Yes, completely ugly.

We will never know the motive from the kids.
No winners here.

I'm thinking that that fellow shouldn't take the stand during his trial.

I love how the news agency says he killed two teens "who entered his home..." um, nope. They broke in.

The guy was pretty cold blooded but he had every right to defend himself and his property. He's old and he was tired of being robbed and obviously, the authorities couldn't do anything to stop the break ins. Did the kids deserve to die? I really don't think so but I do think it's silly to charge the old guy with premeditated murder and turn the real criminals into some kind of innocent victoms.

There are plenty of real criminals here to go around, but whether they were hoodlums or saints, laying in wait, shooting, then executing someone is clearly premeditated murder.

Assistant Washington County Attorney Brent Wartner outlined for jurors Monday the evidence that prosecutors will present, including Smith's statements and audio from a recorder that Smith had set up in a bookcase the day of the break-in.

"He's down in the basement, in a chair, tucked between two bookcases at the bottom of the stairs. He said he was down there reading a book ... with his Mini-14, a .22-caliber revolver, some energy bars and a bottle of water," Wartner said.

Wartner said Smith heard the door of his house rattle at about 12:30 p.m., then someone walking across the deck, then a window breaking.

"And he waited," Wartner said.

As Brady descended the basement steps, Smith shot him in the chest, then in the back while Brady fell, Wartner said. Smith fired a final shot into Brady's head, the bullet passing through Brady's hand, Wartner said.

Smith put Brady's body on a tarp, dragged it into his workshop, reloaded his Mini-14 rifle and sat down again, the prosecutor said. A few minutes later, Kifer walked down the stairs and Smith shot her, Wartner said. He tried another shot, but his rifle jammed, Wartner said, and Smith told police he believed Kifer laughed at him.

"He was angry," Wartner said. "So he pulled out his revolver and he shot her twice in the head, once in the left eye and once behind the left ear."

Smith dragged Kifer's body into the workshop and laid it on top of Brady's. Smith told investigators he thought he heard Kifer gasping, so he pulled out his revolver for what he told police was a "good clean finishing shot to the head," the assistant prosecutor said.

Here's the definition of premeditated murder: Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

I don't think you can say he "wrongfully" killed these robbers when they had broken into his house several times. Again, these are not "innocent" victims. I also think that you can question his ability to rationally think through what he was doing being that he was tired of being a victim and he was scared. Finally, he never concealed what he did, in fact, he's fully confessed all his actions. Just because everyone doesn't agree with his actions or his methodology, does not make him a first degree murderer IMHO.

You mean this guy isn't dead yet?

He's eating up tax dollars because why?

I bet it gets pleaded down to something like manslaughter. The old guy will end up in jail one way or another and it's too bad. It's too bad these idiot teens died and it's too bad this old guy was so robotic in his method of protecting himself.

Once he shot them each a first time, incapacitating them, and them being unarmed, he had successfully defended his life and property with no threat left to himself. Anything that happened after the first incapacitating shot was murder.

You can ARGUE that he didn't, but that would likely just mean you're a disgusting human being who is also wrong.

Throw the book at him.

:rolleyes:

Setting up the audio recording shows a premeditation. What's on it will be what sends him away

RJ, the man is a crazed old murderer... when the home invaders are lying on their backs gasping for air like fish, its time to stop and call the police.

NOT finish the job "nice and clean-like"... he needs to die.

like I said, I don't agree with him killing the teens, but I also don't think he should be charged with premeditated murder.

Dude should get the electric chair as soon as the show trial ends.

Evidence expected to be presented at trial includes video surveillance of the teens entering Smith’s home, as well as an audio recording of the killings. Prosecutors have said the audio tape shows four shots were fired at Brady, and that Kifer can be heard 10 minutes later saying, “Nick?” before more shots were fired. Prosecutors have said Smith can be heard telling Kifer: “You’re dying.”

Assistant Morrison County Attorney Todd Kosovich has said the killings were an “ambush” and that Smith removed light bulbs from sockets and sat by a tall bookcase so the teens couldn’t see him as they came downstairs.

Jurors might find the idea of ambushing people breaking into your house silly sounding.

Leave them alive and they sue you.

Wow it sounds like the prosecutors are trying to spin it like he hunted them down. remember assholes, they invaded HIS home, they act like he went out, found them and shot them down in cold blood. If the damn prosecutes were doing their ****ing job in the first place these thugs would be in jail, not out committing home invasions. Ideally he deserves a bit of time for the 2nd killing, but with the way it has been piss poorly handled from the beginning hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist or less.

