Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
ouija ouija

'Reasonable force' or 'murder'?

144 posts in this topic

Maybe it was ironic laughter. Like if you are being beaten up and the thug beating you slips in a puddle and falls down. You just laugh. It is automatic.

Indeed, or sometimes I think laughing can become a coping mechanism for shock in situations such as this.

Guess only Mr. Smith knows for sure, but can we trust him to tell the truth?

As far as I'm concerned, you break into my property, you violate my personal safety and pay the necessary consequences.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, or sometimes I think laughing can become a coping mechanism for shock in situations such as this.

Guess only Mr. Smith knows for sure, but can we trust him to tell the truth?

As far as I'm concerned, you break into my property, you violate my personal safety and pay the necessary consequences.

The thing is, if they are on the floor, bleeding to death and are unarmed, they are not a threat to your saftey. So planting your gun under their chin and blowing thier head off, is not a reasonable use of force. I agree that shooting them initially inf ear for your saftey etc is entirely reasonable, i would have no qualms about doing such a thing. But executing them when thier prostate on the floor is murder, plain and simple.

Breaking into somones house carries the risk of death at the hands of the home owner but the price of breaking in is NOT death, therefore killing somone when they are not a threat should not be within the bounds of the law.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you going to put a bullet in a young womans head if she is lying on the ground after you have already shot her several times and is no longer a threat? I am not defending what they did and I am not saying he did not have the right to shoot them intially. But something changes when you you go out of your way to make sure someone is dead, which is what this guy did.

8 times people broke into this man's house. once is enough for me. someone breaks into my place u better believe i'm unloading a clip in them. i feel bad for their famiies but these weren't "good kids" they were criminals. who knows what they would've done to the old man had he not done what he did. now that being said he shoulda called the cops as soon as the threat was neutrilized and not hide the bodies. if he goes down for anything it should be that and that alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 times people broke into this man's house. once is enough for me. someone breaks into my place u better believe i'm unloading a clip in

them. i feel bad for their famiies but these weren't "good kids" they were criminals. who knows what they would've done to the old man had he not done what he did. now that being said he shoulda called the cops as soon as the threat was neutrilized and not hide the bodies. if he goes down for anything it should be that and

that alone.

Perfectly summed up there.

He did nothing wrong, although his mental state should be checked out. If there was any real justice he would not even be charged.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to repeat at this point: Smith didn't know how many people had broken into his home. For all he knew there could have been a whole gang of them and some of those others could have been armed. I don't think some posters here are fully understanding the state you would be in if you were outnumbered by people invading your home ...... perhaps killing rather than just injuring the cousins was done because he wanted to be absolutely sure they were helpless if he had to deal with even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a hunch, but I think that when this gets to court Smith is going to be treated leniently ...... with sympathy.

I wish you were right but I really doubt it. You know the prosecutor is going to go after the "but he killed a poor innocent little girl" angle.

It wouldn't matter if she was stabbing him to death at the time, she'd still be an innocent little girl. Just look at the reporting already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish you were right but I really doubt it. You know the prosecutor is going to go after the "but he killed a poor innocent little girl" angle.

It wouldn't matter if she was stabbing him to death at the time, she'd still be an innocent little girl. Just look at the reporting already.

I was right about Casey Anthony :tu: (weeks before the end of her trial)! Sometimes the jury really comes up trumps with the right assessment of what has happened.

The defense will prove that she was not an 'innocent little girl'. What happens in court is what matters.

Edited by ouija ouija

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see, I'm at work, my wife is in class, and my kids are in daycare right now.

Am I trying to lure someone into breaking into my house? Should I have life-sized cutouts of us made and stand them in the windows?

Don't really see how you "lure" someone into breaking into your house.

Lure wasnt my choice term. It was in relevance to whatever post I was quoting. I was just saying perhaps he staged things. Maybe every time he was burglarized it was a certain time and he always had lights off or maybe one on and so he possibly made it appear like it was a good time to break in his house. If these idiot kids were that predictable then lure might be the correct term.

I'd just like to repeat at this point: Smith didn't know how many people had broken into his home. For all he knew there could have been a whole gang of them and some of those others could have been armed. I don't think some posters here are fully understanding the state you would be in if you were outnumbered by people invading your home ...... perhaps killing rather than just injuring the cousins was done because he wanted to be absolutely sure they were helpless if he had to deal with even more.

