Minn. man says he 'fired more shots than I needed'

[Mr. Clean]

LITTLE FALLS, Minn. (AP) — A Minnesota man charged with murder in the shootings of two teenagers he said broke into his home told investigators he was angered by one of the wounded teens who mocked him when his rifle jammed but that he fired more shots than necessary.

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

Smith was charged with two counts of second-degree murder in the deaths of Haile Kifer, 18, and her cousin, Nicholas Schaeffel, 17, both of Little Falls. The teens were shot on Thanksgiving Day, but their deaths weren't reported until Friday.

In the complaint, Smith said he was in the basement of his remote home about 10 miles southwest of Little Falls when he heard a window breaking upstairs, followed by footsteps that eventually approached the basement stairwell. Fearful after several break-ins, according to the complaint, Smith said he fired when Schaeffel came into view from the waist down.

After the teen fell down the stairs, Smith said he shot him in the face as he lay on the floor.
"I want him dead," the complaint quoted Smith telling an investigator.

Smith said he dragged Schaeffel's body into his basement workshop, then sat back down on his chair, and after a few minutes Kifer began coming down the stairs. He said he shot her as soon as her hips appeared, and she fell down the steps.

Smith said he tried to shoot her again with his Mini 14 rifle, but that the gun jammed and Kifer laughed at him.

"Smith stated that it was not a very long laugh because she was already hurting," according to the complaint.

Smith said he then shot Kifer in the chest several times with a .22-caliber revolver, dragged her next to Schaeffel, and with her still gasping 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, but also that he acknowledged he had fired "more shots than (he) needed to."
The following day he asked a neighbor to recommend a good lawyer, according to the complaint. He later asked his neighbor to call the police.

A prosecutor called Smith's reaction "appalling."

"Mr. Smith intentionally killed two teenagers in his home in a matter that goes well beyond self-defense," Morrison County Attorney Brian Middendorf said after Smith appeared at Morrison County District Court on Monday morning. Bail was set at $2 million.

Defense attorney Gregory Larson declined comment.

Minnesota law allows a homeowner to use deadly force on an intruder if a reasonable person would fear they're in danger of harm. Smith told investigators he was afraid the intruders might have a weapon.

Smith's actions "sound like an execution" rather than legitimate self-defense, said David Pecchia, executive director of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association.

Pecchia said his statements to investigators suggest he had eliminated any threat to his safety by wounding the cousins.

Smith's brother, Bruce Smith, told the Star Tribune of Minneapolis that the incident was the eighth burglary at Byron Smith's home in recent years.

The only report the Morrison County sheriff's office has for a break-in at the home was for one on Oct. 27. It shows Byron Smith reported losing cash and gold coins worth $9,200, plus two guns worth $200 each, photo equipment worth over $3,000 and a ring worth $300.


Little Falls is about 100 miles northwest of Minneapolis.

Schaeffel's sister, Crystal Schaeffel, told the Star Tribune that Kifer had broken into her home before. Little Falls police records show Crystal Schaeffel reported a theft Aug. 28, but the department said the report was not public because that investigation was continuing and because it named juveniles.

Bruce Smith declined to talk to an Associated Press reporter Monday outside his brother's home in a secluded area north of Little Falls and near the Mississippi River. A makeshift barricade blocked the driveway and a board leaning against it bore the spray-painted words "Keep Out."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/26/minnesota-murder-haile-kifer-nicholas-schaeffel-cousins/1727455/


The guy sounds like a psychopath to me anyways but damn.....kill intruders and then wait a day to report the incident? Maybe he has got some sort of dementia. :duh:

[Neil]

Messy case!

[LouCipherr]

Wow. Just... wow. I mean, I'm all for defending yourself and your property, but I think this dude took it just a bit too far.

[Purge]

I personally would've at least called the authorities right afterward. Aside from that, if you break into someone's home, you get what you get.

[AcesandEights]

Sounds like one serious sociopath Rooster Cogburn m*utherf*cker.


