Kenney says he didn't lie about gun

Kenney says he didn't lie about gun

There are 10 comments on the Monterey County Herald story from Aug 30, 2008, titled Kenney says he didn't lie about gun. In it, Monterey County Herald reports that:

Murder defendant John Kenney denied Friday that he lied to numerous people about owning a gun that he later used to kill Carmel Valley neighbors Mel and Elizabeth Grimes.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Monterey County Herald.

Ray Smithson

Santa Rosa, CA

#1 Aug 30, 2008
he shot two people,,, and killed them,,, to me he's guilty as sin
Moi from Carmel Valley

Carmel Valley, CA

#2 Aug 30, 2008
If he was fearful for his life why would he ever leave his house to go down to 'rescue' a boulder? It also seems Mr. Kenney doesn't read what he signs - he didn't read that he had to disclose whether or not he had firearms and he didn't read the disclosure about the property in dispute being public. I would think that the purchase of a home is one of the largest purchases one ever makes - wouldn't it make sense to read the fine print? Or maybe the not-so-fine print?
NOTSOFAST

United States

#3 Aug 30, 2008
The Grimses illegally made a driveway and rode over his property, not public property.
Seems people in Monterey County will not listen to the facts and are willing to lynch this man on public opinion alone.
Kenney cannot get a fair trial in Monterey County.
We have no system of justice folks, with people jumping to conclusions and refusing to listen to the facts and weigh them and apply them to the law of self defense.
He was struck in the back of the head again by this stout woman and a man came at him with a sledge hammer. He hit the man with the butt of the gun and the man came at him again.
Does anybody get it?
He's an old man out there alone with 2 people attacking him.
JavaJunkie

Fort Wayne, IN

#4 Aug 30, 2008
They legally had an easement and he knew it. As for the "stout woman" she didn't even weigh 120 lbs. He shouldn't have left his house if he was so afraid. He should have called 911.

He set a trap. He escalated this situation and the final result was he murdered two people.
Thoughtful

Albuquerque, NM

#5 Aug 30, 2008
Placing the boulder in their way was an act of aggression. Trying to break it up with a sledgehammer was also an act of aggression. All three were involved in a dance, allowing themselves to feed off each others drama. None of them took a step back. But the Grimes knew they had a legal right to cross the land, he was a lawyer, after all, and Kenney has a reputation now of signing documents without reading them and assuming rights that are not there. So he was in the wrong for starting the dispute. But only one of them fired a gun. Was there any evidence of Kenney on the sledgehammer? Even so, using the sledgehammer as a battering ram is assualt. If Grimes had raised the sledgehammer over his head, that would seem to me like attempted murder, but that's not what happened. It seems to me that this is voluntary manslaughter. The Grimes could have ignored the boulder, driven around it, and not said a word to him. But he got the sledge hammer out to prove a point. Grimes could have waited till monday and hired someone to move the boulder and place it in his garden as an attractive feature, for example. But the Grimes choose to ramp up the drama. I believe Kenney was lying in wait, though, and that is what makes it murder.
Thoughtful

Albuquerque, NM

#6 Aug 30, 2008
Oops. I meant to say, "move the boulder and place it in Kenney's garden as an attractive feature,"
I did not mean the Grimes should steal the boulder. Only that they should return Kenney's property to Kenney's property.
izzle

Annapolis, MD

#7 Aug 30, 2008
Seems more like manslaughter than murder
Moi from Carmel Valley

New Cuyama, CA

#8 Aug 30, 2008
NotSoFast - first of all, the Grimes bought their house 2 years before Mr. Kenney bought his house - so they'd been using that piece of property before Mr. Kenney moved in. Secondly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the fact that we don't listen to facts and that we're jumping to conclusions. The piece of property in question was - according to a news report on August 11, 2008 - a public easement: "SALINAS, Calif.-- New evidence in the trial of a Carmel Valley man accused of killing his neighbors over a property dispute shows that the land was a public easement and not owned by either party.

Kenney might have known that the land was part of a public easement at the time of the shooting because insurance documents signed in 1999 indicated the area was not his property, prosecutors said."

Mr. Kenney cannot be lynched since we no longer lynch. Regardless, the heaviest sentence Mr. Kenney could receive is life in prison.

Where is there any evidence that Mel Grimes hit Mr. Kenney? Elizabeth Grimes was definitely not a stout women. She was barely 5' tall. She had not hit him on the back of the head. Where is that evidence?

He may be "an old man out there alone" but his testimony continuously alludes to his fear of the Grimes. If YOU feared someone, would you approach them knowing that one of the them had a sledge hammer in their hands? I'll bet you wouldn't. In my opinion, that's why his 'fear' defense doesn't hold up.

Now you may be correct that he may not receive a totally fair trial here, but if he's convicted perhaps the trial can be moved on appeal.
WTF

Monterey, CA

#9 Aug 30, 2008
Well, if prosecutors say it was a "public easement" [for a couple of feet of dirt in a private area of CV?], then that "must" be the case. And how sinister to lay a trap by asking the sheriff to send someone to be there when you place the boulder so you can lay in wait. What incredible forethought to know the deputies wouldn't come up the driveway.
Frelnc

Madison, WI

#10 Aug 2, 2010
NOT illegal. They had an easement that made it perfectly legal for them to cross that narrow little band of property.That was a highly explosive discovery during the trial. The Grimes' knew of the easement. SO DID KENNEY. He just didn't want to abide by it.
NOTSOFAST wrote:
The Grimses illegally made a driveway and rode over his property, not public property.
Seems people in Monterey County will not listen to the facts and are willing to lynch this man on public opinion alone.
Kenney cannot get a fair trial in Monterey County.
We have no system of justice folks, with people jumping to conclusions and refusing to listen to the facts and weigh them and apply them to the law of self defense.
He was struck in the back of the head again by this stout woman and a man came at him with a sledge hammer. He hit the man with the butt of the gun and the man came at him again.
Does anybody get it?
He's an old man out there alone with 2 people attacking him.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Carmel Valley Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Firms say store draws prostitution (Aug '06) Sat Drumputzer 18
Genetic conflict eminent for the U.S. Oct 20 genetic conflict 1
Is dr Carl Bergstrom out of prison Oct 11 Sharon 2
Lost Blue Beach Bag at Carmel beach by 13th Ave Oct 9 mirandajeanbean 1
News Body found in Carmel Valley (Dec '08) Sep '17 linda burleson 6
News Ask the Auto Doctor (Mar '06) Sep '17 Tberruiser 1,555
Lost wedding ring on Carmel beach Sep '17 Rey 1

Carmel Valley Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Carmel Valley Mortgages