AZ - Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, allegedly shot and killed with an AK-47 by rancher George Alan Kelly, 75, Kino Springs, Jan 2023

[Deleted member 39678]

Staying on topic, who among the gun owners here would fire a warning shot over the heads of a group of men on your property, dressed in camouflage and armed with AK-47’s, after you see the “leader” of the group point an AK-47 at you?
This is what the defense alleges.
It seems an odd choice of action for a knowledgeable gun advocate under direct threat and in fear of their life to take and defies common sense in my opinion.

I agree that it would not be a good idea to fire warning shots when using deadly force to stop a threat is justified.

Let me ask you this. Is Mr Kelly being charged with a crime related to shooting warning shots over the heads of the armed trespassers? JMO.

 

[PrairieWind]

Staying on topic, who among the gun owners here would fire a warning shot over the heads of a group of men on your property, dressed in camouflage and armed with AK-47’s, after you see the “leader” of the group point an AK-47 at you?
This is what the defense alleges.
It seems an odd choice of action for a knowledgeable gun advocate under direct threat and in fear of their life to take and defies common sense in my opinion.

I don't find it unbelievable. First, you never know how you're going to react in a tense situation like that. Second, he has had lots of foot traffic through there in the past and now sees armed people. He wouldn't want to attack, just warn off. Engaging potential cartel people in a lethal gun battle wouldn't be advisable. But he wanted to let them know this was not going to unchallenged anymore. And once he had fired, he needs to follow up to see where they go. He can't just let them disappear out of view.

 

[worm]

Didn’t Mr Kelly report that he was being shot at by several armed people?

 

[everybodhi]

Didn’t Mr Kelly report that he was being shot at by several armed people?

That was stated in the beginning of this case but there were so many conflicting reports, I’m now going by what the defense attorney, Brenna Larkin, said in the 13-page document filed Feb. 9.
Also, Kimberley Hunley, chief deputy Santa Cruz County Attorney, said there were at least eight people in the group.

'Political powder keg': New details emerge as rancher charged with murder of Mexican citizen returns to court

The defense's version of events​

On Jan. 30, Kelly was eating lunch with his wife when he heard a single gunshot and saw his horse get spooked and run away at full speed, according to court documents. Kelly saw a group of men, armed with AK-47s, moving through the trees on his property.

The men donned khakis and camouflage clothing and carried large backpacks.

Kelly called the U.S. Border Patrol’s ranch liaison, who is responsible for helping ranchers on the borderlands, and told his wife to stay silent, inside and away from the windows so as not to draw the attention of the men.

Kelly walked onto his porch and saw the leader of the group point an AK-47 at him, the motion read. Kelly subsequently fired several warning shots above the heads of the armed men before they scattered into the desert surrounding his property, according to the motion.

 

[everybodhi]

>snipped
Let me ask you this. Is Mr Kelly being charged with a crime related to shooting warning shots over the heads of the armed trespassers? JMO.

Yes, I believe he is.

BBM
“The Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office filed an amended complaint in Kelly’s case on Tuesday adding two counts of aggravated assault to the initial count of first-degree murder.

The Sheriff's Office said that Kelly, 75, committed aggravated assault using “a rifle, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument” against two additional victims on Jan. 30, according to the complaint. The two additional victims are only identified by their initials in the complaint.”

'Political powder keg': New details emerge as rancher charged with murder of Mexican citizen returns to court

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Yes, I believe he is.

BBM
“The Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office filed an amended complaint in Kelly’s case on Tuesday adding two counts of aggravated assault to the initial count of first-degree murder.

The Sheriff's Office said that Kelly, 75, committed aggravated assault using “a rifle, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument” against two additional victims on Jan. 30, according to the complaint. The two additional victims are only identified by their initials in the complaint.”

'Political powder keg': New details emerge as rancher charged with murder of Mexican citizen returns to court

Thanks. Let me reword my thoughts. The first degree murder was dropped and was replaced by a second degree murder charge.

Does firing warning shots over someones head justify a second degree murder charge? JMO.

 

[everybodhi]

Thanks. Let me reword my thoughts. The first degree murder was dropped and was replaced by a second degree murder charge.

Does firing warning shots over someones head justify a second degree murder charge? JMO.

