this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
1022 points (93.8% liked)

Comic Strips

12974 readers
2123 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This case is horrible, but you have misrepresented it in your comments. The teens broke a window and entered his house with the intention to rob it—it was not left wide open. The recording devices were turned on because he knew they were robbing the house. His first shots to stop the intruders were legal.

Where the crime occurred is that the original shots did not kill them, and then he executed them after they were downed. He also did not report the bodies for a day.

Don’t get me wrong, dude is a psychopathic asshole, but misrepresenting the series of events doesn’t help anybody.

[–] MonkeyDatabase@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

With the premise the OP presented, I expected something worse than what was actually there. It was still horrible, but the impact was lessened for the reasons you listed.

Interesting how someone can manufacture consent like that by shifting your initial view.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They weren't, they went over this in the trial.

He became the aggressor when he removed barriers to entry and laid in wait which is a negative defense for self defense.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wikipedia says they broke a window to enter, and that can be heard on audio—I’m not trying to argue with everything, but how is a closed window that had to be broken for entry not a barrier?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They did, read the testimony. He has the window blocked and he removed it so the window would be the easiest way to enter.

He set a trap, there's no legitimate purpose for that.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The dude clearly murdered them and had violent vigilante fantasies—I don’t argue that one bit.

That said, they still came up to his house, broke a window, and entered with the intention to burgle it. It doesn’t really matter if the window was previously blocked or made of paper—breaking and entering with the intention of burglary is a crime, and having no block on a window isn’t enticement to have your house burgled.

Again, before anyone thinks I’m defending him, I fully agree that he is a murderer. I just think the burglars weren’t innocent either. In Reddit lingo, “everyone sucks here”.

[–] chunkystyles@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's been a long time since I've heard about this case, but my recollection was that he left his garage door open and parked away from his house so it would appear open and unoccupied. I didn't see anything on the Wikipedia page that refutes that.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Smith had been visiting neighbors when he saw Kifer, whom he suspected was responsible for the burglaries, driving past his home. He commented that he needed to get ready for her and went back to his home. Upon entering his home, Smith turned on a recording device he owned. He removed the light bulbs from the ceiling lights and positioned himself in a chair that was obscured from view. He heard the window upstairs break and Brady climb in (captured on audio).

There may have been a window from the garage to the house or something, but it clearly says they broke a window, entered his home, and proceeded to the basement where they were shot. He had previously been burgled in the garage too, which Wikipedia says he was unaware about until police found evidence of a prior burglary. The house had been burgled previously as well, which is why he was looking out for people casing his house.

I hope none of this comes off as a defense of that asshole, but facts matter, and those teens did commit a crime. I don’t think they deserved to be executed for it, but he was within his rights to defend himself when they broke in to his home. He was not within his rights to execute them after the threat was over.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

but he was within his rights to defend himself when they broke in to his home.

No he wasn't, read the actual case transcript.

He was not within his rights to execute them after the threat was over.

There was never a threat, you really really need to read the court transcripts.

[–] Narauko@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It depends on the State for specific legality.

Armed or not, an actual threat or not, an intruder into an occupied home leaves benefit of the doubt at the entry point they used to get in. It might have been intended as a burglary instead of a home invasion, but the perpetrator does not get to make that distinction.

There is a tangible difference between regular property crime like shoplifting, fraud, or theft outside of a dwelling and the violation of a home. And another tangible difference if that home is occupied.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Sure, this is adjudicated though there's absolutely zero question to it at this point.

No one said they did.

Correct, the jury instructions are public and literally all of that is in it.

I'm not even quite sure what your point is.

[–] Narauko@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

The US is over-policed, while simultaneously being under-policed for certain demographics, by a street gang operating under the color of law. We have an overabundance of bad shoots by the cops executing people for nonviolent propert crimes that needs to be dealt with. This is a real issue.

There is also a tendency for some to conflate that with self defense of/in a home under the (generally correct) idea that no property crime deserves the death penalty, like McDonalds managed to conflate the coffee burned old lady with frivolous lawsuits. I am saying that once you break into a home it is no longer "property crime" but something else.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I probably have my copy at home but I'd have to dig.

If you do the case number and FOIA it from the court it was in you'll get a copy, that's how I got mine.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

Sure, no one has time to find out the facts of what the fuck they're voicing their ignorant opinion about.

Everyone has time for that, you don't have the will it would seem.