Little Falls man man who shot, killed...

Little Falls man man who shot, killed teens heads to trial

There are 47 comments on the TwinCities story from Apr 13, 2014, titled Little Falls man man who shot, killed teens heads to trial. In it, TwinCities reports that:

After a central Minnesota man repeatedly shot a teen who entered his home, he dragged the boy's bloodied body into a basement workshop, authorities say, sat down -- and waited.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Tru Dat

Minneapolis, MN

#1 Apr 14, 2014
What the hell is wrong with the Little Falls prosecutor? How could this be first degree murder, did he lure the criminals into his house with bread crumbs? And if you eliminate the statement he made to police w/o a lawyer, you have nothing but self-defense.

“A Frog's Worst Nightmare”

Since: Oct 13

West Monroe, La

#2 Apr 14, 2014
Where's the NRA when you need them? They should be supporting this guy!

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#3 Apr 14, 2014
Wonder how hiding in the basement, waiting for the next home invader, is categorized as first degree murder? Is the prosecutor up for re-election? While one shot probably would have been enough, it would seem that those kids had no business being in that home.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#4 Apr 14, 2014
Burn Babe Burn!
Wade Gustafson

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Apr 16, 2014
Tru Dat wrote:
What the hell is wrong with the Little Falls prosecutor? How could this be first degree murder, did he lure the criminals into his house with bread crumbs? And if you eliminate the statement he made to police w/o a lawyer, you have nothing but self-defense.

If this guy had shot the first intruder to come down the stairs, rendered aid, and called 911 immediately, he would not now be on trial for first degree murder.

It was the coup de grāce aspect of this case that raises the bar to first degree murder.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#6 Apr 16, 2014
The shooter is a retired Federal Government employee. He reminds me of Harry Ried, a control freak who thinks only he knows best.

Anyone of reasonable IQ would know he stepped WAY OVER the line when he did the shooting.

To finish off the intruders is really sick. Add in the kids didn't have weapons or threaten him.

As the prosecuter said: "he would accept a jury made up of NRA members to hear the case".

He WILL BE FOUND GUILTY!

BTW, I'm a firearms owner.
Tru Dat

Minneapolis, MN

#7 Apr 17, 2014
Wade Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
If this guy had shot the first intruder to come down the stairs, rendered aid, and called 911 immediately, he would not now be on trial for first degree murder.
It was the coup de grāce aspect of this case that raises the bar to first degree murder.
This was the third time these fine young criminals broke into this elderly gentleman's house. They stole drugs and guns. Not a good mix. But, while the jury will hear his original statement to police, w/o a lawyer, they will not hear about the dead kid's priors. You have no obligation to render aid to criminals who may want to harm you or your property.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#8 Apr 17, 2014
Tru Dat wrote:
<quoted text>
This was the third time these fine young criminals broke into this elderly gentleman's house. They stole drugs and guns. Not a good mix. But, while the jury will hear his original statement to police, w/o a lawyer, they will not hear about the dead kid's priors. You have no obligation to render aid to criminals who may want to harm you or your property.
Not true, you cannot harm someone for a crime against property.

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#9 Apr 17, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true, you cannot harm someone for a crime against property.
But you can harm someone who is in your home without permission. Especially if you feel they are a threat to your life or others lives.
Breaking in to other peoples homes and then getting shot to death is natures way of weeding out the stupid.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Apr 17, 2014
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
But you can harm someone who is in your home without permission. Especially if you feel they are a threat to your life or others lives.
Breaking in to other peoples homes and then getting shot to death is natures way of weeding out the stupid.
Reminds me of a farmer who had repeated breakins at one of his houses. He set a booby trap with a shotgun and injured or killed an intruder. The farmer went to prison.

Would you feel comfortable after killing someone who broke into your house and was unarmed and never made a threat?

The kids were there for property and didn't threaten anyone, the shooter just plugged them after laying in ambush. And then finishing one of them off. At the minimum he is one sick SOB. At the max he's guilty of murder 1, the jury will sort it out.

Send him to the big house for 30-life.
Yuletide

Seattle, WA

#11 Apr 24, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Reminds me of a farmer who had repeated breakins at one of his houses. He set a booby trap with a shotgun and injured or killed an intruder. The farmer went to prison.
Would you feel comfortable after killing someone who broke into your house and was unarmed and never made a threat?
The kids were there for property and didn't threaten anyone, the shooter just plugged them after laying in ambush. And then finishing one of them off. At the minimum he is one sick SOB. At the max he's guilty of murder 1, the jury will sort it out.
Send him to the big house for 30-life.
Breaking into someones home, in and by itself, is a threat.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#12 Apr 24, 2014
Yuletide wrote:
<quoted text>
Breaking into someones home, in and by itself, is a threat.
Only if the house is occupied.

These kids didn't know it was occupied so it was entering an empty house as far as they were concerned. The woman was stupid when entering the house after hearing gunshots.

The shooter was wrong, IMHO.
Yuletide

Seattle, WA

#13 Apr 24, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if the house is occupied.
These kids didn't know it was occupied so it was entering an empty house as far as they were concerned. The woman was stupid when entering the house after hearing gunshots.
The shooter was wrong, IMHO.
Ralph, If someone breaks into my home when I'm not there, I feel threatened. That means they have been watching my movement, monitoring when I'm home, when I'm not. It makes me feel violated and vulnerable.