I have the feeling this guy was in full control of the situation. The kids were shot and grounded. If he was worried about others he could've just tied them up and as good of a shot as he seemed to be he could've easily popped any other perpetrators who wanted to creep down the basement steps. Besides, many average homes with a basement you could hear a baby crawling around upstairs with the floors creaking. This guy was acting out a vigilant fantasy. The kids deserved to be shot and possibly killed but instead they were straight up murdered.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is, if they are on the floor, bleeding to death and are unarmed, they are not a threat to your saftey. So planting your gun under their chin and blowing thier head off, is not a reasonable use of force. I agree that shooting them initially inf ear for your saftey etc is entirely reasonable, i would have no qualms about doing such a thing. But executing them when thier prostate on the floor is murder, plain and simple.

Breaking into somones house carries the risk of death at the hands of the home owner but the price of breaking in is NOT death, therefore killing somone when they are not a threat should not be within the bounds of the law.

Yeah, no kidding.

I wasn't justifying him blowing their brains out, especially if they're incapacitated, because that is murder. I was however, stating a fact.

If people broke into my home, I'm certainly not going to sit on my ass and let them take my CD's, or whatnot. I'd feel threatened and take necessary action. If the situation called for it, incapacitate them with a sledgehammer to the kneecaps. (I don't own a gun.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lure wasnt my choice term. It was in relevance to whatever post I was quoting. I was just saying perhaps he staged things. Maybe every time he was burglarized it was a certain time and he always had lights off or maybe one on and so he possibly made it appear like it was a good time to break in his house. If these idiot kids were that predictable then lure might be the correct term.

I have the feeling this guy was in full control of the situation. The kids were shot and grounded. If he was worried about others he could've just tied them up and as good of a shot as he seemed to be he could've easily popped any other perpetrators who wanted to creep down the basement steps. Besides, many average homes with a basement you could hear a baby crawling around upstairs with the floors creaking. This guy was acting out a vigilant fantasy. The kids deserved to be shot and possibly killed but instead they were straight up murdered.

This 'luring' business is nonsense! That young man and that young woman CHOSE to break into that home at that particular time! Putting even a tiny portion of blame onto the homeowner is completely absurd.

Also, if I was in that situation and not knowing who was going to appear next, I wouldn't be faffing around looking for ropes and tying them up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This 'luring' business is nonsense! That young man and that young woman CHOSE to break into that home at that particular time! Putting even a tiny portion of blame onto the homeowner is completely absurd.

Also, if I was in that situation and not knowing who was going to appear next, I wouldn't be faffing around looking for ropes and tying them up!

Hey man you're being way too defensive. I'm taking guesses here and you're acting as if you know what happened. Is it not possible the homeowner either made it appear to be a good time to break in or is it not possible he's been itching for this day?

I said repeatedly here that the kids were idiots and they got what they deserved by getting shot and if they died then so be it but this guy just plain executed them when they didn't die right away.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These things are tough and for good reason- you're dealing with taking another person's life. I'm very pro-gun and believe that it's very reasonable to assume anyone who breaks into your home has intentions to harm you and that you should act accordingly. When you feel your life is in danger you should do whatever is in your power to protect it.

This is where it gets tricky. It's an easier scenario to deal with when someone breaks into a home and the homeowner shoots and kills them on sight because they thought their life was in danger and this is regardless of whether or not it turns out they were armed. When a person shoots someone to the point they're incapacitated and clearly unarmed and then delivers a kill shot later after they're on the ground it turns into a completely different scenario. At that point you're not "defending your life" you're delivering your own justice as you see fit. The guy made the decision that this is what they deserved and he delivered the punishment. That's not something that he has the power to do and it's something that a jury and judge will evaluate.

When someone trespasses or breaks into your home, it's not "automatic death sentence." I think this case is about as clear as it gets. This guy admitted to firing more shots than necessary, used words like "a good finishing shot", and he stashed the bodies. That dude is going to jail. I don't really understand how people can be so flippant and casual about taking a life.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see, I'm at work, my wife is in class, and my kids are in daycare right now.

Am I trying to lure someone into breaking into my house? Should I have life-sized cutouts of us made and stand them in the windows?

Don't really see how you "lure" someone into breaking into your house.

I agree. How, exactly, do you 'lure' someone to burgle your home ...... if they have no intention of doing so in the first place?

Hey man you're being way too defensive. I'm taking guesses here and you're acting as if you know what happened. Is it not possible the homeowner either made it appear to be a good time to break in or is it not possible he's been itching for this day?

I said repeatedly here that the kids were idiots and they got what they deserved by getting shot and if they died then so be it but this guy just plain executed them when they didn't die right away.

How do you 'make it appear to be a good time to break in'? And if he has been 'itching for this day', what does that alter? He's still on his own, a lot older than them, and he still has no idea how many people will enter his home and how many will be armed.

