'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Discussion of firearm-related news stories. Please use "Off Topic" for non-firearm news.
Forum rules
Do NOT post the full text of published articles. If you would like to discuss a news story please link to it and, at most, include a brief summary of the article.

'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby gunsmith on Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:11 pm

I'M JUST NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING HERE.

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... ctims-wife

devon-derrick-arker.jpg


The man accused in a Minneapolis "good Samaritan" slaying also sexually assaulted the shooting victim's wife, prosecutors say.

Devon Derrick Parker, 20, was initially charged with a single count of second-degree murder that accused him of acting with intent but not premeditation in the Jan. 31 death of Thomas Sonnenberg, 69.

But on Feb. 21, prosecutors amended the criminal complaint Feb. 21 to add one count each of first- and second-degree criminal sexual conduct.

The new complaint accuses Parker of sexually assaulting the victim's wife while holding her hostage.

The new charges came to light Friday at a hearing where a judge ordered a competency evaluation for Parker.


An attorney for Parker had asked for the assessment under provisions of the state's criminal code that deal with "mentally ill or mentally deficient defendants" and a defense of mental illness.

Hennepin County District Judge Daniel Mabley granted the request by public defender Jane Imholte, and the case will proceed after results come back next month.

Parker, of Minneapolis, is accused of second-degree murder. Prosecutors say that about noon Jan. 31, Parker knocked loudly on the back door of Sonnenberg's home, frantically claiming people were chasing him with a bat.

Sonnenberg let him in and began to call 911. Police claim that once inside, Parker grabbed the pistol that Sonnenberg routinely carried holstered on his hip and shot the man once in the forehead, killing him.

Parker then allegedly took the retiree's wife hostage. He surrendered when a police officer arrived.

At the time of the shooting, Parker was supposed to be tying up loose ends before reporting to prison to begin serving a 33-month sentence for violating probation he'd gotten for assaulting a Metro Transit bus driver. He's also been sentenced to 24 months in a separate assault case.

A day before they amended the complaint, prosecutors filed notice with the court that they would seek a longer sentence than the one recommended in the state's sentencing guidelines.

Those guidelines call for a sentence of three to 40 years for second-degree murder. The notice filed by Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Justin Wesley said the state seeks what is known as an "upward departure" because the crimes "were committed in a location in which the victims had an expectation of privacy."

Parker's murder case had originally been before Judge Fred Karasov, but on Feb. 25, Fourth Judicial District Chief Judge Peter Cahill said the case should be reassigned to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

He wrote that Parker had pleaded guilty before Karasov in the earlier assault cases, and under terms of the plea agreement with prosecutors, the judge had allowed the man to remain free "to get his affairs in order before reporting to serve his time in prison."

Although Imholte had acknowledged that Karasov hadn't shown bias or prejudice toward her client, she did express concern he "may be unconsciously harsh in his rulings and try to punish defendant because the alleged homicide occurred during the time he was released from custody," Cahill wrote in his order.

The chief judge said that in an "overabundance of caution" in a serious case -- "and the fact that both mainstream media and bloggers are writing about this case" -- it was best to reassign it.

"The denizens of the blogosphere and the media may say what they wish, but the duty of the court is to rule based on the law, not on public opinion," Cahill wrote. "Given the unique circumstances of this case, however, there is a danger that every decision of Judge Karasov may appear to be influenced by his regret that he accepted the plea agreement, offered by the state, which allowed defendant to be released."
Attachments
Devon-Derrick-Parker.jpg
Devon-Derrick-Parker.jpg (58.49 KB) Viewed 3828 times
Last edited by gunsmith on Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gunsmith
 
Posts: 1904 [View]
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 2:18 pm

Re: 'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby LePetomane on Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:28 pm

Another "yoot" failed by society.
Donald Trump got more fat women moving in one day than Michelle Obama did in eight years.
LePetomane
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:57 am
Location: Here, there and everywhere.

Re: 'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby Nougat on Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:19 pm

may be unconsciously harsh in his rulings and try to punish defendant because the alleged homicide occurred during the time he was released from custody,

additional punishment for committing serious crimes while you are on leave from serving time for violating your probation? outlandish! :shock: seriously isn't that what should be expected?!!!!!
User avatar
Nougat
 
Posts: 660 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:25 pm

'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby jshuberg on Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:47 pm

Strap him down and plug him in. Problem solved.
NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Certified Personal Protection In The Home Instructor
NRA Life Member
MCPPA Certified Instructor
Gulf War Veteran
User avatar
jshuberg
 
Posts: 1983 [View]
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:35 pm

'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby Stoley_XD on Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:46 am

^THIS^
User avatar
Stoley_XD
 
Posts: 88 [View]
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 9:01 am

Re: 'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby xd ED on Sun Mar 09, 2014 10:37 am

While I have an opposition to government executing it's citizens under any circumstance, this guy's behavior tests my convictions.
LET'S GO BRANDON
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9035 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: 'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby Randygmn on Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:43 pm

xd ED wrote:While I have an opposition to government executing it's citizens under any circumstance, this guy's behavior tests my convictions.