This story would make a good TV movie. They can show the previous alleged break-ins. This old guy setting them up for another break-in by moving his car away from his house, unscrewing all the light bulbs to sit in darkness. The kids break in, he executes them and then he goes to prison.

Well, that might be better than going to prison for the rest of your life?

So, he shot the girl first in upperbody, then several times in chest, once in eye, once in head behind ear...and she was still gasping before final kill shot under chin that left her doing "death shakes".

That doesn't sound like a very powerful gun at all. Sounds like it was a pellet rifle

Agreed.

I don't think it does at all. He could conceivably have set up the recording in fear that armed burglars were about to kill him, hoping to provide evidence.

It's going to be difficult for his side to prove why all those shots were necessary. But I could easily see the defense winning because in a dark basement, an intruder couldn't be judged with complete accuracy as to whether they are a threat or whether they are armed. He could conceivably have been unsure whether the person was actually hit by the shot. whether they were armed (given he'd had firearms stolen before) or whether they were shot but were still a threat. A person who is armed and has been shot could be MORE of a threat, given that they are now in their view fighting for their life.

I don't think they will be able to get a murder conviction on the boy. The girl, sure, if we have the story as it will play out in court. (One has to wonder if we have the whole story here, because what girl would follow someone down into a dark basement after hearing gunshots?)

Anyway, this guy needs to be locked up IMO, but it also is a good reminder that your chances of being shot to death are a hell of a lot lower if you aren't committing burglaries. :spock:

no disrespect intended but fugly.....

I remember hearing about a guy breaking into Brandon Lee, Bruce Lee's son's house. A comedian was saying "can you imagine sneaking in that house, flashlight goes on wall covered with martial arts weapons, all the family pictures with karate and thinking this wasn't a very good idea" lol

I think that guy made it out alive though which is a little ironic

.22 LR. Actually sounds about right.

For a 22....that does sound about right.

1. At some point, he was no longer defending himself. He took the law into his own hands.

2. Being old & tired of being robbed, although completely understandable, does not justify murdering someone who is no longer a threat.

3. At no point in the history of the world has anyone suggested that these teens were "innocent victims."

The teens should be in jail. That can't happen because this ****er decided to play judge, jury, & executioner.

This.

I noticed you conviniently ignored my post #326.

I can’t recall ever thinking the homeowner and victim of a burglary should have repercussions because the criminal died. Had he just repeatedly shot them to make sure there was no longer a threat I wouldn’t have an issue. When someone is incapacitated with multiple gunshot wounds and you go put a bullet in their head to finish them off… I can’t stick up for the guy.

And brag about it. This guy is ****ed in the head.

Sorry. I wasn't sure if you were serious with this one. The sentence in bold is so stupid I thought you might have typed it to be sarcastic. Obviously, being frustrated by repeated burglaries does not give anyone the authority to murder the burglar so murdering a burglar would absolutely be "wrongfully killing" unless it can be argued that it was done in self defense, which it clearly cannot.

You even typed the definition of premeditated murder FFS. The girl was full of bullet holes and he went to get another gun to finish the job.

You are the only one who has ever used the word innocent to describe the teens so I don't know why you keep arguing that they are not innocent.

I think if I were on that jury I would have a hard time convicting him of murder. Maybe manslaughter. Maybe.

did not notice how old this post was. Any follow up in the last couple years?

http://work.chiefsplanet.com/BB/show...&postcount=319

http://work.chiefsplanet.com/BB/show...&postcount=325

Yea, not sure how it can be premeditated when the teens are the ones who chose to break into the house. The teens chose the house and the time.

Old guy was premeditated in his intent to defend his house ......

this, and this has been my point from the beginning.

Thanks

the point is that premeditated murder's definition entials wrongfully killing someone, which can be argued, and it also says something about rational consideration which can be argued too because being a victim of multiple crimes can make someone irrational.

Yeah I think he goes free too.

I know a guy who has hollow tip bullets and know of others who have lethal traps should someone chose the wrong house. I suppose some would think the bad guys fate would be harsh afterwards.

Very difficult to feel any sympathy for the unfortunate idiot who chooses the wrong person to mess with.

his thanksgiving was ruined so he didn't call to report it because he didn't want to ruin someone elses.

