize yourself better with the details.
Facts matter.
Having been in situations where punks were out of the fight then went for weapons after playing dead, I agree 1000%. Unless he searched them for weapons and KNEW they were both unarmed and out of commission I would not fault him for killing them, even more so if they had broken into his house!
Agree...the man had the threat subdued laying and dying...no call to cops was made...he walked up and executed her after she was completely a non threat...he waits a day to call. You cant explains these things to people who are hell bent that at all costs all criminals should be executed. The man got what he deserved and that is end of story....you can cure crazy and you cant solve stupid.
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.