Obviously the second degree murder charge is in relation to the dead man.
Honestly, I think his downfall is his statement regarding warning shots “over their heads” as this can be used by the prosecution as evidence of not being in fear for one’s life, resulting in denial of a stand your ground defense.
The prosecution can say, “it was vengeance, or anger, not fear.”
Jmo

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Obviously the second degree murder charge is in relation to the dead man.
Honestly, I think his downfall is his statement regarding warning shots “over their heads” as this can be used by the prosecution as evidence of not being in fear for one’s life, resulting in denial of a stand your ground defense.
The prosecution can say, “it was vengeance, not fear.”
Jmo

You could be right. But I'm not convinced that Mr Kelly shot the victim. I think it is possible that one of his armed companions may have inadvertently shot him. JMO.

 

[PrairieWind]

Obviously the second degree murder charge is in relation to the dead man.
Honestly, I think his downfall is his statement regarding warning shots “over their heads” as this can be used by the prosecution as evidence of not being in fear for one’s life, resulting in denial of a stand your ground defense.
The prosecution can say, “it was vengeance, or anger, not fear.”
Jmo

I don't think shooting over their heads would take "stand your ground" off the table. But he is claiming he isn't the one who shot this guy. So SYG would really apply to the assault charges.

 

[everybodhi]

You could be right. But I'm not convinced that Mr Kelly shot the victim. I think it is possible that one of his armed companions may have inadvertently shot him. JMO.

Without ballistic evidence the jury is a wild card. Many convictions have been won or lost due to the emotions of a jury.
And generally, I think the state has the upper hand because most people tend to side with the law, LE, and prosecutors, and believe a suspect wouldn’t be charged unless they are guilty, unless there’s overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

[PrairieWind]

Without ballistic evidence the jury is a wild card. Many convictions have been won or lost due to the emotions of a jury.
And generally, I think the state has the upper hand because most people tend to side with the law, LE, and prosecutors, and believe a suspect wouldn’t be charged unless they are guilty, unless there’s overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Jury selection will be very important if this case gets to trial.

 

[WingsOverTX]

Without ballistic evidence the jury is a wild card. Many convictions have been won or lost due to the emotions of a jury.
And generally, I think the state has the upper hand because most people tend to side with the law, LE, and prosecutors, and believe a suspect wouldn’t be charged unless they are guilty, unless there’s overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I don't know. So far his public defender has been sharp IMO. I think the rush to judgment & overcharge will come into play.

Hopefully there will be excellent ballistic evidence. Without it, I can't see a conviction. Everyone on the jury will want solid, trustworthy evidence. If they don't get it, they will acquit.

Being able to separate one's biases & emotions for a clinical look at what each side offers will be key for the jury members. Ultimately, while this case has been conflated by a rush to judgment, common sense will lead jurors to the correct answer regardless of how they feel about those who illegally cross the border or about wealthy ranchers. At least, it should.

Right now we don't have all the evidence which handicaps all viewpoints here & everywhere.

Also....I am sure this will go to trial. The prosecution would look foolish on an international stage should they drop charges. GK has nothing to gain by making a plea deal even if one is offered, which I doubt will happen anyway.

JMO

 

[PrairieWind]

I don't know. So far his public defender has been sharp IMO. I think the rush to judgment & overcharge will come into play.

Hopefully there will be excellent ballistic evidence. Without it, I can't see a conviction. Everyone on the jury will want solid, trustworthy evidence. If they don't get it, they will acquit.

Being able to separate one's biases & emotions for a clinical look at what each side offers will be key for the jury members. Ultimately, while this case has been conflated by a rush to judgment, common sense will lead jurors to the correct answer regardless of how they feel about those who illegally cross the border or about wealthy ranchers. At least, it should.

Right now we don't have all the evidence which handicaps all viewpoints here & everywhere.

Also....I am sure this will go to trial. The prosecution would look foolish on an international stage should they drop charges. GK has nothing to gain by making a plea deal even if one is offered, which I doubt will happen anyway.

JMO

I do wonder if the prosecutor has sort of backed himself into a position where he feels obligated to drive on.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Staying on topic, who among the gun owners here would fire a warning shot over the heads of a group of men on your property, dressed in camouflage and armed with AK-47’s, after you see the “leader” of the group point an AK-47 at you?
This is what the defense alleges.
It seems an odd choice of action for a knowledgeable gun advocate under direct threat and in fear of their life to take and defies common sense in my opinion.

