2 teens killed after allegedly breaking into home;

[20mm]

The guy is going to get the maximum. No use arguing about it.

[gunsmith]

The guy is going to get the maximum. No use arguing about it.

"if duh glove don't fit

You muss aquit"

[gunsmith]

LITTLE FALLS, MINN. – In the days and weeks before Byron Smith killed two teenage intruders in his home, neighbors and friends saw him sleep-deprived and scared because of prior burglaries, they testified Friday in Smith’s nationally watched murder trial.

“He just looked very upset and fearful and shaky,” longtime neighbor Georgia Anderson told the court, saying she almost didn’t recognize Smith when he showed up at her door shortly after a burglary that took place a month before the shootings.
========================
Defense attorneys continued to build their case that the former State Department worker had become increasingly afraid in the fall of 2012 after several break-ins to his home and his adjacent property.

Smith claims that he acted in defense of himself and his home when he killed 18-year-old Haile Kifer and 17-year-old Nick Brady, cousins who broke in and went down his basement steps about 10 minutes apart on Thanksgiving Day.
===========================
Smith faces life in prison if found guilty on charges of first-degree premeditated murder. The Morrison County jury will have to decide whether he acted as a reasonable person would have under the circumstances.

On Friday, William Anderson, Georgia’s husband, testified for the defense that Smith came over after an Oct. 27 burglary appearing “severely” frightened. That break-in was “number 5 or 6,” Anderson testified that Smith told him.

City alderman and cemetery superintendent Brian-Paul Crowder testified that he stopped by Smith’s property the Saturday before the shootings and Smith looked afraid while answering the door. Smith was “terribly worried because he had been broken in so many times,” Crowder said.
========================
The testimony capped an often-contentious week among the lawyers trying the case, including Friday as the trial was delayed for several hours. Defense attorney Steve Meshbesher had tried to call a firearms expert to the stand to testify about the effects of shooting a gun, including adrenaline and auditory ringing. But after much discussion outside the courtroom, the judge ruled against allowing it.

OK....now if this judge is keeping out a firearms expert (Massad Ayoob does this all the time, all over the country) that will testify about the disorienting experience of being in a defensive shooting and the auditory ringing and such....I am going to be pissed.

I smell a rat in the fact that an expert for the defense was PREVENTED FROM TESTIFYING TODAY....HOW COULD MORE INFORMATION HARM THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE....didn't the prosecution have expert testimony.....Catch up on some of Massad Ayoobs blog entries....he is literally saving defendants lives by his advanced knowledge of ballistics and biology....

I'm finding the coverage of this to be 'weak'

What I'm seeing in this article from the Strib is that Smith was beset by the continued burglaries and began to 'fear for his life' continuously ...the burgulary that ended with the shooting would be the SEVENTH BURGLARY.

What would I do after 6 break-ins, ...

I'm thinking: IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO BE UNREASONABLE.

This time next week there will be a verdict....I've seen enough of those pretty pictures of the kids.

Meshbesher said outside the courtroom that he wanted the jury to see photos of the 12-gauge semiautomatic shotgun so they could understand what Smith feared might be used against him by thieves.

[infidel]

What is NOT reasonable: murder after the "threat" was neutralized, moving the bodies, and waiting hours to report.

[gunsmith]

What is NOT reasonable: murder after the "threat" was neutralized, moving the bodies, and waiting hours to report.

Wait.....are we dealing with the same 'facts' / assumptions.

.....as I've got it the first shot killed the male and the second of 2 shots to the female killed her. What if Smith had give the male 2 shots and the first killed him. What if Smith had given him a 10 round clipfull? What if the male had received 40 shots....I'm thinking only the first one counts....the additional 39 were an assault of a corpse.

I want more info on the shooters state of mind...the final burglary was THE SEVENTH BURGLARY and the guy was getting visibly shaken up....and fearing the intruders would be carrying weapons...

Here's what I'd want to see:

He walks because the prosecutor ONLY charged him with 1st degree intentional murder and was too in love with himself to consider 2nd degree or manslaughter.

[Mn01r6]

You should look in to what a lesser included charge is.

[gunsmith]

You should look in to what a lesser included charge is.

Lesser included charges may have been filed but there is no mention in the KStp or strib coverage.

[steve4102]

The problem as I see it is, the First shot killed the boy, any additional shots were NOT Killing Shots of a wounded Man as the prosecution and Media contends. The second shot from the 22 is what killed the girl, any additional shots were also not Killing Shots.

Someone please Ed-u-ma-cate me on this....WHAT THE EFF DOES IT MATTER THAT THERE WERE SHOTS AFTER PERP WAS DEAD?

I'll try, but under the circumstances, I can't guarantee results.

The headline, and first paragraphs from the news:

Little Falls teens were not fatally wounded initially, M.E. testifies

LITTLE FALLS, Minn. -- The two Minnesota cousins killed by a man who claimed he was defending himself after they broke into his home were each shot multiple times, a medical examiner testified Thursday, and while the initial gunshots caused serious injury, they did not immediately kill the teens.

Byron Smith, of Little Falls, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder in the deaths of 18-year-old Haile Kifer and 17-year-old Nick Brady on Thanksgiving Day 2012. Smith, 65, claims he was defending himself and feared for his life after several break-ins at his home. But prosecutors say he sat in his basement with guns, waiting for the teens to enter his house, then went too far when he continued to shoot them after they were no longer a threat.

You're allowed your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Well, what a surprise two different new outlets reporting two different sets of "Facts".

As further reports come to light it is clear that my original post based on the News source quoted, was in error. Contrary you your accusation, I did not "Use my own Facts"!

[xd ED]

No accusations were made by me, nor was my post directed at you
One cannot be faulted for quoting what should be an trusted and reliable source.

[Mn01r6]

You should look in to what a lesser included charge is.

Lesser included charges may have been filed but there is no mention in the KStp or strib coverage.

The whole point is that you don't have to file them...

631.14 VERDICT FOR LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE.
Upon an indictment or complaint for an offense consisting of different degrees, the jury may find the defendant not guilty of the degree charged in the indictment or complaint, and guilty of any degree inferior to that. Upon an indictment or complaint for an offense, the jury may find the defendant not guilty of committing it, and guilty of an attempt to commit it. Upon an indictment or complaint for murder, if the jury finds the defendant not guilty, it may, upon
the same indictment or complaint, find the defendant guilty of manslaughter in any degree. In all other cases, the defendant may be found guilty of any offense necessarily included in that offense with which the defendant is charged in the indictment or complaint.

[gunsmith]

ok so the jury can 'Compromise'

Meshbesher is there to get the guy a 2-4 year sentence instead of 17-life.

I'll bet he gets manslaughter and that not enough attention will be paid to the man's age and his mental state after 6 Burglaries.

The guy just should have gotten a pair of of Dobermans.

There's something about a PAIR of Dobermans that is especially scarey...like you may fight off one but 2 are just going to eat you for dinner.









These two look like they're in a bad mood....

[tman]

How many of his burglaries were reported to police?

His reported "facts" may be unsubstantiated.

And. If I were Mas Ayoob, I'd not touch this with a ten-foot pole.


Sent from my iPad using that app which shall not be named.

[Mn01r6]

If I were Mas, I would volunteer to testify for free...for the prosecution.

[LePetomane]

Gunsmith,

Thanks for the pictures of the Doberman Pinschers. They are beautiful dogs.

[steve4102]

Am not going to comment on whether he is innocent or guilty. Thats the juries job. My question though is, what is the law in minnesota in reguards to shooting a burglar inside your own home? We don't have stand your ground law and we don't have the castle law. So are we to leave the house for the intruder to do as they please? I don't know what the law is so am asking.

MN 609.06 - Reasonable Force
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.06

MN 609.065 - Justifiable Taking of Life

609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE.
The intentional taking of the life of another is not authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the actor's place of abode.

In addition to the two cases jshuberg references, there is also State v. Pendleton in which the court held that fear of death or great bodily harm is not an element of a "defense of dwelling" claim.
http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archi ... 952162.htm


The key element in this case is that there's an obvious threat with the two individuals in the home. He used deadly force, likely lawfully, to repel that threat - but his actions after that threat was ended went *way* over the line based on my understanding of the facts.

According to the MN Court of Appeals Fear of death or great bodily harm is not an element of a "defense of dwelling" claim. Minn. Stat. § 609.065.

So, if Byron Smith did not have to Fear for His Life to begin shooting, how can the State claim that he is Guilty of Murder because he didn't stop when the "Threat" was over. If he didn't need the "Threat" to start shooting why would he need a Neutralized threat to stop?