Well then, I suppose, you're operating with the understanding civilian = human. We can safely say this example is, by actions alone, an animal. We kill, put down, cull, hunt, slaughter and otherwise dispatch many different species of animals in the US, every second. In this particular case, the benefit of execution far outweighs any other possible solution by a magnitude of infinity.
Randygmn
 
Posts: 901 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby redaudi on Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:38 am

what a piece of garbage.

put the filth down.
O.o derp
User avatar
redaudi
 
Posts: 369 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:07 pm

Re: 'Good Samaratn' killer also sexually assaulted victim's wife

Postby xd ED on Tue Mar 11, 2014 7:04 pm

Randygmn wrote:
xd ED wrote:While I have an opposition to government executing it's citizens under any circumstance, this guy's behavior tests my convictions.

Well then, I suppose, you're operating with the understanding civilian = human. We can safely say this example is, by actions alone, an animal. We kill, put down, cull, hunt, slaughter and otherwise dispatch many different species of animals in the US, every second. In this particular case, the benefit of execution far outweighs any other possible solution by a magnitude of infinity.


Well, I suppose with the level of trust you have in .gov to reign supreme over human life - to the point of terminating it you are in favor of obamacare as well…. would seem hypocritical to support the former and not the latter.
LET'S GO BRANDON
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9035 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby jshuberg on Tue Mar 11, 2014 9:32 pm

In all fairness, those are completely different things. Professional politicians with political agendas, verses a jury that your lawyer has direct input in selecting. Generally speaking, I'd trust the verdict of a jury over the agenda of a politician to be an honest and sincere decision every time. With modern forensics and DNA, the likelihood of a jury getting a death sentence wrong is extraordinarily unlikely.
NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Certified Personal Protection In The Home Instructor
NRA Life Member
MCPPA Certified Instructor
Gulf War Veteran
User avatar
jshuberg
 
Posts: 1983 [View]
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:35 pm

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby greenfarmer on Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:40 am

He was caught at the scene!

There's no possible way of law enforcement catching the wrong person. Which has happened in the past. This gang banger was caught at the scene. He "executed" this guy in my eyes.

My tax dollars shouldn't go to support, or rehab someone like this. He has a criminal past. It's lights out for him! I'm sorry, but I don't feel my taxes which can be used for education, roads, and things that benefit society, should go to rehab, and support someone who took an innocent persons life. And I could care less about being "politically correct". If people think he should live, and just spend life in jail or prison. Fine... Sell off all of his posessions, which look to be a flat billed baseball cap, maybe some nike airs, jeans that don't fit and a starter jacket. If he has 150 dollars worth, well he stays in prison til that 150 is burnt up. Once it's gone, he can starve or throw his pathetic waste of space and good oxygen body in the chair, and throw the switch!

This thug used an excuse to gain entry into someone's house. Saw this guy was armed, and knew he wasn't going to be able to easily rob them without stealing the mans gun. Once he stole it, who knows... Maybe he knew he needed to kill the guy, or it was heat of the moment, who knows. But he stole an innocent mans gun, and shot and killed him, and then assaulted his wife. There's no reason the general public, (which doesn't support this kind of behavior) should have to support this waste of space for the rest of his life.

Go ahead and flame me. But think about it for a while. If you support rehabbing and incarcerating this individual, then your supporting crime.
greenfarmer
 
Posts: 343 [View]
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:43 am
Location: kinda by the SW Metro, but a little further out in the sticks.

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby xd ED on Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:49 am

jshuberg wrote:In all fairness, those are completely different things. Professional politicians with political agendas, verses a jury that your lawyer has direct input in selecting. Generally speaking, I'd trust the verdict of a jury over the agenda of a politician to be an honest and sincere decision every time. With modern forensics and DNA, the likelihood of a jury getting a death sentence wrong is extraordinarily unlikely.


I don't disagree with most of that, but I would include many prosecuting attorneys as"…Professional politicians with political agendas …" . couple that with the virtually unlimited resources of the gov, a collaboration with the investigate agency not enjoyed by the defense, vs whatever you can get in a quick sale of your home to for legal defense, I see room for error, and when coupled with an execution, it is irrevocable.

While I believe that most would take jury duty as a solemn duty, I don't doubt many juries are composed, as the joke goes, with people who could not figure a way to get out of it.
And not to get smarmy, but OJ Simpson was tried by a jury.

Given the procedural hoops, appeals, delays, etc that occur carrying out a death sentence, it pretty much removes the possibility of an execution being 'swift and certain punishment' discounting the act being used as a deterrent against other crime.

That's the practical side of the issue.

While I cannot dispute many, such as the criminal in the OP have lost their right to participate in society,and if during the course of the victims defending themselves, or an outsider interceding, he had been put him down, I would have no issue there.

I simply do not abide governments to intentionally and deliberately kill it's citizens.
LET'S GO BRANDON
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9035 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby Randygmn on Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:09 am

xd ED wrote:
jshuberg wrote:In all fairness, those are completely different things. Professional politicians with political agendas, verses a jury that your lawyer has direct input in selecting. Generally speaking, I'd trust the verdict of a jury over the agenda of a politician to be an honest and sincere decision every time. With modern forensics and DNA, the likelihood of a jury getting a death sentence wrong is extraordinarily unlikely.