LMAO

Hollowpoints are the best choice for home defense, because they are far less likely to overpenetrate.

And you don't have to be that great a shot. Shot to the arm dismembers that arm from being a problem again

His lawyer, "...You see how thoughtful and kind he is to think of others even at a time like this"

Getting hit with a ball round is not going to have you doing pushups afterward either.

Just tell the old coot that the state is going to take him to an abandoned corn field and given a shovel to dig his own grave. Then, the state will be sure to put a gun under his chin for a nice, clean finish.

bad buys killing bad guys.

Death Wish 6.

"I've sentenced boys your age to the electric chair. Didn't want to do it... Felt, I owed it to them."

When he went to get another gun with the intent to finish off the teenage girl who was on the ground, incapacitated, and full of bullet holes, it is premeditated murder. WTF are you missing about that? He's no longer in danger. He's no longer defending his house.

Yeah, that was his mistake. You don't place and talk about a "finishing shot". You just keep shooting randomly until the criminal dies, and then you testify that they were a threat. Then everyone's a winner.

I understand the legal argument against what this guy did. If I'm on the jury, I'd let him walk or I'd negotiate with the other jurors to give him a littering ticket or a citation for improper disposal of human remains. I have no sympathy for criminals. If you break into a house, there's a chance that you're going to encounter a guy like this, and criminals should bear that risk. As far as I can tell, this guy was no threat to anyone who wasn't invading his home.

If I'm on the jury, I recognize the fear that she'll get sent to the hospital, heal up at taxpayer expense (that last part was just an insult), and then come back with a gun to get revenge on the death of her pimp or whatever (that was also an insult - I don't like criminals). She's a repeat criminal who was an imminent and long-term threat to his safety.

I understand your logic and suspect that you're legally right. However, I think the jury does the right thing on this one as long as the defense attorneys cut this guy's hair and put a suit on him.

No. You cannot argue that. Not without sounding like an idiot.

And you are misinterpreting the definition if you think that behaving irrationally is an acceptable defense for murdering someone.

If you are trolling, well done. You got me. If not, :shake:

He's not saying the guy is innocent of murder, he's arguing the difference between man slaughter and murder 1.
Personally I disagree, moving the incapacitated intruders around to “finish them off” seems a pretty clear indication of premeditation to me. I'm just not going to get worked up over it and will wait to see what the jury decides.

If he really believed that was going to happen, that still wouldn't put him in imminent danger.

I really don't think that was his thought process, though. I believe he decided to take matter into his own hands and make sure these teens never broke into his house ever again.

I guess I missed where he mentioned anything about manslaughter. I still think his argument against murder is ridiculous. There are way better arguments that one could make, but his are silly and ill-conceived.

I agree with your take on it.

Minnesota law allows deadly force to prevent a felony, so that defense might work

I don't know if that was his thought process or not, but as a jury member looking at the defense table, that would be my assumption until proven otherwise. Of course, this guy seems to have watched too many Charles Bronson movies so he'll likely kill that defense himself.

I would rather set ten guilty criminal-killing homeowners free than imprison one innocent one. I just wish this guy was less crazy.

If this guy's attorney has even half a brain, the defendant won't take the stand. From what's been published, the prosecution would destroy this guy on cross.

It would work for the first shot. Not the finisher.

These 'kids' were trash - thieves - the old man should be given a medal.

Yeah. The defendant would be better off going to court in a straight jacket on one of those Hannibal Lector dollies with the mask over his mouth than testifying.

So since they were burglar's they deserved to be killed? He could have fired a warning shot and that might have scared them enough....or if they would have served some time....There are thousands of cases where people have turned their lives around after being idiots young in life.

I'm not opposed to protecting ones property or own life, but to the extent he took it, I think he went a little overboard.

LITTLE FALLS, Minn. - The jury in the Byron Smith murder trial heard a graphic audiotape Tuesday morning that captured the fatal shootings of two teenage cousins.

The families of 17-year-old Nick Brady and 18-year-old Haile Kifer sobbed as the courtroom heard the events of the fatal day in November of 2012 unfold. KARE 11's Jana Shortal is in the courtroom for Smith's trial and provided this account of what she heard on the tape.

The sound of breaking glass was followed by footsteps coming down a set of stairs, an intruder that investigators say was Brady. Two gunshots are fired, followed by groans from Brady who has been seriously wounded. One more shot is fired after which Smith is heard saying, "You're dead."

The tape continues with sounds of heavy breathing and what appears to be someone dragging something. After approximately 11 minutes there is the sound of Smith reloading his weapon. A female voice belonging to Kifer softly calls "Nick?" down the stairs. A shot is fired followed immediately by the sound of someone falling down the stairs. Smith is heard saying "Sorry about that," then Kifer screams. She says "Oh my God, I'm sorry," then three or four more gunshots are fired. Smith mutters, "B****," and then the tape captures the sounds of what is most likely the defendant dragging Kifer's body. Then there is a final gunshot.

Smith's defense team maintains that the shooting of the two teens was self-defense, and that he was terrified after a series of break-ins at his home. Prosecutors say he went too far, firing repeatedly after the threat to his safety had been removed.

He probably should have destroyed that recording.

Yeah, a teensy, weensy bit. Just a smidge.

That makes my stomach turn. Sad all around.

go back and read my posts again. I said I thought it would get pleaded down to manslaughter in one post and I never said I didn't agree with that. Then post 359 backs this up.

I've said he should go to jail, I also said this whole case is very sad and unfortunate. I also clearly said from the beginning I don't think he should be CHARGED with premeditated murder.

I think you are the one trolling. Anyone who can read knows what I've been saying.

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.

The killings stunned Little Falls, a central Minnesota community of 8,000, and stirred debate about how far people can go to defend their homes. Under Minnesota law, a person may use deadly force to prevent a felony from taking place in one's home or dwelling.

Jurors viewed autopsy photos Thursday that showed the teens' injuries, as Smith sat still and stared at the photos projected on a screen. Dr. Kelly Mills, with the Ramsey County medical examiner's office, testified that Brady was shot three times, and Kifer had six gunshot wounds.

Mills said the final shot to Brady, which went through his right hand and into his right temple, was the "most immediately fatal." She described it as a close-range shot, fired from between 6 inches and 3 feet away, that went through his skull and into his brain.

Brady was also shot in the abdomen and in the back of his left shoulder as he descended the stairs into Smith's basement. Mills testified these first two gunshots caused serious internal injuries that would have been fatal had enough time passed but would not have been incapacitating.

Mills testified that Kifer had six gunshot wounds, including two to the head at close range. She said the shot that killed Kifer, the fifth fired by Smith, was a close-range shot behind her left ear, striking her brainstem.

"This is a fatal shot," Mills testified. According to the criminal complaint, Smith fired another shot after that, under Kifer's chin, which he called a "finishing shot."

On cross-examination, defense attorney Steven Meshbesher pointed out that before the fatal shots, both Kifer and Brady would have been able to move and could have been perceived as threats. He said Brady could have grabbed a weapon if he had one. Both teens were unarmed.

Mills testified that Brady testified negative for alcohol and drugs. But Kifer had an ingredient from cough medicine in her system at a level that would have made her intoxicated. Mills said the drug, dextromethorphan, can cause hallucinations, disassociation and an out-of-body experience.

Kifer's toxicology tests also showed the presence of a marijuana metabolite that Mills says had no hallucinogenic effects, Mills testified.

Prosecutors rested their case Thursday, and defense attorneys called their first witness, Morrison County Sheriff's Deputy Jamie Luberts. Meshbesher questioned Luberts about recent burglaries on Smith's properties.

Meshbesher said his client wrote a memo to sheriff's officials on Oct. 29, asking authorities to investigate recent burglaries at his house and at an adjacent property he owns. Meshbesher raised questions about how authorities conducted the investigation and a lack of movement on Smith's request.

He recorded it?


Fry this **** already. JFC

KARE 11

LITTLE FALLS, Minn. - A medical examiner says an 18-year-old woman was intoxicated on cough syrup when she and her cousin were fatally shot after breaking into a Minnesota man's home.

Dr. Kelly Mills with the Ramsey County Medical Examiner's Office testified Thursday at the murder trial of 65-year-old Byron Smith. Smith is charged with first-degree premeditated murder in the deaths of 18-year-old Haile (HAY'-lee) Kifer and 17-year-old Nick Brady on Thanksgiving Day 2012.

Under cross-examination by the defense, Mills said Kifer had an ingredient from cough medicine in her system at a level that would make her intoxicated. Mills said the drug can cause hallucinations, disassociation and an out-of-body experience.

Mills says Brady had no drugs or alcohol in his system.

