Man slain in Burnsville had innocent motive in pictures, his mother says

As a boy, James Edward Koenig liked lifting weights and taking pictures of his biceps. Full Story
First Prev
of 6
Next Last
LBJ

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Jan 26, 2011
Anyone else reading between the lines of this story? Too bad about it all but there's something odd about throwing back some vodka, going into the bedroom, taking your shirt off and flexing in front of the camera for the neighbor boy. I can see how something like this could happen being a father myself.
Denny Green

Longwood, FL

#2 Jan 27, 2011
This is a murderer, plain and simple. He wanted the boy to take pictures for his facebook page, nothing more. You don't get a shotgun if someone refuses to leave, call a friend or call the police.
AMX

Saint Paul, MN

#3 Jan 27, 2011
Grand jury and eventually court will get to bottom of this. Yes, it does seem odd on one hand. But, on the other there is nothing sexual (or at least obviously suspicious) of a guy having photos taken flexing. Especially, if they are all upper body shots. If they were in boxers/underwear bottoms, or shots of the 13 year old, or shots of the 13 year and adult together --- YES!!! Otherwise, that is like calling almost all professional sports a form of pornography when players celebrate and flex. It is not sexual. I do not find it offensive when a football player flexes after a dunk or a hockey player raises their arms after a scrum.

But, we will see.
candyman

Saint Paul, MN

#4 Jan 27, 2011
it'll be 1st degree intentional homicide... the dead guys girlfriend will be charged as an accomoplice. you watch. this has jerry springer written all over it.
linokid

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Jan 27, 2011
sounds like the story is a bit contrived, I agree with the mom no reason to shoot the guy, but now you get to pay the price you poor damn fool. who's gonna watch your kid now?
green5leaf

Maple Grove, MN

#6 Jan 27, 2011
Vodka + Shotgun = oh man... oh and to boot packers and bears...ugh!
Jennifer

Minneapolis, MN

#7 Jan 27, 2011
Our country does not allow our citizens to take the law into their own hands like this. Why? Because our country believes in innocent until proven guilty. You don't get to just take matters into your own hands when you think someone has done you or someone wrong...DUH! The guy will get what the dead guy SHOULD have had - a chance to clear his name or rot in jail.
gwisahoax

Saint Paul, MN

#8 Jan 27, 2011
Jennifer wrote:
Our country does not allow our citizens to take the law into their own hands like this. Why? Because our country believes in innocent until proven guilty. You don't get to just take matters into your own hands when you think someone has done you or someone wrong...DUH! The guy will get what the dead guy SHOULD have had - a chance to clear his name or rot in jail.
Actually what you say isn't exactly the truth. You are allowed to defend yourself from home invasion. Since he actually invited the guy over and let him into the house, this is not necessarily the case in this instance.

If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and I shoot him dead, I am fully within my constitutional rights to do so.
Paul M

Minneapolis, MN

#9 Jan 27, 2011
I wish they would stop including comments from parents in these articles. For these type of criminal stories, they are the least objective people you could talk to, and add very little news content and value. I think most would also be better off grieving outside the media spotlight.
none

Saint Paul, MN

#10 Jan 27, 2011
gwisahoax wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually what you say isn't exactly the truth. You are allowed to defend yourself from home invasion. Since he actually invited the guy over and let him into the house, this is not necessarily the case in this instance.
If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and I shoot him dead, I am fully within my constitutional rights to do so.
Yeah? Try it sometime and see what happens.
Jerry

Minneapolis, MN

#11 Jan 27, 2011
He had a boy taking his picture? Put me on the jury...not guilty but still drunk and stupid.
Tchotchke

Minneapolis, MN

#12 Jan 27, 2011
AMX wrote:
Grand jury and eventually court will get to bottom of this. Yes, it does seem odd on one hand. But, on the other there is nothing sexual (or at least obviously suspicious) of a guy having photos taken flexing. Especially, if they are all upper body shots. If they were in boxers/underwear bottoms, or shots of the 13 year old, or shots of the 13 year and adult together --- YES!!! Otherwise, that is like calling almost all professional sports a form of pornography when players celebrate and flex. It is not sexual. I do not find it offensive when a football player flexes after a dunk or a hockey player raises their arms after a scrum.
But, we will see.
Why did they have to take the pictures behind closed doors in the 13-year old's bedroom? That is what gets to me. I could see it as something innocent if the 13-year old was taking pictures in the shared living area (i.e. living room, family room, kitchen, etc).
LivingInMN