I don't disagree with most of that, but I would include many prosecuting attorneys as"…Professional politicians with political agendas …" . couple that with the virtually unlimited resources of the gov, a collaboration with the investigate agency not enjoyed by the defense, vs whatever you can get in a quick sale of your home to for legal defense, I see room for error, and when coupled with an execution, it is irrevocable.

While I believe that most would take jury duty as a solemn duty, I don't doubt many juries are composed, as the joke goes, with people who could not figure a way to get out of it.
And not to get smarmy, but OJ Simpson was tried by a jury.

Given the procedural hoops, appeals, delays, etc that occur carrying out a death sentence, it pretty much removes the possibility of an execution being 'swift and certain punishment' discounting the act being used as a deterrent against other crime.

That's the practical side of the issue.

While I cannot dispute many, such as the criminal in the OP have lost their right to participate in society,and if during the course of the victims defending themselves, or an outsider interceding, he had been put him down, I would have no issue there.

I simply do not abide governments to intentionally and deliberately kill it's citizens.


Ok. Let me get this straight; you don't think the government should kill him?
Since this subhuman animal MUST die, would you let a group of citizens do it instead? How about the victims family members and if not, their proxys?
Randygmn
 
Posts: 901 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby xd ED on Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:30 am

Randygmn wrote:
xd ED wrote:
jshuberg wrote:In all fairness, those are completely different things. Professional politicians with political agendas, verses a jury that your lawyer has direct input in selecting. Generally speaking, I'd trust the verdict of a jury over the agenda of a politician to be an honest and sincere decision every time. With modern forensics and DNA, the likelihood of a jury getting a death sentence wrong is extraordinarily unlikely.


I don't disagree with most of that, but I would include many prosecuting attorneys as"…Professional politicians with political agendas …" . couple that with the virtually unlimited resources of the gov, a collaboration with the investigate agency not enjoyed by the defense, vs whatever you can get in a quick sale of your home to for legal defense, I see room for error, and when coupled with an execution, it is irrevocable.

While I believe that most would take jury duty as a solemn duty, I don't doubt many juries are composed, as the joke goes, with people who could not figure a way to get out of it.
And not to get smarmy, but OJ Simpson was tried by a jury.

Given the procedural hoops, appeals, delays, etc that occur carrying out a death sentence, it pretty much removes the possibility of an execution being 'swift and certain punishment' discounting the act being used as a deterrent against other crime.

That's the practical side of the issue.

While I cannot dispute many, such as the criminal in the OP have lost their right to participate in society,and if during the course of the victims defending themselves, or an outsider interceding, he had been put him down, I would have no issue there.

I simply do not abide governments to intentionally and deliberately kill it's citizens.


Ok. Let me get this straight; you don't think the government should kill him?
Since this subhuman animal MUST die, would you let a group of citizens do it instead? How about the victims family members and if not, their proxys?


You're asking if I think the government should sanction murder/ vigilanteism?
LET'S GO BRANDON
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9035 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: 'Good Samaritan' killer also sexually assaulted victims wife

Postby jshuberg on Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:54 am

Vigilantism is when someone deprives a person of the writ of Habeas Corpus. By definition, a judge and/or jury cannot engage in vigilantism, as by definition the accused's due process rights are being respected. As far as the government sanctioning murder, they (we) already do in numerous scenarios. A person may legally murder another person in self defense. War is another example. Police officers may murder a criminal who is recklessly endangering the public. There are multiple examples where state sanctioned murder is authorized while a person is engaged in an activity that's an imminent threat to the safety of others.

The question comes down to, should we execute people as a punishment, and/or should we execute people who have demonstrated that they are a significant risk to the public. I personally believe the answer to the first question is no, but the answer to the second question is a qualified yes.

We are not immortal beings. Every single one of us will die. It's also been shown that the notion of rehabilitation for violent offenders is pretty much a pipe dream. When a persons crime is so severe that they can no longer be trusted to live their life amongst the rest of us, and the evidence against them is sufficient that their guilt is absolute, I say we should expedite the natural process and send the criminal to whatever awaits him after this life. I do realize that in the past (the not too distant past actually) it was rare, but not impossible to sentence an innocent person to death. In today's world of forensics and DNA, it *is* possible for a jury to convict a person not simply beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond all doubt.

I believe that anyone convicted of a sufficiently violent crime be sentenced to life in prison if he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if he was found guilty beyond all doubt, such as being caught in the act, or DNA evidence eliminates all doubt as to his guilt, we should save the taxpayers the cost of incarceration and sentence him to death.

I don't make the rules though, so this entire conversation is purely academic.
Last edited by jshuberg on Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Certified Personal Protection In The Home Instructor
NRA Life Member
MCPPA Certified Instructor
Gulf War Veteran
User avatar
jshuberg
 
Posts: 1983 [View]
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:35 pm

Next

Return to In The News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron