by AndersonsInfo 40 Replies latest jw friends
The only problem here is the trespasser wasn't suitably weaponized himself.
If he had exercised his 2nd amendment rights he could possibly have got a shot or two off himself and taken that neighborhood crazy down before dying himself.
Wasted opportunity....
Not even a verbal warning to get off his property. His 2nd ammendment right wasn't taken away - not even when he pulled a gun on the meter reader. Fifteen guns later and a shot to the head 'for effect' on an unarmed sales guy trying to earn a living and what do you hear - 'he was a nut' - 'the victim was a trespasser and should have obeyed the signs'.....so - the meter reader isn't allowed to go on to the property without getting shot? The 'nut' gets off on the first case, accumulates more weapons and then only stops when he kills someone who although he is laying on the ground shot, puts a bullet in the guys head? Still not hearing any gun advocate come up with any small idea on how to stop 'nut's' from exerting their 2nd ammendment rights - sammies
---
Cape Coral, Florida (News-Press) -- A former prosecutor described him Thursday as a "time bomb" because seven years ago, he pointed a gun at a woman who simply wanted to read his electric meter.
On Wednesday, Kenneth Roop, 52, of Cape Coral, pointed a gun again, police say, and this time fired two shots, telling police he was "in fear." He is charged with second-degree murder in the death of Nick Rainey, 30, who wanted to sell him frozen steaks and lobster.
Rainey, an employee of Blue Ribbon Steak and Seafood, had just knocked on Roop's door at 1815 SW 30th Terrace and gotten no response when Roop pulled into the driveway, driving a pickup, according to an arrest report released Thursday.
Explaining his actions to police after the shooting, Roop said he became "more than a little nervous" as Rainey walked down the driveway toward histruck and appeared to have something in his hand.
As Rainey drew within 4 feet, Roop grabbed his 9mm Glock from his pocket and fired once, striking Rainey in the shoulder, he told police. Rainey fell to the ground, screaming, 'You shot me,' in what Roop described as an "antagonistic" manner, according to the report.
Roop said he was still in fear and thought Rainey was reaching for something, so he shot Rainey once more in the back of the head, "for effect," the report said. A company order brochure and cell phone were found near Rainey's body.
Roop told detectives Rainey should have respected his three "No Trespassing" signs and explained he didn't warn Rainey after pulling his weapon because, "I'm not going to give him the chance to do something to me; I was in fear." He told police he believes he possesses 14 firearms.
A Similar Situation
Seven years ago, Roop pulled a weapon and threatened a power company meter reader who had walked onto his property in Wildwood, south of Ocala, according to former prosecutor Ray Sotomayor.
Sotomayor led the state's case against Roop in 2005, when he was charged with improper exhibition of a weapon.
Sotomayor said the uniformed meter reader approached his home to perform her job when she was confronted by Roop, who was aiming his gun directly at her. He said she was terrified.
"I have no doubt he pointed it directly at her heart," he said. "This guy had a screw loose."
He said Roop's outlook was similar to "militia-minded, anti-government" types and that he was obsessed with the idea of guarding his home. Sotomayor recalled Roop saying: "I have a right to protect my property and my land. Nobody need come on there."
"I knew this guy was a time bomb, I really did," Sotomayor said. "It's unfortunate we didn't get him convicted."
Roop was found not guilty by a jury. It is the only charge on Roop's record, according to his attorney, Marquin Rinard.
He was just selling food
John Godfrey, who was selling meat with Rainey on Wednesday, said Rainey had no idea what was coming.
"That's the eerie part," Godfrey said. "There was no warning; there was no yelling."
Once Rainey lay face down on the driveway, bleeding after the first shot, Godfrey said Roop sat in his truck for a few seconds before pointing his weapon once more at the back of Rainey's head.
"That's murder, execution-style," he said. "The guy showed no emotion whatsoever."
Donna Perillo, who lived two doors down from Roop for about a year, said he was known as "the nut job from the block" and had called police several times on neighborhood children playing in the street near his home.
Perillo said the children, between the ages of 4 and 8, would ride their bikes up and down the street.
