www.vnews.com
Thursday, February 8, 2018
Defendant in murder trial says shooting victim attacked him
The Vermont man accused of fatally shooting a Springfield, Vt., resident three years ago took the witness stand in his own defense this morning, saying the victim, Wesley Wing, attacked him through the window of his car, hit him in the face and pushed his head into the steering wheel, an action that impeded his breathing.
www.vnews.com
www.vnews.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
---
Sign by Danasoft - For Backgrounds and Layouts
OH, so that's a good reason to shoot him 5 times, couldn't be that smith is a low life drug user
ReplyDeleteThis guy looks so very innocent and honest. lol
ReplyDeleteSmith shot Wes in cold blood because Wes called him and his girl a name, a very accurate name. Smith drove by Wes a few times, and then shit him 5 times, from a distance.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, Smith stalked Wes like an animal, then gunned him down.
Even if wes did punch him, Smith is in a car.... Drive away!!!!!!
I hope they nail this scumbag and his gf Wendy to the wall.
Who was the original owner of the gun? Smith with a felon's record couldn't possibly have bought it, even at a gun show. So, somebody bought a gun and decided to let it pass into less worthy hands. He should be in the dock, too.
ReplyDeleteUnless he owned it before becoming a convicted felon, especially if it was handed down by a relative. There would be no way to trace it then.
DeleteThere shouldn't have to be a way to trace it. Did King Arthur ever let his deadly weapon, Excalibur, fall into unworthy hands? So should it be for the purchaser of a weapon: Bound to it for its entire existence, and if it is ever used by anybody for an illegal purpose, the purchaser would pay for violating his duty toward his Excalibur.
DeleteThen we should hold all people responsible for all deaths related to items they own such as bicycles, pools, cars, power tools,,,then how about people who choke on food?? We should hold the farmers responsible also! The above is a ridiculous statement.
DeleteYeah, 1:29. Everybody buys bikes, pools, cars and power tools that are designed, built and purchased so they can kill somebody if necessary, so of course your idea is brilliant. In fact, that's why King Arthur never lent out his TV remote, either.
DeleteQuestion: Does anybody give a damn about King Arthur? Show of hands.......
DeleteI think Chuck truly experienced the 60'sand 70's,,it's been catching up to him recently.
DeleteWell, it doesn't say much for the intelligence of an owner of a gun when he/she can't tell the difference between it and a household appliance. If I'm a gun-owning patriot who bought it to defend my freedom, what does it say about me if I don't take steps to make sure it doesn't pass into the hands of some weed-crazed dirty hippie commie Black Lives matter type? Eighty percent of the homicides in America (not the suicides, legal homicides or accidental homicides) in America are committed with guns some bozo didn't treat like an Excalibur.
DeleteGuns don't kill people, ask the NRA.
DeleteChuck, your big problem, (like most liberals) is that you know nothing about guns, nothing about the background check system, and nothing about crime. Everything you say is nothing more than a knee-jerk political response that you got from somewhere else. Case in point: The background check system DOES work rather well; every time I purchase a firearm, I get "red flagged" for a local ordinance violation from 1988! There is no way to stop illegal sales or gifts of firearms; all that can be done is trace a firearm AFTER the crime has been committed, which does nothing to prevent crime! Utopians like yourself have been trying to create the "perfect world" since the dawn of humanity, WITHOUT SUCCESS. Therefore, the right to defend ourselves against hostile individuals MUST BE MAINTAINED.
DeleteChuck, I grant you owning a firearm comes with great responsibility. And I too cringe at some of the irresponsible morons who's weapons are a liability to the safety of everyone around them. However, Gregory Smith's parole officer and the SPD also had a distinct responsibilities they failed to uphold. Smith's and every other felon's domicile should have been searched on a frequent basis as the law allows.
DeleteCase in point. Proven or not, if a spouse cries "abuse," by law every firearm must be removed from the home. If later found before clearing their name, is instant jail time. Alternatively, I know of both a convicted and imprisoned narcotics dealer, and violent, serial robber now out on parole that deer hunt. How is it Fish & Game is able to sell a firearms, hunting license to a felon? The system is broke and no one is being held responsible.
So, 9:38, let's say there's a law in effect that says when you buy a gun you are responsible for it forever. You can buy as many as present law allows, so your right to "bear" arms is still operant. But how would you treat any and all weapons that you possess if you know that you will go to jail as an accomplice to murder if you sell one, give it away, pawn it, lose it, leave it unsecured or let a friend "borrow" it?
DeleteI think you would pay much more attention to the lethality of firearms, be very careful about their security and destroy them when you tire of having them around. Would you agree?
When gun owners take that sort of care of their weapons, I think we will see firearms homicides committed with second-hand weapons drop precipitously. We will also have a priesthood of firearms owners who know they are a special class because they (and probably they alone) have a proper respect for a weapon.
10:45, you identify a serious problem.
Why not? BECAUSE IT'S STUPID! I know you will never understand the concept of being responsible for your own actions, but you should AT LEAST understand that one can not be responsible for the future actions of another. You just want to create a law that makes law-abiding citizens AFRAID to exercise our Second Amendment rights! You are the Donald Trump of the left; he wants to kill the First Amendment, you'll go after the Second. You authoritarians are all alike; you HATE not being able to control everything. The only freedom you recognize is the freedom to do as YOU please!
Delete6:15, I'm confused. If you destroy a weapon rather than sell it, pawn it, give it away, etc., how can somebody else get you into trouble with it after you've dumped the shards into the trash? You don't think it's a responsible attitude to look at a gun in someone else's hands as possibly being a danger? Aren't you doing the responsible thing by destroying it when you're tired of it and by keeping it under lock and key when you're not holding it?
DeleteAnd how does the proposal curtail your second amendment right? You can still buy as many guns as you want. Is this a problem for you???
Attention all low lifes. Move to Vermont where drugs are cheap, judges are like your grandmother and there ARE NO GUN LAWS.
ReplyDeleteMaybe YOUR grandmother; mine would've beat me to death with a rolling pin!
Delete12:39 again; LOL u r right, no milk and cookies for him, but we will see.
DeleteWe need to make felon gun possession more illegaler.
DeleteThat could be true if gunpowder residue was found on Wesley's shirt. If not, Wesley would have been further than three feet away when shot.
ReplyDelete