Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 9/28/2011 7:52:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/28/2011 8:00:12 AM EDT by JmPnTX]
http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/130664433.html

The man who shot and killed a 16-year-old who had broken into a northwest side scrap yard with his friends was sentenced Tuesday to 12 years in prison plus four years of extended supervision.

In his verdict, Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Richard J. Sankovitz called the shooting by David A. Helton, who was charged with second-degree reckless homicide while armed, a tragedy.

He said Helton, 54, was a loner who lived in an unheated trailer without water in the scrap yard and did not intend to kill anyone - but he was too quick to use unnecessary force when Shelton D. Smith and three others broke in May 2.


Thoughts? Was he justidfied? Obviously WI needs a Castle Doctrine.

Why weren't the adult accomplices of the kid who was killed charged with murder? Since "My baby didn't do nothin'"
Link Posted: 9/28/2011 9:13:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/28/2011 9:17:53 AM EDT by variable]
No accusation, but the tone of your post seems to lead towards trolling.

As for a response, the article (DA) stated the subject lied to police (his account did not match the facts).

Next, most castle doctrines stop at the domicile/car door.

As for the others involved, I am sure their connection was not lost in translation. It seems to me to fall into the "what if" classification (What if worms had machineguns? - Birds wouldn't fu<k with them).

Lastly, through years of exposure, most people do not see justice in the courtroom - unfortunately.

WI needs the doctrine IMO nonetheless.

V
OUT
Link Posted: 9/28/2011 4:48:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By JmPnTX:

Why weren't the adult accomplices of the kid who was killed charged with murder?


Good question. Their willful criminal actions started the chain of events that lead to a homicide. They should be prosecuted for it. I would gladly convict as a juror.

Link Posted: 9/28/2011 6:31:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/28/2011 7:00:57 PM EDT by JmPnTX]
Originally Posted By variable:
No accusation, but the tone of your post seems to lead towards trolling.

As for a response, the article (DA) stated the subject lied to police (his account did not match the facts).

Next, most castle doctrines stop at the domicile/car door.

As for the others involved, I am sure their connection was not lost in translation. It seems to me to fall into the "what if" classification (What if worms had machineguns? - Birds wouldn't fu<k with them).

Lastly, through years of exposure, most people do not see justice in the courtroom - unfortunately.

WI needs the doctrine IMO nonetheless.

V
OUT


No trolling intended. Just trying to get the hometown take on it.

Castle doctrine would cover your place of habitation, business or employment. Not sure how that would have covered this incident, although the guy was allowed to live on the property...therefore he had a right to be at the location.

The DA and the paper both seem to be making the case that the person threatened should try everything else...even when confronted in the middle of the night by burglars and what should be a reasonable fear for your life. Yes he shot an unarmed kid, but the kid was in the middle of committing a crime with three others including an older adult who had brought the kids there.
Link Posted: 9/28/2011 7:14:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By JmPnTX:
Thoughts? Was he justidfied? Obviously WI needs a Castle Doctrine.

Not justified. We do not need a "shoot at noises in the dark and not be liable for murder" Staute....
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 3:05:36 AM EDT

He said Helton, 54, was a loner who lived in an unheated trailer without water in the scrap yard and did not intend to kill anyone - but he was too quick to use unnecessary force when Shelton D. Smith and three others broke in May 2.


And what, exactly, does that have to do with anything? Media trying to paint him as a Ted Kaczynski crazy type?
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 3:41:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 4:55:46 PM EDT
I'm guessing he got more time due to his not keeping his mouth shut and his attempt to dispose of his firearm. Telling multiple stories about what happened that didn't match the forensic evidence and throwing the shotgun and shells over a fence didn't help him any. If you do things to make yourself look guilty of a crime they'll likely convict you of something. Castle doctrine is not about killing someone for stealing stuff that isn't even yours. I can't find the outrage over him getting 12 years in jail.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 9:19:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 9:20:30 PM EDT by GreenZ]
saw this. I think it's crap.
Should he be prosecuted for obstruction and tampering with evidence? Yes.
12 years for murder? No way in hell.

Confronted by 3 people, in the dark, who are already committing felony B+E, you never know if they are willing to go all the way to get away. If you stand in their way, it might mean your life. Would I want to kill someone? No. Would I be more likely to pull the trigger if it was dark and i was confronted by more than 1 ? Yes. The tables can turn quickly against you in a circumstance like that.

And the dead perp's cohorts should all be charged with accessory murder for their role in encouraging the "my baby din' do nuffin" to participate. They are just as liable for his death as the triggerman.
Link Posted: 10/1/2011 4:20:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GreenZ:
saw this. I think it's crap.
Should he be prosecuted for obstruction and tampering with evidence? Yes.
12 years for murder? No way in hell.

Confronted by 3 people, in the dark, who are already committing felony B+E, you never know if they are willing to go all the way to get away. If you stand in their way, it might mean your life. Would I want to kill someone? No. Would I be more likely to pull the trigger if it was dark and i was confronted by more than 1 ? Yes. The tables can turn quickly against you in a circumstance like that.

And the dead perp's cohorts should all be charged with accessory murder for their role in encouraging the "my baby din' do nuffin" to participate. They are just as liable for his death as the triggerman.


Complete agreement.
Link Posted: 10/2/2011 4:57:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GreenZ:
saw this. I think it's crap.
Should he be prosecuted for obstruction and tampering with evidence? Yes.
12 years for murder? No way in hell.

Confronted by 3 people, in the dark, who are already committing felony B+E, you never know if they are willing to go all the way to get away. If you stand in their way, it might mean your life. Would I want to kill someone? No. Would I be more likely to pull the trigger if it was dark and i was confronted by more than 1 ? Yes. The tables can turn quickly against you in a circumstance like that.

And the dead perp's cohorts should all be charged with accessory murder for their role in encouraging the "my baby din' do nuffin" to participate. They are just as liable for his death as the triggerman.


Yep, the gun merely leveled the playing field. the 3 wanted to play to some extent when they broke in. The way I see it is this: how would this case had gone if it had been a Doberman or German Shepherd guarding the place and the dog had killed the kid?
Top Top