The kids didn't think he was home and were there to help themselves to more of his belongings. He has no obligation to make his home look like he is or isn't there so that the little felons can have their way with his property.

Todays testimony also suggests that Mr. Smith had received a written death threat.

I don't think the girl entered the home after hearing gunshots. I think she was outside as a lookout and when Nick didn't appear for ten minutes she went looking for him.

Medical Examiner testimony indicated today that the first shot Nick received was fatal. The second shot Haile received was fatal.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#14 Apr 24, 2014
Yuletide wrote:
<quoted text>
Ralph, If someone breaks into my home when I'm not there, I feel threatened. That means they have been watching my movement, monitoring when I'm home, when I'm not. It makes me feel violated and vulnerable.
The kids didn't think he was home and were there to help themselves to more of his belongings. He has no obligation to make his home look like he is or isn't there so that the little felons can have their way with his property.
Todays testimony also suggests that Mr. Smith had received a written death threat.
I don't think the girl entered the home after hearing gunshots. I think she was outside as a lookout and when Nick didn't appear for ten minutes she went looking for him.
Medical Examiner testimony indicated today that the first shot Nick received was fatal. The second shot Haile received was fatal.
The law does not allow the defense of property with lethal means. You can't legally kill OR injure someone for stealing or damaging your property. When the intruders died, how many times he had been burglerized, a death threat, all that makes no difference. The kids were unarmed and didn't threaten him, he ambushed the kids and killed them without even calling 911 for law enforcement to help out. Did he have firearms training on when you can and can't shoot a human?

Just my opinion but it sure seems like he stepped in it and will be guilty of something.
or maybe

Minneapolis, MN

#15 Apr 24, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if the house is occupied.
These kids didn't know it was occupied so it was entering an empty house as far as they were concerned. The woman was stupid when entering the house after hearing gunshots.
The shooter was wrong, IMHO.
Hogwash. Don't break into someone's home, you won't get shot and killed. It's that simple.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Apr 24, 2014
or maybe wrote:
<quoted text>
Hogwash. Don't break into someone's home, you won't get shot and killed. It's that simple.
True but when ya get to court it's NOT simple. The gun control freaks have made usage of a firearm for any reason so complex if you use a firearm you 1st go to jail then post bail then attempt to justify your actions. The proverbial cards are stacked against firearms users. The law is very complex with so many loopholes it's very difficult to escape conviction.

“A Frog's Worst Nightmare”

Since: Oct 13

West Monroe, La

#17 Apr 25, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if the house is occupied.
These kids didn't know it was occupied so it was entering an empty house as far as they were concerned. The woman was stupid when entering the house after hearing gunshots.
The shooter was wrong, IMHO.
So you're a mind reader now? You don't know what these kids were thinking, and the girl wasn't only stupid, she was on drugs.

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#18 Apr 25, 2014
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you feel comfortable after killing someone who broke into your house and was unarmed and never made a threat?
I don't know how I'd feel after killing someone since I've never done that before. But it is not my responsibility to know what is in the mind of someone who has broken in to my home. As far as I'm concerned, if they broke in to my home they are assumed to be armed and their intent is to do bad. That alone justifies a shooting.
Ralph

Minneapolis, MN

#19 Apr 25, 2014
Being on drugs is not justification for killing someone, even if they are in your house.

A co-worker shot an intruder in his house and in retrospect he said he wouldn't do it again. You don't forget an event like that, living with it forever. Unless someone is poised to hurt me or others I'd pobably call 911 and wait for Gobermunt. This case doesn't pass a smell test, shooting unarmed people, not calling 911 after first shooting, "finishing off" the intruders, having no remorse.

The shooter is nothing but another Hary Reid, retired Fed employee who thinks he is king.
Wade Gustafson

Saint Paul, MN

#20 Apr 25, 2014
Ralph wrote:
Being on drugs is not justification for killing someone, even if they are in your house.
A co-worker shot an intruder in his house and in retrospect he said he wouldn't do it again. You don't forget an event like that, living with it forever. Unless someone is poised to hurt me or others I'd pobably call 911 and wait for Gobermunt. This case doesn't pass a smell test, shooting unarmed people, not calling 911 after first shooting, "finishing off" the intruders, having no remorse.
The shooter is nothing but another Hary Reid, retired Fed employee who thinks he is king.
In Minnesota it is legal to use lethal force to stop a felony in progress. Smith could have legally shot each of these teens once (in the case of the male, the first shot killed him). Had he shot them only once and called 911 he would not have been charged with a crime. He is being charged with 1st degree murder because of the last shots to the head. The girl was shot under her chin with a .22 handgun to 'finish her off'. That was a premeditated act.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

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.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 2 hr litesong 34,383
As long as we're discussing flags, what about M... 4 hr cowboy chris 21
I'm Voting for Trump 5 hr Virgil Caine 14
America Ferrera Writes "Thank You" Letter to Do... 5 hr Virgil Caine 8
Be thankful on the 4th f July 7 hr Little Boy Blue 1
No m$%lims allowed at party 18 hr goat lover 2
A Very Sad Day 21 hr Little Boy Blue 14
More from around the web

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages