aburtang
…wikipedia.org/…/Murders_of_Haile_Kifer_and_Nicho…
TLDR: man lures teens into his home by leaving his house wide open so he could shoot and kill them.
The absolute sicko made audio recordings where he floated about killing them.
WeirdGoesProThis 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.
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.
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?
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.
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”.
If you’re arguing that both the murderer and murder victims “suck” maybe you need to rethink your priorities…
I’m not saying one is worse than the other, rather that both fucked around and found out.
Well that’s strange because one is a convicted murderer.
And the others probably would have been convicted of burglary if they lived, what’s your point?
Absolutely. If you think unarmed burglary and premeditated murder are the same morally and legally I cannot agree.
Never said that. You are taking everything I say and twisting it.
The man is a murderer, the intruders are burglars, everyone sucks here. That is the only point I have ever made in this thread.
lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/15490737
I’m not saying one is worse than the other, rather that both fucked around and found out.
Except it isn’t, you keep saying he had the right for the first few shots the jury found he did not.
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.
I find this kind of “appeal to the system when it agrees with me” strange
What do you mean, by any system one is a murderer one is a burglar what’s not to agree with?