Thursday, February 19, 2015

70 Years for Markus Kaarma, Idaho Homeowner Who 'Hunted' Intruder



USA Today 

A Montana homeowner was sentenced Thursday to 70 years in prison for the shotgun slaying of a German exchange student he found trespassing in his garage late one night last spring.

Markus Kaarma, 30, of Missoula, won't be eligible for parole for at least 20 years. A jury in December found him guilty of deliberate homicide in the April 27 shooting death of 17-year-old Diren Dede, of Hamburg, Germany.

Jurors rejected Kaarma's argument that he shot in self-defense under the so-called Castle doctrine because his home had been burglarized previously. Dede was unarmed, and three witnesses testified at the trial that Kaarma had spoken about shooting someone.

23 comments:

  1. 70 years well deserved. This is one of the few posts and categorizations that I completely agree with. Should have been life without possibility of parole.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gun loons defended this killer also.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Where exactly did anyone defend him? I have searched and found nothing. Perhaps you cold share whatever you have found?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MikeZ: "Perhaps you cold share whatever you have found?"

      That'd be a first.

      Delete
    2. I don't remember, and I'm not gonna look, but guys like this are often defended on this blog. You abandon all support after conviction, but initially, he's just another armed homeowner defending himself.

      Delete
    3. I don't remember, and I'm not gonna look . . .

      Probably a good (and convenient) idea--because I seriously doubt you would have found anyone here defending Kaarma's actions.

      Delete
    4. You won’t look, but I will. Here is where the story first broke on your blog:

      http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/04/montana-homeowner-faces-felony-homicide.html

      And as you can see, you are 0/3 for gun rights supporters defending what Kaarma did (before conviction). Greg Camp, SJ, and I all came down on the side of this being homicide unprotected by Castle Doctrine. Of course, you did qualify your statement with “guys like this”, so maybe you mean cases not at all like this that were in fact legitimate self-defense, but it is a “guy like this” to you.

      Delete
    5. Don't make me look, TS. Just admit that you and the others often say things like, "if that kid didn't want to get killed he shouldn't have broken into the house." And some of the cases turned out to be other than legitimate shootings.

      Delete
    6. Just admit that you and the others often say things like, "if that kid didn't want to get killed he shouldn't have broken into the house."

      Home invasion is both immoral and characterized by the risk (which the home invader should realize) of being shot. One need not be "defending" the shooter to point that out.

      Delete
    7. Ah, just like I thought, you are trying to steer the conversation away from this case to some other cases which were nothing like this one. Additionally, you are conflating "he should not have broken into a house" with defending the killer. Breaking and Entering is stupid, dangerous, not to mention illegal. Dede was in the wrong to do that, and it got him murdered. That is not to say that he wasn't murdered or the guy who did it shouldn't rot in jail. It's no different that saying joining a street gang is dangerous, or pointing out that the Vegas mom looking for that car was dangerous, or that Zimmerman should not have gotten out of his car. With your standard, would you say that Jadegold is defending her killer for the comments he made about that Vegas case?

      Delete
    8. As usual, Kurt and TS are incapable of admitting anything. The fact is you guys often defend the shooters, even in cases which later turn out to be crimes. And in cases where no charges are brought, you guys really dig in your heels and defend the shooter regardless of how wrong it was. Remember the Georgia Alzhiemer's patient who "got himself killed?"

      Delete
    9. And again you are trying to redirect to another case. None of us defended Kaarma. I didn't defend the Alzheimer's case either. Greg Camp may have, so go take it up with him (but even he didn't defend Kaarma).

      Delete
    10. From the beginning I've been talking about "guys like this." There was no redirection, that was the direction from the beginning of the argument.

      Delete
    11. As in cases of legitimate self-defense, i.e. not at all like this. Just because you can differentiate them doesn't mean that rational people can't.

      Delete
  4. Yipppeeeeeee!

    Very much like the conviction of the murderer of two teens in Minnesota. In that case the man was ordered to pay for their funerals.
    There is a civil suit against this guy winding down now as well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. lies are all you got TS, thanks for proving that

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about you just paste a link to a quote from a "gun loon defending this killer" to prove what a liar I am?

      Delete
    2. How about you just stop defending killers TS?

      Delete
  6. Here is the TTAG post from last May when Kaarma was charged. (Someone beat me to the pun.) One could hardly say the TTAG guy defended Kaarma's actions. He actually ridiculed the guy by comparing him to a real-life Joe Biden fantasy DGU killer. Most of the serious gun guys in the commentariat also called it a bad shooting and explained why in pretty clear details. One or two of the commenters seemed to suggest that anyone has a right to kill an intruder under just about any circumstances once they have broken into their property. But even those guys stopped short of offering any true defense. I'd say the typical gun guy advised strongly against this type of blind firing into a garage which was actually rigged to be a trap. Only one or two guys predicted he would walk. The TTAG guy's legal analysis proved to be quite correct.

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/mike-mcdaniel/bad-advice-tactics/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FJ, I'd say anyone whe put the focus on the crimes of the dead kid, is defending the sick shooter. That's one of the typical responses to these unnecessary DGUs - if you don't wanna get shot, don't _______.

      Delete
    2. Is that anything like saying the mother in Las Vegas isn't a victim because of her actions?

      Delete
    3. My favorite commenter over at the TTAG post was the guy who assumed that Diren Dede couldn't possibly have been a nice, blonde, blue-eyed German kid because of his funny name. Most likely an African immigrant who had lived in Hamburg.

      Can't make that kind of shit up.

      Delete