German exchange student killed in Montana by home owner.

[HumblePie]

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25446280/markus-kaarma-speaks-out-on-diren-dede-shooting

Partially opened garage to air it out after smoking. Purse was not "bait" as it wasn't in plan view and hidden in the garage.

The thief opened the garage fully with the enter to enter illegally. That's a forcible entry and under MN law provides grounds for self defense.

Moral of the story, don't enter someone else house, especially after dark, if you don't want to get shot.

 

[spidey07]

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25446280/markus-kaarma-speaks-out-on-diren-dede-shooting

Partially opened garage to air it out after smoking. Purse was not "bait" as it wasn't in plan view and hidden in the garage.

The thief opened the garage fully with the enter to enter illegally. That's a forcible entry and under MN law provides grounds for self defense.

Moral of the story, don't enter someone else house, especially after dark, if you don't want to get shot.

Who's to say this little thug wasn't the one that broke into their home twice earlier or the one breaking into the homes? It takes great balls to illegally enter somebody's garage at 12 in the morning, because doing so you're likely to get shot.

 

[nehalem256]

Yes you are.

The punishment for being in someone's garage is not being murdered, no matter how much people like you think it should be.

Again you are confusing reasonable person with coward. Considering the murderer could see that the victim.

Lets follow your logic here...

The punishment for rape is not being killed.

Therefore if a woman shots a man trying to rape her she should be charged with murder

D:

 

[OCGuy]

In states that have Felony Murder laws on the books, if someone dies during the commission of a felony, all parties involved in the initial crime can be charged with Murder.

If this kid had a get-away driver waiting outside, that person would actually be going to prison.

 

[Svnla]

Pointing out that the deceased brought on the consequences is not saying the consequences are just or reasonable, it's merely pointing out that the consequences were completely avoidable.

Exactly.

This is what I said previously:

If he DID NOT do that, he would be still fine today.

If the guy in the story did NOT enter the garage without permission, he would still be alive today. He triggered the consequences of action (whether it is fair or just or proportionally is debatable) by his own action. Period.

True, but as far as we know he never actually touched the purse (which I would think of as more akin to getting into the driver's seat). Regardless, in your hypothetical, just as in the actual case, I would blame the car owner, at least in part, for leaving his car unsecured with the keys in the ignition, in broad daylight (particularly if, as in this case, he did so intentionally, with the intention of shooting anyone who made any move toward taking the car).

Being stupid or careless with your own properties/items is not a crime but breaking/entering without permision is. If he was just outside the garage door, I can understand. But he was inside the garage, he triggered the consequences of actions. If the purse was outside the garage door, I can understand but it was inside the garage.

One can say the purse was a bait but I believe he can put that darn purse anywhere inside the garage as he wanted to. That's his right as the owner. But the other guy does not have the right to enter his property (regardless his intention). That's my point.

 

[Fern]

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25446280/markus-kaarma-speaks-out-on-diren-dede-shooting

Partially opened garage to air it out after smoking. Purse was not "bait" as it wasn't in plan view and hidden in the garage.

The thief opened the garage fully with the enter to enter illegally. That's a forcible entry and under MN law provides grounds for self defense.

Moral of the story, don't enter someone else house, especially after dark, if you don't want to get shot.

Well, that's a considerably different story than that first reported.

Fern

 

[spidey07]

Well, that's a considerably different story than that first reported.

Fern

Folks should learn by now that what is first "reported" is highly unlikely to be anywhere close to the truth. There's an agenda to push. Especially when it's an innocent "child".

A "child" who broke into this guys garage.

 

[shira]

That's very weak castle doctrine. Even so, it applies in this case as unlawful entry was made and the thug was attempting to enter the home. Any reasonable person would presume they were attempting to enter the occupied dwelling to cause harm.

Most other states with Castle Doctrine, the unlawful entry presumes the victim to have fear of life or great bodily harm.

Another gun-nut who accepts without question that the attorney's version of events is the truth. Why should anyone be surprised?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25446280/markus-kaarma-speaks-out-on-diren-dede-shooting

Partially opened garage to air it out after smoking. Purse was not "bait" as it wasn't in plan view and hidden in the garage.