Smith claims self-defense after several break-ins at his home.

Kifer and Brady were shot a total of nine times, with some shots coming from close range.

Smith claims he was defending himself and feared for his life after several break-ins at his home.

Under Minnesota law, a person may use deadly force to prevent a felony from taking place in one's home or dwelling, but authorities have said Smith crossed a line when he continued to shoot the teens after they were no longer a threat. Prosecutors also say Smith planned the killings. They say he sat in a chair in his basement and waited for the teens to enter his home, instead of calling police.

Dr. Kelly Mills with the Ramsey County Medical Examiner's Office testified that Brady was shot three times, Kifer six times. The final shot to Brady, which went through his hand and into his right temple, was the "most immediate fatal," Mills said. She described it as a close-range shot.

Kifer also was shot in the head at close range, Mills testified. She said the shot that killed Kifer, the fifth fired by Smith, was a close-range shot behind her left ear.

Mills also said Brady tested negative for drugs and alcohol. Kifer's toxicology tests showed the presence of a substance in cough medicine, as well as a marijuana metabolite that Mills says had no hallucinogenic effects. The question of possible drug use became an issue after the killings as Smith's friends claimed the teens were high on drugs, and authorities said a car linked to Brady and Kifer contained prescription drugs that had been stolen from another house. However, the drugs won't be allowed as evidence in court.

Defense attorneys were expected to cross-examine Mills on Thursday afternoon.

The killings stunned Little Falls, a central Minnesota community of 8,000, and stirred debate about how far people can go to defend their homes.

Earlier this week, prosecutors played for jurors an audio recording Smith made of the shootings. The tape was presented to jurors as a sequence of events, but defense attorneys raised questions about the recording on cross-examination, noting it had been spliced and altered, and some key pieces of information were left out.

In that picture she does have the face of a hard core drug user.

Both sides screwed up. It will depend on what kind of jurors were chosen.

Like I said. Criminals killing criminals. If he does not have family, leave him in prison. The guy snapped from all the break ins and took it out on the young robbers to get over his anger. I would say multiple manslaughter charges, but I do not see him getting out if a psych tests him. If the recordings are accurate, his reality is too altered to let him out. Especially since he will become a target by the young criminals friends for revenge if he gets out and now it would be illegal for him to have a firearm.

Any backstory on why those kids chose that place? Broke in before? Friends robbed it before?

And has crime of burglaries/break ins dropped since this incident?

The gun jamming / switching guns technically is more than enough passage of time to fulfill the standard for premeditated in majority of jurisdictions.

Hanging Murder 2 on him is simply want to lock in a probable guilty verdict - and technically based on the circumstantial they're overcharging him in the event a plea is reached.

This way if it gets plead down it will be to what the DA was satisfied with from the moment the file hit his desk.
Voluntary Manslaughter - 2 counts, and given his age to run concurrently instead of consecutively. Possible parole if squeaky clean inside in 10 years- if he's still alive.

Reading the updates and MN law.

Dude's touched in the head.

Most states have equal force self defense. Basically just because someone punches you doesn't give you the right to use deadly force unless your state of mind and the facts show you were in mortal danger. Also why stand your ground is about as logical as getting a kick out of watching 2 monkeys tossing shit at each other and thinking the best place to watch it is between the two of them.

Minnesota law really shields him - breaking in under cover of night steps it up to a felony : Burglary.

There's plenty of charges on the books to get him locked up for the remainder of his years. The additional excess force and failure to notify, etc... etc...

In the limited info I've seen presented, black and white of it is no murder charges should have been filed - like I said plenty to charge him with otherwise- except community and media reaction trumps this happening.

Clearly the guy is a twisted sick ****, but if this was 100 years ago would anyone bat an eye or give it much talk after the initial few weeks...

Some of the lawyers in TV said the dude has a 50/50 shot of getting off.

He probably deserves some time but in a way I hope he gets off scott free. A clear message needs to be sent to all home invaders, you invade someones home, you might get killed. Home invasions happen all too often and many of them are terrifying and fatal to innocent victims. Also the punishment for Home Invaders needs to be harsher when they do get caught. Many times it seems they get let out of prison way too soon and are out doing it again. Had the police, prosecution and justice system done its job properly on the first break ins these thugs committed this would not have happened.

It's Okay to execute a person now?


A Wichita business owner got murder for executing an armed invader in his store. The media is just trying to drum up emotion. He isn't going to walk.