Self Defense Hypocrisy, the Persecution of Bryon Smith

Poor Dead Teens or Budding Sociopaths?

Two Dead in Minnesota Thanksgiving Shooting

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor

It took the pop culture media five minutes to assign the requisite “three name” serial killer moniker to Smith, a retired State Department Diplomatic Security Officer.  Smith had, at one point, worked for my good friend Leo Crampsey, who headed that department. 

Smith shot two intruders on Thanksgiving and chose not to report it to the police until Friday morning out of what he described as “professional courtesy.”

Smith now faces life in prison for two counts of second degree murder because he killed two people who obviously broken into the wrong home, one burgled three times before.

Diplomatic security officers are the best trained and most lethal of all law enforcement personnel.  Though retired, Smith carries broad “residual authority” to defend himself as his career could and would have made him a target for assassination.

Think “Benghazi.”


Were Smith to be a retired local constable, sheriff’s deputy or jail guard, there would have been no arrest, not even if he had shot someone 50 times in public for displaying a mobile phone or ball point pen in a “threatening manner.”

We have a long history of police beating people to death, shooting unarmed suspects up to 200 times, strangling or crushing jail prisoners or beating peaceful protestors while accepting huge gratuities from fraudulent “banksters.”

Considering most American police forces are now Israeli trained, meaning to systematically ignore civil rights and act as what most have come to know as the “blue gang,” the idea of being arrested at all seems ironic.


In this case, we have a high ranking retired federal security officer with long experience in some of the most dangerous locations in the world, shooting brazen intruders.  Were they shot too many times?

Is there such a thing as “too many times?”


The only crime Byron is really accused of is speaking to police without an attorney present.  There are no recordings of anything said, only second hand “blue gang” reports which may or may not mischaracterize both the situation and what was said.

As someone trained in both diplomatic security and police/SWAT and having, for years trained many others in these and other equally obscure and too often abused skills, counter-terrorism/insurgency, I can assure you that the likelihood of anyone surviving a home intrusion involving such an individual is minuscule.

Regular police, “blue gang” types, are all taught to “double tap” suspects.

In reality, even when suspects are unarmed and there are two dozen police about, not only do “blue gangers” empty magazines into suspects, sometimes wheelchair bound veterans, but they are likely to replace high-capacity magazines of .40 caliber hollow point ammunition and empty those as well, often into an unrecognizable corpse.

Then I think of the Columbine massacre, dozens of police officers sat outside while the armed suspects used up all their ammunition and then killed themselves.

I actually was awarded a Medal of Valor for acting alone under threatening circumstances while nearly two dozen others sat by.  The award is one of the greatest embarrassments of my life.

Those who “walk the walk” will need no explanation.


Many police are highly qualified professionals.  Many more are professional criminals with a gun and badge.  The most dangerous occupation on earth is that of being an honest cop on a crooked police force.

Sheriff Larry Deaver of Cochise County, Arizona or J.T. Ready could tell you all about this if they weren’t dead and branded as either “drunks” or “Nazi’s.”

I don’t know what happened inside the brain of Byron Smith that Thanksgiving.  We know he killed two people inside his home and no one has “alleged” that they were guests, far from it.

I can also categorically state this:

Anyone who breaks into the home of a retired Tier One special operations/black ops veteran, a military combat vet or intelligence, diplomatic security or similar will be assumed to be part of an assassination squad staging a phony break in.

They will be assume to be armed, highly trained, be assumed to be operating “with cover as a street criminal” and are there to kill.

I have friends with backgrounds not unlike that of Smith.  When I visit, I phone first.  When I come up the driveway, I beep the horn.

Quite honestly, no member of Diplomatic Security or CIA agent or FBI undercover operative even enjoys visits from “old friends.”

Too many have died “before their time” at the hands of former trusted associates.


Police and local busybody court types are trying to invent a case of the victimized criminal.  What we have is a case of “broke into the wrong friggin’ house.”

Let Smith go home, apologize to him, bury the dead and let criminals consider that when they choose to victimize senior citizens, some are going to chop them to pieces.


The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on December 2, 2012, With Reads Filed under Veterans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

33 Responses to "Self Defense Hypocrisy, the Persecution of Bryon Smith"

  1. Gerry  December 4, 2012 at 3:22 pm

    The 5.56 Nato is a 223 calber round. They chamber in both the M16 / M4 as well as the Mini 14. There are a variety of different loads but are essentially the same except for bullet weight and shape. The mini 14 is a more reliable rifle IMO when it comes to jamming and requires little more than retracting the bolt and shaking the jammed cartridge out of the chamber and cycling the bolt forward with a new round. The Colts all have a forward assist built into the upper reciever since they are so prone jamming.

    The only pistols chambered for 223 are the Thompson Contender and some exotic bolt actions, all single shot silohette / hunting pistols. Of course you can put a 10 inch barrel on an M4 / 16 but you still have the stock and buffer spring assembly so it’s about 24 inches in length. Hardly a pistol.

  2. The Rahnameh  December 4, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Good case study, Gordon. I like that you challenge everyone.

  3. xx  December 4, 2012 at 9:01 am

    I have several brothers retired from the military, one specialized in security and operated teams that protected diplomats traveling and entering into countries (many years). Now let’s see, what type of person always makes certain the persons are dead, wounding is not enough? Possible enjoys the use of small caliber weapons, basements, garages, maybe even wooded areas outside the city, and even the local dump on occasion? The profile does not match the tag.

    The profile doesn’t seem to match the trade, the action.

  4. The Rahnameh  December 3, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    Agreed also, I used the reply to your comment as a soapbox (mostly not directed at you, but to whomever would read my rantings!) . I apologize 😉

  5. The Rahnameh  December 3, 2012 at 7:56 pm

    Gordon, that’s an abomination of the self-defense doctrine brought to you by the Zionists, gun manufacturers, Zionist media, and NRA. There is no such thing as immunity against prosecution or arrest unless you’re speaking about diplomatic or special immunity granted by the Constitution (Sovereign immunity vis a vis the 11th Amendment).

    For instance, during the Travyon Martin scenario, what the news media universally did was not bring on any legal experts whatsoever to explain falsities about “Stand Your Ground”.

    The victim ALWAYS possess due process rights. Any law that proscribes or limits this is completely unconstitutional and the people who brought it to be should be investigated for corruption.

    In Criminal Procedure, as you know, arrest is always dictated by probable cause. If the officer has probable cause to arrest, particularly when it involves a violent crime, then the arrest must be made or there are sanctions for such a deviation from the pursuit of justice.

    What is happening here is a degradation and corruption of our laws by the named entities. The self-defense doctrine is a great one to corrupt, that simple act being parlayed into profit (gun sales) and more, by the usual suspects. Why?

    Look at who claims self-defense falsely the most: the Zionists/Neocons.

  6. Mike Kay  December 3, 2012 at 7:51 pm

    More people have been sent to the great beyond with a .22 than with any other firearm. What has been current issue for 40 some years in the M16/M4-the 5.56? Y’know what the 5.56 is? a 22. A Mini 14 is chambered for the 223, a slower version of the military 5.56, and just as deadly.
    It is not specified if the handgun was centerfire, or rimfire, but either way, it can kill, period.
    Personally, I don’t give a rats ass for the story we are being fed. It makes absolutely no sense, what so ever.

  7. wolf  December 3, 2012 at 6:29 pm

    Well you’re right. Byron Smith was justified in taking no chances because of his background. But it looks bad for him when it comes to the second killing…the girl. And something just doesn’t add up about this story. I got to thinkin that maybe his go-to home defense weapons got ripped off during that previous burglary and all he had left were the mini and the 22 pistol. And then if it took place at 4 AM on Friday…what was he doing in the basement? Was his bedroom down there? It would be interesting to review the forensics report. A tragedy all around.

  8. Raptor  December 3, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    Your line of reason is silly…akin to assumption along the lines of suggesting that the intruders knew he would be in the basement and therefor away from the best home defense dollar for dollar weapon ever invented.

    Rail mounted laser sights are for Hollywood…

    Gordon made a subtle, yet very obvious point in regard to this topic. Breaking into a home is a crime, doing so unarmed is pure ignorance. Failure to understand this as a fact is even worse.

    Not trying to be an ass, only pointing out the obvious…..Many trained killers use weapons of opportunity, this eliminates evidence….So at the end of the day who’s to say what, where, or where when it comes to home invasions?