By stating that 'this guy just plain executed them' you are acting as if you 'know what happened'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These things are tough and for good reason- you're dealing with taking another person's life. I'm very pro-gun and believe that it's very reasonable to assume anyone who breaks into your home has intentions to harm you and that you should act accordingly. When you feel your life is in danger you should do whatever is in your power to protect it.

This is where it gets tricky. It's an easier scenario to deal with when someone breaks into a home and the homeowner shoots and kills them on sight because they thought their life was in danger and this is regardless of whether or not it turns out they were armed. When a person shoots someone to the point they're incapacitated and clearly unarmed and then delivers a kill shot later after they're on the ground it turns into a completely different scenario. At that point you're not "defending your life" you're delivering your own justice as you see fit. The guy made the decision that this is what they deserved and he delivered the punishment. That's not something that he has the power to do and it's something that a jury and judge will evaluate.

When someone trespasses or breaks into your home, it's not "automatic death sentence." I think this case is about as clear as it gets. This guy admitted to firing more shots than necessary, used words like "a good finishing shot", and he stashed the bodies. That dude is going to jail. I don't really understand how people can be so flippant and casual about taking a life.

I wonder if Smith thought he was 'delivering his own justice' at the time, or if it was only afterwards when he had time to think about it, knowing afterwards that there were only two of them and they were unarmed .... was it then that he thought he should have left it at incapacitating them?

Only Smith knows whether or not he was being 'flippant and casual'. The two burglars certainly were being flippant and casual with their own lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. How, exactly, do you 'lure' someone to burgle your home ...... if they have no intention of doing so in the first place?

How do you 'make it appear to be a good time to break in'? And if he has been 'itching for this day', what does that alter? He's still on his own, a lot older than them, and he still has no idea how many people will enter his home and how many will be armed.

By stating that 'this guy just plain executed them' you are acting as if you 'know what happened'!

Do you know this guy? Is he a friend. You're going out of your way to be unreasonable.

House has been robbed several times already. He makes the house appear as it does every time he's been robbed. Perhaps no car and one porch light on for example. If its the same thieves then one could assume they'd say hey look at the house, it'd be a good time to breaking now. As I said, I'm speculating there and it's entirely possible.

As for acting like I know what happened with the execution I'll quote from the op article that you surely read already...

When the teenager tumbled down the stars, Smith shot him in the face as he lay on the floor, looking up.

'I want him dead,' the complaint quoted Smith as telling an investigator.

He dragged the body into his workshop and then sat in the chair, the complaint said. When Kifer began walking down the stairs, he shot her and she fell down the stairs.

He tried to shoot her again with his rifle, but the gun jammed and Kifer laughed at him, the complaint noted.

'If you're trying to shoot somebody and they laugh at you, you go again,' Smith, 64, told investigators, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday.

He then shot her several times in the chest with a .22-caliber revolver, dragged her next to her cousin, and with as she gasped for air, fired a shot under her chin 'up into the cranium'.

'Smith described it as "a good clean finishing shot",' according to the compliant, and acknowledged he had fired 'more shots than (he) needed to'.

Smith said he left the bodies in his home overnight before calling a neighbor to ask if he knew a good lawyer. He later asked the neighbour to contact police.

Sounds to me like he not only executed them he wanted to and admitted to it. So I think it's time you cool your jets missy.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't read all 8 pages, but if someone breaks into my home, there's a good chance you're going to die. I wouldn't pull a 'double tap' but I'm also not going to aim for your foot.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't read all 8 pages, but if someone breaks into my home, there's a good chance you're going to die. I wouldn't pull a 'double tap' but I'm also not going to aim for your foot.

Most reasonable people would agree. I do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know this guy? Is he a friend. You're going out of your way to be unreasonable.

House has been robbed several times already. He makes the house appear as it does every time he's been robbed. Perhaps no car and one porch light on for example. If its the same thieves then one could assume they'd say hey look at the house, it'd be a good time to breaking now. As I said, I'm speculating there and it's entirely possible.

As for acting like I know what happened with the execution I'll quote from the op article that you surely read already...

When the teenager tumbled down the stars, Smith shot him in the face as he lay on the floor, looking up.

'I want him dead,' the complaint quoted Smith as telling an investigator.

He dragged the body into his workshop and then sat in the chair, the complaint said. When Kifer began walking down the stairs, he shot her and she fell down the stairs.

He tried to shoot her again with his rifle, but the gun jammed and Kifer laughed at him, the complaint noted.

'If you're trying to shoot somebody and they laugh at you, you go again,' Smith, 64, told investigators, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday.

He then shot her several times in the chest with a .22-caliber revolver, dragged her next to her cousin, and with as she gasped for air, fired a shot under her chin 'up into the cranium'.

'Smith described it as "a good clean finishing shot",' according to the compliant, and acknowledged he had fired 'more shots than (he) needed to'.

Smith said he left the bodies in his home overnight before calling a neighbor to ask if he knew a good lawyer. He later asked the neighbour to contact police.

Sounds to me like he not only executed them he wanted to and admitted to it. So I think it's time you cool your jets missy.

Lol! No, I don't know this guy, but why should that stop me from imagining how things might have happened from his perspective? Why shouldn't someone give him the benefit of the doubt here? And I'm confused as to why you interpret that as 'going out of my way to be unreasonable'?

As for the rest, well it's open to interpretation ..... yours is different to mine. Neither of us know what was going through his mind in the heat of a very stressful and unpredicable time. Have you ever been in such a stressful, frightening situation that you felt you were 'outside yourself', 'watching' yourself act and having no control over those actions?

Not directed at you, Mr Fess, but when did complainants suddenly become complaints? I've noticed this in several American articles recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol! No, I don't know this guy, but why should that stop me from imagining how things might have happened from his perspective? Why shouldn't someone give him the benefit of the doubt here? And I'm confused as to why you interpret that as 'going out of my way to be unreasonable'?

As for the rest, well it's open to interpretation ..... yours is different to mine. Neither of us know what was going through his mind in the heat of a very stressful and unpredicable time. Have you ever been in such a stressful, frightening situation that you felt you were 'outside yourself', 'watching' yourself act and having no control over those actions?

Not directed at you, Mr Fess, but when did complainants suddenly become complaints? I've noticed this in several American articles recently.

Well for one, he stated his perspective and his intentions so there is little doubt left. As for the situation itself, he gave us the details leaving little reasoning for him to be lying about it.

The only things we can speculate at this point is the events leading up to this situation. But like I said earlier and as the article confirms, he was in full control of the situation and not in a raging blackout. As for myself, you got me thinking. I can't say that I have. I have found that in times of great stress I gain full composure. Don't know why but when something with great impact happens I get no butterflies, head rushes or black outs. But that's only during a situation, usually an unpredictable one. Now nerves are a different story if I am thinking about an upcoming situation of significant impact. Be that as it may, I haven't been in a situation like the op here and couldn't say how things would go or how I'd react. I don't have a gun but I have many stabbing weapons and a ball & chain, seriously. And don't take any of this as me being mr cool at all times. I am in a relationship and am entirely susceptible to getting into fights over the dumbest things, hence not being in full control.

And about the complaints remark, I noticed that too. It doesn't look or sound right.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfectly summed up there.

He did nothing wrong, although his mental state should be checked out. If there was any real justice he would not even be charged.

Nothing wrong with hiding the bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the circumstances surrounding the death of those burglary teenagers are true as reported, he murdered them.

There is no excuse, in my book, for willifully doing "killing shots" on any unarmed downed person.

That's just plain sick.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey man you're being way too defensive. I'm taking guesses here and you're acting as if you know what happened. Is it not possible the homeowner either made it appear to be a good time to break in or is it not possible he's been itching for this day?

I said repeatedly here that the kids were idiots and they got what they deserved by getting shot and if they died then so be it but this guy just plain executed them when they didn't die right away.

sorry, but that just got me. I guess I was raised differently. One rule, not yours? don't touch. How can a homeonwer make it appear to be a good time to break in? The kids shouldn't have broke in. The guy shouldn't have shot them repeatedly. the public shouldn't be saying that they were 'role models'. This whole instance stinks. BUT, it could have been avoided by the kids not breaking in in the first place. Maybe if the punishments for the crimes were harsher, the kids wouldn't be doing things for a lark.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it really does not matter if what he did leagal or not, right or not, the buttom line is, if THEY didn't brake into his house, they would be alive, THEY started chain of events that got them killed. NOT the home owner.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it really does matter.

I don't disagree that it was a chain events started by the intruders, but there are still laws applicable to what happens at that point.

If he would have tortured them for hours, then chopped them up and ate them, would it have 'mattered' then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it really does matter.

I don't disagree that it was a chain events started by the intruders, but there are still laws applicable to what happens at that point.

If he would have tortured them for hours, then chopped them up and ate them, would it have 'mattered' then?

This is what I meant in my OP: if you break into someone else's property you risk anything happening to you! This could be an attack by pitbulls; the homeowner having a heart attack and you get charged with murder; through to being held hostage, tortured and abused for hours, days, weeks.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.