"He kept saying if they step foot on my property, they're trespassing," she said.
Each time, officers came and talked to the man and told him the kids were allowed to play in the street, she said.
"The cops came several times and said the man's not all there, so have them pick a different turn-around point (on their bikes)," she said.
At his first appearance Thursday morning, where bond was denied, Roop politely answered the judge's questions with "Yes, ma'am." A woman who identified herself as Rainey's mom yelled out, "He shot my son in cold blood."
Rinard said his client attends a local church, though he declined to say which one, and is also a member of the Caloosa Dive Club, where he won underwater video and photo awards. Roop is self-employed as an underwater photographer, he said.
Roop is listed as the president of Ancient Island Educational Media. The company's website describes Roop as a Christian, economist and cave diver.
Rinard said it was too early to tell whether Florida's stand-your-ground law might be used as a defense.
"Obviously, whatever avenues are available, we will explore them," he said.
“He was telling the officer, ‘he stepped on my property, he trespassed, I’ll kill anybody that steps on my property,’
Fantasy and stuff of JW urban legend.
Officer: "Why didn't you shoot the Jehovah Witness that came to your door?" Shooter: "Because of the two 7ft tall men with them, sporting semi-automatic rifles."
I wonder what the no trespassing laws are in Florida. With the Zimmerman/Martin case, I doubt it is the same as in this state.
I would never walk past a no trepassing sign here and never as a jw. I remember some jws that climbed over a gate at a private residence, one of the cattle types. I stayed in the car off the property.
Sounds like this guy had extreme issues before. Probably someone should have posted a beware sign outside his property.
The shooter is going to go to prison for life - that really was a 2nd Degree murder.
"The shooter is going to go to prison for life - that really was a 2nd Degree murder."
Yep! He won't be keeping people of his property in prison. They will be taking turns to jump on his back. Happy humping days ahead.
| The shooter is going to go to prison for life - that really was a 2nd Degree murder. | |
| james_woods |
Mr JW,
Please, do not jump on the quick conclusion. T here may be more than what is presented currently in the media. Let us wait and see the next developments. But one thing is seem clear to me, its going to be a contested case. The rights of the killer and killed will be discussed at large. I will not be surprised if 'self defence claim' come into the picture. The legality of a tresspassing sign may come up as well. What is the ethnic of the killer and the killed? How about the argument that by deliberately igoring the tresspassig sign, the killed guy brought death upon himself?. Needless to say, I feel very bad for his loss and its gonna be painful to his family. We will see the outcome. I will keep an eye on this case.
Scott77
Scott77 said:
". The legality of a tresspassing sign may come up as well. What is the ethnic of the killer and the killed? How about the argument that by deliberately igoring the tresspassig sign, the killed guy brought death upon himself?. Needless to say, I feel very bad for his loss and its gonna be painful to his family. We will see the outcome. I will keep an eye on this case."
Those aren't exactly unanswered legal questions; the answer is found by doing a little reserch into existing laws (which apparently the shooter didn't do).
While the shooter will get his day in court, it's not likely he'll be raising objections based on challenging precedents determined long ago (ie use of deadly force against trespassers is already well-defined, and his posting a sign doesn't give him license to kill, just as not posting a sign doesn't mean people can enter property without the owners permission without it constituting trespassing).
Is there really any excuse for shooting and unarmed man then shooting him again in the head when he is already down? All the guy was doing was trying to sell fish. Threatening him with a gun would have been more than sufficient. Did the killer think the fish man would outdraw him with a smoked kipper? Even gladiators have rules of combat!
Nope. If nothing else, the nut job teaches a lesson about the right to remain silent, even if not placed under arrest to avoid self-incrimination. He sealed his own case when he stated that he shot the wounded man in back of the head "for effect". No law anywhere allows you to kill someone "for effect". He might've been justified for the 1st shot to the shoulder, but the coup de grace shot to the back of head was murder, execution-style. (it's harder to claim shots fired while the person was fleeing were defensive shots).
He'll no doubt cop an insanity plea (and rightly so, as there's strong evidence for that defense).