    Speaking of Thanksgiving: Over dinner I was told of an interesting hunting incident that took place a few weeks back. Seems someone I know very very well was scouting out on a parcel that had recently been bought by a person better suited for the Hills and Hollers of Eastern Kentucky or Tennessee, than this local area. Set his dogs loose on him, both of which he could have killed if he wanted….He was told point blank…by the land owner…” Sorry bout my dogs. Kain’t do nuttin bout them. But if you shoot one of em you best get right with Jesus! ”

    He opted to get back in his truck and drive away…just something to ponder..


  9. Gerry  December 3, 2012 at 11:57 am

    Yep I’m waiting for the current photos. You know the ones with the rotted teeth and looking in their 40s already.

    There is more to this than meets the eye Gordon. Some things just don’t add up: “Diplomatic security officers are the best trained and most lethal of all law enforcement personnel”

    Under 10 yds with a Mini-14 from a secured postition against soft targets. One shot throught the abdomen and take out the lower spine and possibly the abdominal aorta. Another through the thigh and 2 minutes later no pulse.

    What’s this crap jamming guns you can’t clear even with no return fire to worry about. Carrying a 22 revolver as backup? I thought the only thing a cap gun was good for was sneeking up behind some one and popping them behind the ear. A friend, thrown under the bus by “The Company”, had a target live throught 3 close range 22LR hits to the head. To many pieces of the puzzle stink!

  10. wolf  December 3, 2012 at 10:51 am

    Maybe his 12 gauge shotgun chambered with magnum buckshot was upstairs…along with his Glock with laser sight. So all he had to work with was his basement arsenal: a mini-14 and a .22 revolver. Two shotgun blasts would probably have settled the issue without all these “complications”. The other lesson here might be to only use Ruger factory magazines in your mini-14.

  11. Curmudgeon  December 3, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Would that be like the cute picture of Trayvon Martin?

  12. Curmudgeon  December 3, 2012 at 10:35 am

    Based on the “story”, the teens were shot before they came fully into view. There would be no way of knowing whether they were armed. As someone who knows individuals who have done time, I have heard stories about “the dark side”. There are criminals who see everything as a weapon: keys, pencils, handkerchiefs, you name it, they will use it.

    Additionally, one or two shots with a smaller calibre firearm does not necessarily render the target incapacitated. With a second intruder on the loose, would you take time to determine whether the intruder was: 1) armed; and 2) incapacitated?

  13. Raptor  December 3, 2012 at 10:32 am

    I’m beyond surprised…..everything my Father ever taught me, he was one of the best totally at odds with this story. Maybe the word professional has become too often used, or maybe the bar has been lowered since my initial intro into the world of firearm operation, safety, and basic common sense.

    Where was his 870 tactical?? No questions, no overkill, and sure as hell no case.

    Something strange here.


  14. OrdinarySerf  December 3, 2012 at 9:25 am

    That’s why I was careful to use the word ‘broadly’ Rahnameh. There have been exceptions to the application of the Castle principle, even in Minnesota itself. State v Corothers (MN Court of Appeals 1998) was a case where duty to retreat was upheld.


    “Hamline University School of Law professor Joseph Olson, who has studied self-defense laws, noted that the number of Smith’s shots will make it difficult for him to claim self-defense in court”.


    That was from a piece in the Star Tribune 27th November. And for balance, from the same article:

    John Lange, who describes himself as Smith’s best friend, was in the courtroom and visited Smith in jail.

    “Byron is holding up just fine, but he shouldn’t be in there, ” Lange said. “You have the right to defend your home, and he’s been through hell.”

    Lange said Smith’s house has been broken into six times, although authorities says they have only one report of a break-in, in October.

    “They tortured him and targeted him, and it’s not good,” Lange said. “If you’ve been broken into one time, that would be enough. But it’s terrible.”

    Smith’s brother, Bruce Smith, said about $10,000 worth of guns, electronic gear and cash were stolen in October.

    Wetzel, the sheriff, declined to discuss what was taken in the October theft and said they have no suspects. He also declined to say whether the teens knew Smith, insisting the investigation is ongoing”.


    We are all commenting in general terms here and agree with you entirely that the proper place for the full facts to come out is in court, if one trusts the court system that is……



  15. juana  December 3, 2012 at 8:59 am

    Gordon…he wounded them, possibly already fatally, then he decided to give a cruel coupdegrace without any signs of human empathy. This is proven by not attempting to call for assistance…of any kind ! Breaking and entering does not deserve a cruel death penalty. They were two stupid kids…no doubt, but it wouldn’t matter. And if they were Mexicans ….even if they had jailhouse tattoos…if they weren’t armed , I’d be still writing what I’m writing! The only difference is the allwhite corrupt justice system wouldn’t have prosecuted. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have. And he certainly deserves to be in jail for stupidity as well. He had all night to plant the weapons. Probably past out into a stupor instead. I’m sure they did a blood test….99% jackdaniels. He could have shot them in the leg for gods sake. This guy’s a trained murderer. However he might be regretting his strategy ’bout now…or certainly, when he’s sharing a cell with 13 bad mfker’s covered from head to toe with jailhouse tattoos ! They have their own system of justice.

  16. Gordon Duff  December 3, 2012 at 8:04 am

    let’s also be clear…the dead are white, not black or Mexican…
    none of the “pro-victim” comments would be here if I didn’t include the cute photo supplied by the newspapers…
    any proof our young lady does have dozens of tats and piercings, or doesn’t now have a swastika on her forehead?
    give a moment of thought to the tate la Bianca slayings

  17. Gordon Duff  December 3, 2012 at 8:01 am

    reporting is not germaine…as for “armed,” who says?
    legally, anyone breaking into an occupied dwelling is assumed to be armed…or looking for weapons..
    given a lamp or kitchen knife, you might want to see what a motivated and well trained person can do
    an unarmed person is someone who has either dropped a weapon or has failed to pick one up because they didn’t see their victim first

  18. Gordon Duff  December 3, 2012 at 7:58 am

    I know this, if this were Ohio, he wouldn’t be under arrest..or Michigan or Florida or or or or or

  19. The Rahnameh  December 3, 2012 at 7:26 am

    First, I must stipulate there is no such thing as immunity from arrest or prosecution in ANY jurisdiction. This is a line that has been purposely blurred by corporate media by way of the corrupt gun manufacturer lobby. “Stand Your Ground” is a defense or mitigating factor in court, not something you can tell police to make them go away while you hold a smoking gun and the victim lays dead before you. All self-defense cases come down to fact-sensitive issues and require case-by-case analysis by the fact-finder (typically a jury of 12 peers).

    Truthfully, Minnesota does not operate “broadly” under the Castle Doctrine, but you are correct in your interpretation of this law save for this line, which states two different nuances: “No duty to retreat before using deadly force to prevent a felony in one’s place of abode; no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense in one’s place of abode. ” In the first clause, entry into an abode with the intent (keyword) to commit a felony (another key term) is something that must be substantiated in court. The prevention of a felony, thus, may include protecting your property (breaking into an abode with the intent to commit larceny therein) using deadly force according to your first clause. The second clause regards the right to use deadly force in one’s home upon the presence of an imminent (keyword) and hostile threat. Once the threat is eliminated (and no longer imminent/hostile), there is no necessity for a “kill shot” — you are right in this regard.

    But again, all of this is fact-sensitive, and we simply don’t have the facts, only interpretation under the rules of evidence. That will be left up to expert testimony (forensics, etc.)

    Your claims are disputable. The only undisputed facts here are that:
    1- he shot these two targets and they died as a result of those wounds;
    2- he did not immediately report the shooting.

    Thus, you can’t, with certainty, claim that this person is up “sh*t creek without a paddle” as you simply do not know what happened.

    That is what a trial is all about. Victims, whether guilty or accountable in some degree or not, have due process rights as well. Thus, again, there is never an immunity to prosecution or arrest allowable in the United States under any circumstances.

    Also, there is never a verdict until the fact-finder, a magistrate or jury, make that assessment. We are innocent until PROVEN guilty, and this sentence carries with it more than one point:
    1- A verdict is the only thing that proves guilt; and,
    2- in order to assess the guilt, prosecution and arrest are necessary.

  20. OrdinarySerf  December 2, 2012 at 10:01 pm

    Looked at this a little more now Rahnameh. Minnesota broadly operates under Castle Law (as in ‘an Englishman’s home is his….’) No duty to retreat before using deadly force to prevent a felony in one’s place of abode; no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense in one’s place of abode. He probably gets away with the first shot in each case, but once the intruders are immobilised and no longer a threat, the application of the self defense principle is finished. So he is up shit creek without a paddle, especially as he stuffed the bodies away and didn’t immediately report it, unless he goes down some route involving impairment of mental faculties.

  21. DaveE  December 2, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    Thanks for your expert opinion on the legal issues. To an idiot like me with only a rudimentary knowledge of the law, this don’t smell good for Smith and a lot worse for the dead victims.

    Jane Harman stinks all the way to Hell, however.

  22. The Rahnameh  December 2, 2012 at 6:35 pm

    I can’t really prescribe a legal remedy without knowing the totality of the facts and the laws of the jurisdiction at play (Minnesota), but I will speculate a little bit on this point you have made.

    I would say that it’s more likely that a PTSD claim would serve as an extenuating circumstance or mitigating factor in his defense, but not towards absolution. The prima facie (threshold evidence) he would have to prove, likely, would need to speak to the actual occurrence and type of traumatic event that caused the condition, his relation/proximity to it, along with some medical history or reliable expert testimony/supporting evidence to prove that he was indicating the DSM criteria for PTSD symptoms prior to this alleged break in. This is assuming, also, that these individuals did, indeed, break in to his house and were not invited in or trespassed where they did not belong.

    If you are suggesting that he claim he suffered the PTSD because of this event, and as a reason for not reporting the dead people in his basement shot by him under a claim of self-defense for an entire day, then that will be completely futile. Of course, I don’t know what you meant from your trademark one-line response, so I am running through all of the iterations here. The PTSD defense would speak, on the other hand, to his moral intent in committing the act (his culpability) and also to explain why he may not have reported the event sooner.

    He should contact Jane Harman. I heard she lets entire countries get away with murder.

  23. Gordon Duff  December 2, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    he could claim PTSD

  24. lola  December 2, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    I could not shoot them enough.

  25. juana  December 2, 2012 at 4:16 pm

    The intruders weren’t armed , and he used excessive force , and then didn’t call and report a crime until the next day. Another psychopath trained by our government. This is exactly the type of incident that plays into their hands. Put him with the other animals where he belongs and throw away the key !

  26. OrdinarySerf  December 2, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    My sister was in the RAF in the seventies and when on leave, recounted a story about an SAS officer being asleep face down in a hotel room and a guy just tapping him on the shoulder to wake him. SAS man is up off the bed and within 10 seconds the guy who tried to rouse him finds himself pinned up against the wall with a broken bottle against his throat. Same kind of trained soldier instinct here I guess (?)

    Still, another report (Daily Mail) from this side of the pond…..”While Minnesota law stipulates people are allowed to use deadly force when defending their homes, relatives, friends, police and prosecutors claimed Smith reacted too drastically by killing them. ‘A person has every right to defend themselves and their homes, even employing deadly force if necessary,’ Morrison County Sheriff Michel Wetzel said. ‘Circumstances of this case however, led deputies to believe that Smith went beyond that point.”

    For me, the basic principle is that if you cross the boundary with intent to steal or cause harm, then lose your rights. These two didn’t know what they were getting into for sure…..Quote from above article: What we have is a case of “broke into the wrong friggin’ house.” That’s an indisputable fact Gordon.

  27. Gerry  December 2, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    “Quite honestly, no member of Diplomatic Security or CIA agent or FBI undercover operative even enjoys visits from “old friends.””

    Hehehehe. I guess that’s why the only other surviving member of my group doesn’t even go to his outhouse without his M14 and I have to put a case of good whiskey on the hood of my truck before I turn off onto the road up to his cabin.

    Let this be a lesson to anybody about calling the cops. Chances are you’ll end wishing you didn’t, regardless of the alternative.

  28. The Rahnameh  December 2, 2012 at 3:27 pm

    Self-defense is fact and statute (jurisdiction) sensitive. Common law self-defense is valid only when there is a “present and imminent threat”. The response must be “reasonably proportionate”. There is no self-defense for pre-emption, the aggressor, against mere verbal threats (like a menacing phone call or other harassment), retaliation or revenge, namely because in these instances the “present and imminent threat” either no longer exists or was caused by the actor in the first place.

    In some jurisdictions, there is the duty to retreat, while others do exempt this duty. This duty means that you must, first, exhaust all avenues of retreat from the “hostile and imminent threat”. Some jurisdictions are nuanced even further whereby the duty to retreat may or may not exist in the home. That is, if you have an option to run somewhere in your home or to otherwise avoid the threat, that option should be exhausted before the defense is invoked. Some jurisdictions, by way of case law, dictate that all avenues are exhausted once you are in your bedroom. Some jurisdictions simply hold that once you are in your house, you have exhausted your available avenues. The “Stand Your Ground” law applies to these parameters. However, in no way does this law allow an individual to avoid arrest. That is an abomination of the victim’s due process rights and cannot be upheld even if codified into law by incompetent legislators.

    The irrelevant duty to arrest is dictated by “probable cause”, something that is wholly separate from a valid and affirmative claim of self-defense, available to an individual only once actually before the magistrate or court of law.

    The facts here are unknown. Only Smith was capable of recollecting them. Thus, we cannot speculate either way. I do not know the specific type of self-defense that would be held valid in Smith’s jurisdiction because I have not examined those statutes. However, from appearances, I can comment that there are several factors that do hurt him and some that may help him if the fact-finder agrees:

    What Hurts Him: waiting too long before reporting the act (indicates guilt); if the victims were unarmed; that there were no caution signs about trespassers being shot (without indicating his status/station/position); if he didn’t necessarily wait for the threat to reasonably appear to be hostile and imminent similar to the requirement that police often give verbal warnings to stand down before shooting given his training (also, having had burglaries before without getting hurt himself); and,

    What Helps Him: that a reasonably prudent person in his shoes (as a diplomatic security officer) would consider a breaking in to his home to be a hostile and imminent threat.

    However, this is a weak argument for Smith because the undisputed facts show that he waited to report the deed. This was his biggest mistake. He should have called the police as soon as he heard the break in, put down the phone, taken aim, sighted his targets, and then fired only upon properly assessing the threat.

  29. stephanaugust  December 2, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    But, but, when we see that in a Hollywood movie the media says it is great. Remember Jodie Foster hunting down a killer alone in SILENCE OF THE LAMBS?

  30. Gordon Duff  December 2, 2012 at 2:04 pm


  31. wolf  December 2, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    Well it IS from CBS so one does have to question the BS factor but that’s what the public is being presented with.

    If that account is true, I just can’t figure out why the girl wouldn’t have surrendered or fled in terror after hearing the gunshots…instead of descending the stairs.

  32. Gordon Duff  December 2, 2012 at 12:51 pm

    I would have used a vastly more powerful weapon.

    Funny thing, if you re-read your quotes, they are unsubstantiated and highly prejudicial.

    I expect VT readers to pick up on bullshit when exposed to it.

  33. wolf  December 2, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    I had to google this story to get the specifics. This an excerpt from a CBS update:

    “According to the complaint, Smith said he was in the basement of his Little Falls home when he heard a window breaking upstairs, followed by footsteps that eventually approached the basement stairwell. Supposedly fearful after several previous break-ins, Smith said he fired when Schaeffel came into view from the waist down.

    After the teen fell down the stairs, Smith said he shot him in the face as he lay on the floor.

    “I want him dead,” the complaint quoted Smith telling an investigator.

    Smith said he dragged Schaeffel’s body into his basement workshop before sitting back down on his chair. He said he shot Kifer a few minutes later as soon as her hips appeared as she came down the stairs.

    Smith said Kifer laughed at him when his Mini 14 rifle jammed while he tried to shoot her again. He then allegedly shot Kifer in the chest several times with a .22-caliber revolver, and dragged her next to Schaeffel, allegedly firing yet another shot under chin when she was still gasping for air.

    “Smith described it as `a good clean finishing shot,”‘ according to the complaint, but he also acknowledged that he fired “more shots than (he) needed to.”

    It doesn’t look good for Byron Smith. The details of the killing of the girl (if true) seem indefensible any way you look at it.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

From Veterans Today Network