Menahga, MN

#13 Jan 27, 2011
It is unclear if the person who got shot was in the boy's bedroom. It states that the boy went to his room to get his camera and the pictures of the guy posing was on them. From that it almost sounds like the pictures in question were taken at an earlier time. But, since journalism in this country has become more of a talk show event the timing of the photos are unknown.
Jackpine savage

Glendale, AZ

#14 Jan 27, 2011
Denial is more than a river in Egypt. Alcohol....long pattern of abuse...would love to know BAC of both idiots at time of incident. Wait for the facts to be fully developed before making all these brilliant comments.

Since: Apr 08

Twin Cities

#15 Jan 27, 2011
LivingInMN wrote:
It is unclear if the person who got shot was in the boy's bedroom. It states that the boy went to his room to get his camera and the pictures of the guy posing was on them. From that it almost sounds like the pictures in question were taken at an earlier time. But, since journalism in this country has become more of a talk show event the timing of the photos are unknown.
You and I read it the same way. I thought the boy went to his room to retrieve his new camera, then brought them out to the livingroom to show off the photos he had taken at an earlier time. The father saw the shirtless pictures and went into a rage over it.

I don't understand why the victim's girlfriend would tell him to leave, without going with him. Maybe I'm reading that wrong. The article is unclear and vague, but hopefully a jury will get the facts in order.
Marine Mom

Cambridge, MN

#16 Jan 27, 2011
Doesn't make sense to me that there would be anything "funny" going on if the kid's dad was right there in the house. I would tend to believe that the victim probably did want a new photo for his FB page, and just wanted the kid to take a picture. But if alcohol and a gun are added to the scenario it creates a volatile a dangerous situation. Nobody other than the people who were there know all of the details, but the results of this will certainly have devastating consequences to that young boy that will last a lifetime. And one man has had his life taken away. Tragic.

“Things can only get better”

Since: May 08

Minneapolis

#17 Jan 27, 2011
AMX wrote:
Grand jury and eventually court will get to bottom of this. Yes, it does seem odd on one hand. But, on the other there is nothing sexual (or at least obviously suspicious) of a guy having photos taken flexing. Especially, if they are all upper body shots. If they were in boxers/underwear bottoms, or shots of the 13 year old, or shots of the 13 year and adult together --- YES!!! Otherwise, that is like calling almost all professional sports a form of pornography when players celebrate and flex. It is not sexual. I do not find it offensive when a football player flexes after a dunk or a hockey player raises their arms after a scrum.
But, we will see.
Football players don't dunk and hockey players don't scrum. You have mix.ed your metaphors.

“Ahhhh hee ahw”

Since: Aug 09

Twin Cities

#18 Jan 27, 2011
2nd degree murder - just like I thought. I hope the gimp rots in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
Thrall

Lincoln, AL

#19 Jan 27, 2011
Sounds like the victim was a fairly big guy... and the shooter was disabled. No doubt he felt threatened when the victim advanced on him. I don't know about you people, but if somebody points a gun at me and says 'leave' ....I'm leaving. The fact that the victim moved TOWARD the cripple while he was holding a gun on him sounds like the victim might have had bad intent.

Since: Nov 10

st. paul mn.

#20 Jan 27, 2011
sock wrote:
2nd degree murder - just like I thought. I hope the gimp rots in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
so sock in an earlier post you say you punched this guy out in a bar, and now were learning hes disabled, hmmm ?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
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.

Fitness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wish List: 19 Awesome Gifts Under $50, From Bac... Nov 25 Kid_Tomorrow 1
Who is the best bodybuilder past and present? (Feb '14) Nov 23 Kenny 5
Weight loss successful stories Nov 23 Researcher 2
'Shark Tank' Investor Daymond John Says Losing ... Nov 18 Jason Oman 2
Bodybuilding Tips For Vegans & Vegetarians (Sep '09) Nov 9 sushil864 2
5 Religions You've Probably Never Heard Of (Sep '09) Nov 8 Kid_Tomorrow 128
6 Pack Abs | How To Get A 6 Pack Abs Nov 3 daskundo 1

Fitness People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE