• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

‘You’re dying, b---h’: MN jury hears audio of man shooting teen intruders to death

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WoodWERD

Member
Saw this story and remembered the thread. Apparently the shooter had bugged his house and they played the audio at the trial. He's fucked.

‘You’re dying, b---h’: Minnesota jury listens to chilling audio of man shooting two teen intruders to death

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...lly-shooting-teen-intruders-article-1.1765846

The bugged home of a Minnesota man recorded the chilling moments he encountered two teen burglars inside his house and appeared to take pleasure in shooting them dead.

Byron Smith claimed he was armed and ready for the intruders — Nick Brady, 17, and 18-year-old Haile Kifer — because of previous break-ins at his Little Falls home before the Thanksgiving Day 2012 shooting.

A 14-minute audio clip from his home security system was played for jurors in a Morrison County courthouse during his murder trial on Tuesday, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Click to expand...
 
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

They were already injured. We have laws for a reason and executing someone is completely bypassing that and claiming yourself judge jury and executioner and that has no place in modern society.
 
So...let me get this straight....He had video surveillance, audio recording equipment on, cell phone jamming equipment, and plastic tarp on the the floor as to not get blood everywhere and waited for them. If that is not premeditated murder, I don't know what is.
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

So do you support the death penalty for all thefts? I mean, why even bother with prison?
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

You have a fucked up moral compass
 
Retrocide said:
So...let me get this straight....He had video surveillance, audio recording equipment on, cell phone jamming equipment, and plastic tarp on the the floor as to not get blood everywhere and waited for them. If that is not premeditated murder, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

still not premeditated imo. but yeah, anything after the first shot on each was unwarranted.



Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

i feel bad because they were executed, it's not like he feared for his life when he killed them. he wounded them and then 'finished the job' on two helpless people.
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

So once you hit retirement age it should just be assumed that you're capable of executing people? Obviously these kids shouldn't have been robbing people, and an intruder being shot isn't exactly shocking - but the callousness of the accused in this case is pretty horrific, not to mention is seems pretty far out of the realm of self-defense to be delivering a coup de grace to a 18 year old girl who isn't posing a threat.
 
Retrocide said:
So...let me get this straight....He had video surveillance, audio recording equipment on, cell phone jamming equipment, and plastic tarp on the the floor as to not get blood everywhere and waited for them. If that is not premeditated murder, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

He parked his car miles away from his house and was chilling in the basement, it was a clear trap.
 
MooseKnuckles said:
So once you hit retirement age it should just be assumed that you're capable of executing people? Obviously these kids shouldn't have been robbing people, and an intruder being shot isn't exactly shocking - but the callousness of the accused in this case is pretty horrific, not to mention is seems pretty far out of the realm of self-defense to be delivering a coup de grace to a 18 year old girl who isn't posing a threat.
Click to expand...

Hey man, she was on his property. Once you set foot on another man's property, your life is forfeit. Its the most sacred thing.
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

You don't feel bad for the kids who were murdered because were stealing? What the fuck. The old man is a sociopath.
 
Sometimes this country is seriously fucked up. It's like "hey everyone, guns are easy to obtain and totally legal so get armed". Then when people shoot each other over property crime it's like "well people have guns, so the fear of violence compelled them to kill another human being". And then you try to argue that maybe we shouldn't have so many guns and it's like "if you take away the guns from the good guys, then only the bad guys have guns!"

How do you fix that?
 
God damn, my initial reaction was, "Well fuck those guys, they were breaking into his house to steal drugs that would further poison our population."

Then I read the story.

What the fuck. I'm not even going to try to jump into the conversation, so how about that weather folks? Back and forth, back and forth.
 
WoodWERD said:
Saw this story and remembered the thread. Apparently the shooter had bugged his house and they played the audio at the trial. He's fucked.

‘You’re dying, b---h’: Minnesota jury listens to chilling audio of man shooting two teen intruders to death

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...lly-shooting-teen-intruders-article-1.1765846
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that is the three words uttered anytime an intruder breaks into someone's home that has a gun. Home invaders are right under murderer's and rapists for me. Don't feel sorry for them at all.
 
It is a terrible case.

The kids were definitely criminals . . . but with fore-thought, the guy decided to do a stake-out in his own home and then shot them multiple times, execution style.

The castle doctrine is one thing . . . . but using it to entrap and summarily execute juvenile delinquents is a bit too much.
 
So, read the new article and yeah, the guy is fucked up but I kind of see what Winterfang is getting at. I don't condone this brutality but it sounds like the old man had so many prior problems with break-ins and having things stolen from him that it finally put him over the edge. Again, not condoning but combining the fact he's been a burglary victim several times and he is a Vietnam vet, possibly with some form of PTSD, it's not too surprising. Sounds like he should have had some kind of mental health assistance as well doing something - whatever that may be - to create more non-violent, preventative measures to protect his home.

Sad story all around.
 
Retrocide said:
So...let me get this straight....He had video surveillance, audio recording equipment on, cell phone jamming equipment, and plastic tarp on the the floor as to not get blood everywhere and waited for them. If that is not premeditated murder, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

Yep. Murder. The new evidence removes any doubt.
This was not just some old guy freaking out and killing intruders. It's disturbing.
 
The Faceless Master said:
he set a trap in his own house? i mean, sure, ok, lets say he did... what's wrong with that? what happened after they were wounded was the awful part.
Click to expand...

Setting a trap so that you can shoot intruders is fucked up, period. The sane thing would be to set cameras around your house to identify the intruders, then actually leave the house to catch them on tape. Show that to the police once you ahve evidence, and make them answer to the law.

Dude is a sick fuck who deserves to be jailed for a long time.

xbhaskarx said:
This guy knows he's on trial for murder, right?
Click to expand...

Thats the thinking of a man who believes other people are animals, not human beings.
 
Pelydr said:
You don't feel bad for the kids who were murdered because were stealing? What the fuck. The old man is a sociopath.
Click to expand...

I don't have a side in this story, the man is going to prison because he is a murderer. And that's the life those kids chose, they had a whole future ahead of them but decided to spend their time breaking an entering houses. There's no winners in this story, just consequences of bad decisions.
 
Winterfang said:
Can't say I feel sad for the kids, that's the life they chose. You keep this life and you end up dead or in prison. The old man is 65 years old, of course he doesn't give any fucks, he already lived his life.
Click to expand...

What? The kids fucked up, yes. Ending their lives in such a vicious way over some fucking prescription medication is the most clear cut example of senseless murder I've ever seen. There's no defending this man, whatsoever.
 
Winterfang said:
I don't have a side in this story, the man is going to prison because he is a murderer. And that's the life those kids chose, they had a whole future ahead of them but decided to spend their time breaking an entering houses. There's no winners in this story, just consequences of bad decisions.
Click to expand...

So they were murdered without any chance to turn their lives around/
 
No doubt its premeditated. Unfortunately I have no doubt the defense will go for an "attack the victim" tactic which in our highly partisan nation, will at the very least deadlock any jury...
 
Notrollious said:
They were already injured. We have laws for a reason and executing someone is completely bypassing that and claiming yourself judge jury and executioner and that has no place in modern society.
Click to expand...

I gotta agree with this. Once the threat is stopped you stop shooting. Period. No ifs, ands, buts. You stop.

Call the police. Ask them to send an ambulance. Can't just double tap someone like that.
 
Winterfang said:
I don't have a side in this story, the man is going to prison because he is a murderer. And that's the life those kids chose, they had a whole future ahead of them but decided to spend their time breaking an entering houses. There's no winners in this story, just consequences of bad decisions.
Click to expand...

Winterfang said:
And that's the life those kids chose
Click to expand...

Winterfang said:
And that's the life those kids chose
Click to expand...

Winterfang said:
And that's the life those kids chose
Click to expand...

Winterfang said:
And that's the life those kids chose
Click to expand...

But then again they had a whole future ahead of them but decided to spend their time breaking an entering houses.
 
A_Gorilla said:
No doubt its premeditated. Unfortunately I have no doubt the defense will go for an "attack the victim" tactic which in our highly partisan nation, will at the very least deadlock any jury...
Click to expand...

I though he was already sentenced. But I see the trial is about to start, I don't see how can he be a free man after the concrete evidence of him dragging bodies, delivering finishing shots and saying one liners.
 
The Faceless Master said:
he set a trap in his own house? i mean, sure, ok, lets say he did... what's wrong with that? what happened after they were wounded was the awful part.
Click to expand...

Um, he set up the trap with the intention on killing the teens?

On a more legal note, I refer you to the decision in Katko v. Briney:

The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
 
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...


This line is awesome. And so true.
 
GaimeGuy said:
This line is awesome. And so true.
Click to expand...
The case stands for the proposition that, though a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Click to expand...
Pretty sure that's the law that prevents you from setting up unmanned, deadly booby traps in your home, which, by nature, cannot differentiate between intruders and random people.

Doesn't fully apply to this case.
 
Erico said:
Pretty sure that's the law that prevents you from setting up unmanned, deadly booby traps in your home, which, by nature, cannot differentiate between intruders and random people.

Doesn't fully apply to this case.
Click to expand...

Oh man it's like I'm in law school again... 1L Torts if I'm not mistaken.
 
The problem is definitely what he did after he removed any threat to his life. All that trap stuff is pretty sick and sounds like the guy really is messed up in the head.
 
Erico said:
Pretty sure that's the law that prevents you from setting up unmanned, deadly booby traps in your home, which, by nature, cannot differentiate between intruders and random people.

Doesn't fully apply to this case.
Click to expand...

So Home Alone is still legal. Sweet.
 
The Faceless Master said:
that was an actual booby trap mechanism, not a homeowner laying in wait.
Click to expand...

How does it not? A trap is a trap, but I suppose that could just be my interpretation of it. The act was premeditated, in both cases.

The point still stands. The Courts have always valued human life above the protection of property. Deadly force can only be used in appropriate increments; the teens were unarmed and posed no threat, he had no right to shoot them after they had already been injured.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
If you found a Death Note, would you use it?
2
55
597
Lambogenie replied
Advice for life: "If you're afraid of dying don't be born"
44
637
Tieno replied
Rob & Michele Reiner stabbed to death in home invasion
2 3 4 5
227
1K
Aesius replied
How often do you think about dying?
Cringe  2
57
1K
ForAcademicPurposes replied
  • Locked
Man Opens UAP Cyclinder -Dies Livestream
10
466
AJUMP23 replied
Top Bottom