I personally would've at least called the authorities right afterward. Aside from that, if you break into someone's home, you get what you get.

I agree, though the coup de grace was over the top and definitely grounds for charges.

[LouCipherr]

So I was reading this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2238705/Familys-outrage-star-students-murdered-mans-basement-claims-robbed-home-Thanksgiving.html

...and I was astonished by the stupidity of this statement in the article:

"While Minnesota law stipulates people are allowed to use deadly force when defending their homes, relatives, friends, police and prosecutors claimed Smith reacted too drastically by killing them."

:rockbrow:

Am I the only one who sees the contradiction in the above statement? You can use DEADLY FORCE when defending your home in Minnesota, but everyone says this guy overreacted by "killing them" - isn't that the exact definition of DEADLY FORCE?! :rolleyes:

Doesn't change the fact that if he had already immobilized them, there was zero reason to kill them. Shoot 'em in the kneecaps, then call the cops. Pretty simple. This dude just took it one step further when it didn't need to be. If you've already stopped the subject in their tracks, you deserve to be charged if you walk up and put a bullet in their heads when they are no longer a threat.

This guy is an idiot.

[shootemindehead]

I think what the article is trying to say, Lou, is that deadly force can be used, but killing with intent is a cause to draw the line.

In other words Smith already used "deadly force" when he shot the girl in the abdomen first. But, he "killed" her by then put more rounds into her chest and one through her head.

[Cykotic]

I fully agree that a person has the right to defend their home using whatever means necessary, but that guy sounded just a little unbalanced... actually, a lot unbalanced.

[Mr. Clean]

In military and law enforcement....Deadly Force is "That force which a person uses with the purpose of causing or which he or she knows or should know creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm."

Now with that said....If someone is a threat and you shoot them in the chest and they fall to the floor incapacitated. They are no longer a threat at that point. Deadly Force does not authorize executions to make sure they are dead. Just because someone is still breathing....doesn't mean they are still a threat....Make Sense?

There was a case a while ago about 2 teenage thugs attempting to rob a pharmacy. The pharmacist behind the counter pulled out a gun and shot one of the kids then chased the other kid out the door. The pharmacist came back inside and plugged the kid on the floor 5 more times. The pharmacist now has a life prison sentence or so last I seen. It is arguable that emotional and situtational stress made the man succumb to poor judgement or cloud his thought process but he was wrong for performing the execution on the incapacitated dirtbag. I personally think it's great that he did the tax payers a favor but do see the wrong in it.

With this Minnesota guy....He performed 2 executions and then waited a day to report to police.....He is a shoe in for a life prison sentence if the prosecution attorney doesn't foul up the case like Florida did with Casey Anthony....I really don't see any possible way they can. His best chance at washing his hands of this was to get rid of the bodies and bleach the shit out of everything not to mention "accidently" burn down his house but that train already left.

[LouCipherr]

I think what the article is trying to say, Lou, is that deadly force can be used, but killing with intent is a cause to draw the line.

In other words Smith already used "deadly force" when he shot the girl in the abdomen first. But, he "killed" her by then put more rounds into her chest and one through her head.

Oh, I know what they 'meant' by it, but the way they worded it made me wonder if they even re-read what they typed. :D

[shootemindehead]

Aye, it looks a bit odd alright.

[LouCipherr]

Aye, it looks a bit odd alright.

:D

I have a habit of over nit-picking printed stuff and things of that nature. It doesn't help I'm in the Quality Assurance field as my career. It tends to make me over-analyze things I shouldn't, but when something gets that ingrained into you brain, it's sorta hard to shut it off. :lol:

[AcesandEights]

:D

I have a habit of over nit-picking

Oh, we're well aware! :lol: :p




Teasing someone for being nitpicky other than Shootem in a thread Shootem posts in...

Priceless!

[LouCipherr]

Oh, we're well aware! :lol: :p

*hangs head in shame*

See? I shame myself all the time (and not just by watching shitty movies!). :lol: :p

[krakenslayer]

Don't expect quality in any way, shape or form from the British Daily Mail (or Daily Express or Daily Telegraph). It (they) is (are) a reactionary populist/sheltered-upper-middle-class arse rag(s).

Anyway, what that guy did was cold-blooded murder. Simple as that. Every one of his actions reads like it's always been his greatest wish to kill someone (sans consequences) for a long time, and when those people broke into his house he thought his dream had come true. Either that or he's completely senile and has no grasp of what "self-defense" actually means.

And I'm not just talking about the head-shots. Shooting a girl in the gut without so much as a warning, before she has even seen you, is a cowardly act too, IMO, on a par with shooting a man in the back. If your life is in direct and immediate danger and it's a you-or-them situation, of course you have every right to take whatever steps might be necessary to ensure your survival, and if you break into someone's home with the intention of harming the inhabitants, you are deliberately and knowingly placing yourself in danger. In a life-or-death situation, the life of the innocent party completely outweighs the value of the perpetrator's life, I completely agree. BUT you should at least have SOME reason to believe it IS a life-or-death situation first. A quick "freeze or I'll kill you" should clear up any doubt. Of course, you have to make some allowances for frightened old timers in the fear of the moment, but that doesn't seem to be the case here at all.

People always say "OHHH ARNUDDER SCUMBAG LESS IN THI' WURLD, HURRDURRDURRR" in regards to these situations, and while there is an element of truth in that, I know plenty of people who shitty, often criminal things, in their younger days who have gone on to become successful, contributing members of society. Everyone deserves once chance, I reckon, even if it's only "you have three seconds before I take your face off".

Your home is your castle, and all that, but it's not a private hunting reserve where you can just automatically murder everything that steps over the threshold, invited or not. Regardless of what the law might or might not say.

[shootemindehead]

:D

I have a habit of over nit-picking printed stuff and things of that nature. It doesn't help I'm in the Quality Assurance field as my career. It tends to make me over-analyze things I shouldn't, but when something gets that ingrained into you brain, it's sorta hard to shut it off. :lol:

I did some QA myself in the past, so I get the pedantic side. :shifty: :p

But print is a dead medium, it very rarely conveys with complete success.

- - - Updated - - -


Oh, we're well aware! :lol: :p




Teasing someone for being nitpicky other than Shootem in a thread Shootem posts in...

Priceless!


Your name vill also go on ze list...vot is it?

http://www.simondunn.me.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/pike.jpg

[MoonSylver]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4f/Egon_GB1.jpg/250px-Egon_GB1.jpg


print is dead

I knew it. :lol:

[Mr. Clean]

Your home is your castle, and all that, but it's not a private hunting reserve where you can just automatically murder everything that steps over the threshold, invited or not. Regardless of what the law might or might not say.

I mostly agree with what your saying. The part I disagree with is having to give the "Freeze, your move creep!" if the intruder has a weapon weither the purpose of a weapon is to cause harm to the inhabitants of the property or to even out the odds against a gun-toting home owner.

If someone breaks into my house and I spot them before they spot me plus I see a weapon in hand (knife or gun)....the only thing the guy/gal is gonna hear is the sonic boom from the bullet leaving the chamber of my gun headed for his/her noggin.

If the person appears to be unarmed.....they might get a verbal but it's doubtful since a second intruder could be lurking around. Shouting commands and giving yourself away could play to your disadvantage and make you lose control of the situtation which in reality is all that you really want. If I thought I was able to rifle butt someone in the back of the head and then place the rifle barrel in their mouth to ensure compliance rather than shoot them......I would. If I had come to the conclusion that it was only one person, then I with challenge the intruder with a verbal command once in the best position to take control of the situtation.

The "thug to law abiding citizen" isn't really something to make me think twice about taking someone else's life. Forever removing some kid's Dad or Mom from this world however does but I can't really say to what extent. Just because someone is stealing(or worse) doesn't exactly mean they are a terrible parent. They're just not a very smart one for choosing a life of crime to support a family and yes I know....most criminals are indeed absolutely terrible parents. If not the worst....

Money problems tend to make some people take extreme measures though.

[krakenslayer]

If the person appears to be unarmed.....they might get a verbal but it's doubtful since a second intruder could be lurking around. Shouting commands and giving yourself away could play to your disadvantage and make you lose control of the situtation which in reality is all that you really want. If I thought I was able to rifle butt someone in the back of the head and then place the rifle barrel in their mouth to ensure compliance rather than shoot them......I would. If I had come to the conclusion that it was only one person, then I with challenge the intruder with a verbal command once in the best position to take control of the situtation.

Honestly, I see where you're coming from but if you'd err on the side of killing the guy because you think there may be a second intruder... don't you think, if I am a desperate gun-toting criminal robbing your house, and I see/hear you gunning down my friend, that would make me more likely to seek to harm you and/or your family (either because of anger/revenge or cornered animal syndrome), than if you had my friend's life at gunpoint ready to shoot him the second either of us stepped put of line? Of course, neither situation is gonna be easy, but it seems to me that instantly killing the one intruder you've found (out of a possible gang), neutralizes one threat whilst leaving you with an unknown number of intruders (now assailants) at unknown locations, who are now aware of your presence. Ethics and morality aside, I'd be mostly concerned about not turning my house into a enactment of the finale of Death Wish III. :lol:


The "thug to law abiding citizen" isn't really something to make me think twice about taking someone else's life. Forever removing some kid's Dad or Mom from this world however does but I can't really say to what extent. Just because someone is stealing(or worse) doesn't exactly mean they are a terrible parent. They're just not a very smart one for choosing a life of crime to support a family and yes I know....most criminals are indeed absolutely terrible parents. If not the worst....

Money problems tend to make some people take extreme measures though.

Yeah, I wasn't so much talking about killing or not killing in self defense at that point, I was talking about people who glorify or gloat in the deaths of people killed as a result of their criminal activities. Killing is sometimes neccessary, but it is always a tragedy. By that, I don't mean I expect people to actually grieve over a gangbanger gunned down by cops or a carjacker who commits suicide to escape justice, of course not. I'm not even saying they don't deserve what they get. What I mean is: everyone is someone's son, everyone was once a baby with infinite possibilities in front of them, and everyone has the potential to do something great with their lives, so when they get themselves snuffed doing something stupid, they themselves are throwing all that potential (and possibly some grey-haired old lady's love and hope) away, and that's a tragic thing; I just think we shouldn't lose sight of that. A person's death might be neccessary, it might be deserved, it might save the taxpayer thousands, it might be the best overall outcome for society, but the fact it got to that point in the first place is not something to cheer about. We should treat such cases with sombre acceptance, but not celebration, IMO. (if that makes any sense)

[shootemindehead]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4f/Egon_GB1.jpg/250px-Egon_GB1.jpg



I knew it. :lol:

Blast....I've been outed!

[rongravy]

I agree with the Cleanmeister mostly here. You don't give away your advantage with a verbal warning, even to a chick. You can't even begin to imagine WTF might be going on in someone's head, especially after hearing them breaking in. I'd rather find out after I've put a few new holes in it. My family is wayyyyyyyy more important to me than the family of dead pieces of crap who should've been teaching them right in the first place. No pity.
As far as executing them after the fact like that...
I say shoot to kill in the first place. Coming down the stairs on me like that would've caused me to unload on them until they weren't even twitching anymore.
I will agree that the guy's... "execution" was a bit off. Poor guy was too scared to turn it in, it looks like. I need to find an interview I saw from an old man who had killed intruders who were looking to rob and most likely kill him and his wife. Looked like it tore him up inside.
I'd say this guy will probably be pretty popular in the nursing home... or mental facility.
Point is, kids: stay out of other peoples' shit and you won't be pushing daisies.