The thief opened the garage fully with the enter to enter illegally. That's a forcible entry and under MN law provides grounds for self defense.

Moral of the story, don't enter someone else house, especially after dark, if you don't want to get shot.

That is taking the word of the defense. Frankly I don't think it makes much sense to intentionally leave a purse out (which I believe is what happened - they had catalogued the items in it with the specific thought that it might be taken), but leave it somewhere where it could not easily be seen. Seems more likely, particularly since Kaarma had told others that he intended to shoot an intruder, that he left it in plain view. I also don't buy that if they were in such mortal fear of a break-in that they would have chosen to leave the garage open. To me the circumstances really only make sense if they were setting a trap, and everything that actually occurred also seems consistent with that.

Montana (it's MT, not MN) law only permits the use of deadly force in self-defense if the person using it is reasonably in fear of an assault or other attack on his person. Merely entering does not provide that right. I quoted the statute earlier in this thread.

 

[spidey07]

Another gun-nut who accepts without question that the attorney's version of events is the truth. Why should anyone be surprised?

Another libtard who accepts without question a prosecutor's (who is a lawyer by the way, they always lie) events of the truth.

You should have learned by now not to do that lest you look like a fool yet again.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Another libtard who accepts without question a prosecutor's (who is a lawyer by the way, they always lie) events of the truth.

You should have learned by now not to do that lest you look like a fool yet again.

A defense attorney is also a lawyer, but you're taking his word for it . . .

 

[Fern]

That is taking the word of the defense. Frankly I don't think it makes much sense to intentionally leave a purse out (which I believe is what happened...
-snip-

The woman claimed they would go into to the garage to smoke. Woman typically have their ciggs and lighter in their pocketbook. I can easily see her taking the pocketbook to the garage to smoke then leaving it there, either intentionally or forgetting it, when they went back in to watch TV.

Fern

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The woman claimed they would go into to the garage to smoke. Woman typically have their ciggs and lighter in their pocketbook. I can easily see her taking the pocketbook to the garage to smoke then leaving it there, either intentionally or forgetting it, when they went back in to watch TV.

Fern

Certainly possible, but considering all the other circumstantial factors (two prior break-ins, Kaarma telling a third party he intended to shoot an intruder, the fact that they had catalogued the contents of the purse, leaving the garage door open, and Kaarma indiscriminately shooting at the intruder rather than turning the lights on or calling out), I don't see that as the most intuitively likely explanation.

Obviously all I know of the case is what has been reported, and it's likely there is other relevant evidence which may support one side or the other or both. The local reporting on the Byron Smith case did not include, prior to the trial, some of the prosecution's most damning evidence, I guess because the prosecutor, Pete Orput, didn't want to make it public. The same may be true here, but we shall see . . .

 

[CitizenKain]

Another libtard who accepts without question a prosecutor's (who is a lawyer by the way, they always lie) events of the truth.

You should have learned by now not to do that lest you look like a fool yet again.

So the defense attorney is what then?

Just a reminder, it was dark garage and the tiny dicked thug with the gun couldn't actually see the person in there before shooting in there.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Update: Markus Kaarma has been convicted. From http://news.yahoo.com/montana-homeowner-found-guilty-slaying-german-exchange-student-203310841.html -

Montana homeowner found guilty in slaying of German exchange student

MISSOULA, Mont. (Reuters) - A jury found a Montana homeowner guilty of deliberate homicide on Wednesday in the shooting death of a German high school exchange student who entered his garage in a case that tested the state's version of a "castle doctrine" self-defense law.

Markus Kaarma, who prosecutors painted as an armed aggressor who lured a would-be burglar to his death, was charged in connection with the April death of Diren Dede, 17, of Hamburg, who authorities say was killed while "garage hopping" at night in Missoula in a possible search for alcohol.

Prosecutors argued during the trial that Kaarma had installed motion detectors and a baby monitor days before the shooting and left a purse filled with cash and other items in the garage on the day Dede was killed in a shooting that sparked outrage in Germany.

Prosecutors contended that when Kaarma left his house to corner Dede in the garage after being alerted to his presence by the monitoring devices, he lost legal protection under Montana law.

* * *

Seems like the right outcome to me, as this really looked like a premeditated murder. I am fine with Castle laws, but they need to have common-sense-based limits.

 

[Brainonska511]

Who's to say this little thug wasn't the one that broke into their home twice earlier or the one breaking into the homes? It takes great balls to illegally enter somebody's garage at 12 in the morning, because doing so you're likely to get shot.

Folks should learn by now that what is first "reported" is highly unlikely to be anywhere close to the truth. There's an agenda to push. Especially when it's an innocent "child".

A "child" who broke into this guys garage.

Another libtard who accepts without question a prosecutor's (who is a lawyer by the way, they always lie) events of the truth.

You should have learned by now not to do that lest you look like a fool yet again.

Another thread where spidey is hilariously wrong in predicting the outcome.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Another thread where spidey is hilariously wrong in predicting the outcome.

I doubt we will see much of Spidey or the other usual suspects in this thread now that their predictions have been proven wrong.

 

[TheVrolok]

Thanks for posting the update DVC, was just thinking about this case the other day. Seems to me that this was the appropriate outcome.

 

[feralkid]

Meh...me and one of my cousins got peppered with rock salt when we were kids (I was 9)...we got caught raiding one of his neighbors' watermelon patch on a warm summer evening.
Getting shot was painful as hell...but having it picked out and then soaking the rest out in a hot bath was even worse...

Personally, in this case and the Minnesota case, I think the homeowners were justified in their shootings. Thieves should be killed. Whether it's by those from whom they're stealing...or by the courts following a trial...If you catch a thief...you should be able to shoot the fucking fuck.

Armed robbery, burglary, forcible rape, child molestation...those are just a few of the crimes that should carry an automatic death sentence.

So when do we pass the death sentence onto you for your admitted thievery?

 

[CitizenKain]

I'm glad this turned out the way it did and that idiot will hopefully spend a lot of time in prison. Kinda hoped they nail his idiot wife with time as well so their kid would have a chance to grow up raised by non-shitheads.

Only way it could have been better is if Kaarma had tripped and shot himself with the shotgun earlier in the week when he ran outside to confront a lawn care person that was hired to spray his lawn.

 

[alcoholbob]

The interesting thing is quite a few Germans are saying some un-PC things about the crime rate of the muslims immigrants in Germany, in the comments section in news articles on this piece, lol.

 

[Smoblikat]

The thing that bothers me about this story is the way he blindly fires into the garage multiple times. What if he blasted one of his neighbor's young kids away? This was really an unjustified shooting and the guy deserves to go to prison.

While I agree that the man set up a trap to purposely bait a burglar, can we all just STOP using fucking children as the basis for every argument? Its literally pathetic at this point.

 

[z1ggy]

To be fair, this guy was using the method of self defense recommended by VP Joe Biden.

Well he didn't kill him with an AR-15, so it's less terrible & scary.

/s

 

[HumblePie]

Update: Markus Kaarma has been convicted. From http://news.yahoo.com/montana-homeowner-found-guilty-slaying-german-exchange-student-203310841.html -



Seems like the right outcome to me, as this really looked like a premeditated murder. I am fine with Castle laws, but they need to have common-sense-based limits.

Right verdict because of one reason only.

ballistic evidence showed Kaarma had repositioned himself for a final kill shot of an already wounded, weaponless Dede.

The dumbass finished with a "double tap" with the intent to kill by going after the guy twice. First shot was legal, second volley to finish the man was not. Case closed.

 

[Brainonska511]

Right verdict because of one reason only.



The dumbass finished with a "double tap" with the intent to kill by going after the guy twice. First shot was legal, second volley to finish the man was not. Case closed.

I don't even think the first shot was legal. He basically set up a trap in the first place, just waiting for someone to cross into the garage.