In a general sense you never point a gun, loaded or otherwise, at anyone unless you intend to KILL. In a self-defense situation you don’t give warnings.

This situation is entirely different than a typical self defense situation. imo If i lived in a cartel crossing and I saw a large group with a at least one gun with a shot fired, I would think warning shots would be fair enough. I don’t think an individual would think they could pick them off one by one. They don’t have to cower behind a locked door and can be pro-active in their defense. imo

I’m not convinced GCB was killed by GK. If he was, I think second degree murder is an over charge. imo

 

[wary]

I don't know. So far his public defender has been sharp IMO. I think the rush to judgment & overcharge will come into play.

Hopefully there will be excellent ballistic evidence. Without it, I can't see a conviction. Everyone on the jury will want solid, trustworthy evidence. If they don't get it, they will acquit.

Being able to separate one's biases & emotions for a clinical look at what each side offers will be key for the jury members. Ultimately, while this case has been conflated by a rush to judgment, common sense will lead jurors to the correct answer regardless of how they feel about those who illegally cross the border or about wealthy ranchers. At least, it should.

Right now we don't have all the evidence which handicaps all viewpoints here & everywhere.

Also....I am sure this will go to trial. The prosecution would look foolish on an international stage should they drop charges. GK has nothing to gain by making a plea deal even if one is offered, which I doubt will happen anyway.

JMO

What are your thoughts about the trajectory of the bullet? Entering his lower back and rising to exit his upper chest, I believe? (I don’t think that’s been disputed.)

If GK had fired into the ground, I’d think it could be a ricochet.

But there’s no evidence of that, as far as I know.

MOO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

What are your thoughts about the trajectory of the bullet? Entering his lower back and rising to exit his upper chest, I believe? (I don’t think that’s been disputed.)

If GK had fired into the ground, I’d think it could be a ricochet.

But there’s no evidence of that, as far as I know.

MOO

I can't say for sure but I would think that a bullet striking the ground would expend a lot of it's energy and become deformed before hitting a persons body.

Would a ricocheting bullet be able to go completely through the victims body? I have doubts about that. JMO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Jury selection will be very important if this case gets to trial.

I agree. I was on jury duty once and the defense attorney was questioning a potential juror. The guy said that the defendant "had to do it" because police only arrest guilty people. He was obviously excused.

That one was easy for the defense. Not all people are that blatant about their biases during voir dire and can get on a jury. JMO.

 

[WingsOverTX]

What are your thoughts about the trajectory of the bullet? Entering his lower back and rising to exit his upper chest, I believe? (I don’t think that’s been disputed.)

If GK had fired into the ground, I’d think it could be a ricochet.

But there’s no evidence of that, as far as I know.

MOO

I really can't say without an expert explaining distance from weapon, damage from the bullet, etc.

I would want to hear a lot about the wound. Did they test for bullet residue/fragments?

I am not very familiar with anything having to do with firearms.

 

[everybodhi]

Jury selection will be very important if this case gets to trial.

I don’t pretend to know what happened that day but I just read today that we are now at 3% of cases not making a plea so the odds are against this, or anyone else, ever going to trial.
The pattern is now to over charge to force a plea agreement, they have made it not feasible to fight charges.
With a murder charge he can liquidate all his assets to pay the lawyers a million on a gamble to prove innocence, if he loses he dies in prison and his wife is left destitute and if he is acquitted he will still be broke, or he can plea to a lessor charge and possibly still have a life left to live.
It’s a travesty that our justice system has come to this, imo.

 

[everybodhi]

I don't know. So far his public defender has been sharp IMO. I think the rush to judgment & overcharge will come into play.

Hopefully there will be excellent ballistic evidence. Without it, I can't see a conviction. Everyone on the jury will want solid, trustworthy evidence. If they don't get it, they will acquit.

Being able to separate one's biases & emotions for a clinical look at what each side offers will be key for the jury members. Ultimately, while this case has been conflated by a rush to judgment, common sense will lead jurors to the correct answer regardless of how they feel about those who illegally cross the border or about wealthy ranchers. At least, it should.

Right now we don't have all the evidence which handicaps all viewpoints here & everywhere.

Also....I am sure this will go to trial. The prosecution would look foolish on an international stage should they drop charges. GK has nothing to gain by making a plea deal even if one is offered, which I doubt will happen anyway.

JMO

Wait. What? How does he qualify for a public defender?