Probable Cause Statement, Sawyer Cty Sheriff, WI.

[TomBow]

The following is the full Probable Cause Statement relating to the WI shootings. I have typed it exactly as written:

PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT

CHAI SOUA VANG 09-24-1968

ON NOVEMBER 21, 2004 AT 12:30 PM SAWYER COUNTY SHERIFF’S INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS WAS CONTACTED BY CHIEF DEPUTY TIM ZEIGLE WHO ADVISED THAT THERE HAS BEEN A SHOOTING WITH MULTIPLE VICTIMS IN SOUTHERN SAWYER COUNTY. CHIEF DEPUTY TIM ZEIGLE REQUESTED THAT INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS REPOND TO THE SCENE.

NOVEMBER 21,2004 WAS THE SECOND DAY OF THE 2004 WISCONSIN RIFLE DEER SEASON.

INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS WAS ADVISED THAT THE INCIDENT OCCURRED IN THE WOODS BEHIND A CABIN AT 394N DEER LAKE RD IN THE TOWN OF METEOR IN SAWYER COUNTY WISCONSIN. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS LEARNED THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME SORT OF DISPUTE THAT DEVELOPED BETWEEN A HUNTING PARTY AT 394N DEER LAKE RD AND AT THE TIME AN UNKNOWN MALE SUBJECT OF ASIAN DESCENT. REPORTS INDICATED THAT THE ASIAN MALE WANDERED ONTO PROPERTY OWNED BY TERRY WILLERS AND ROBERT CROTTEAU. THE ASIAN MALE WAS LOCATED SITTING IN A TREE STAND ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE ASIAN MALE WAS CONFRONTED TY TERRY WILLERS AND TOLD BY WILLERS TO LEAVE THE PROPERTY. WILLERS USAD A WALKIE TALKIE TO ADVISE THE REST OF THE HUNTING PARTY THAT WERE LOCATED AT THE CABIN THAT WILLERS TOLD THE SUBJECT TO LEAVE AND WILLERS WAS GOING TO WAIT AND MAKE SURE THE SUBJECT LEFT.

LAUREN HESEBECK WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.

AT THIS POINT ROBERT CROTTEAU, JOE CROTTEAU, LAUREN HESEBECK, DENNIS DREW AND MARK ROIDT LEFT THE CABIN AND WENT TO WILLERS LOCATION. DURING ANOTHER VERBAL EXCHANGE WITH THE ASIAN MALE ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER’S PARTY WROTE THE BACK TAG NUMBER OF THE ASIAN MALE SUBJECT IN THE DIRT ON A “MULE” WHICH IS A 2 SIDE-BYSIDE SEAT ATV, THE BACK TAG NUMBER THAT WAS WRITTEN DOWN WAS 0685505. THE ASIAN MALE WAS ALSO ADVISED THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT WAS GOING TO BE CALLED.

RECORDS CHECK OF THE BACK TAG INDICATED THAT THE TAG WAS REGISTERED TO CHAI VANG 09-24-1968 ST. PAUL MN 5’04” 145LBS BLACK HAIR AND BROWN EYES. VANG WAS LATER ARRESTED AND WAS IN POSSESSION OF THIS BACK TAG. THE ASIAN MALE FROM THIS POINT WILL BE REFERRED TO AS VANG.

VANG STARTED TO WALK AWAY AND GOT APPROXIMATELY 40 YARDS AWAY. THEN VANG APPEARED TO REMOVE THE SCOPE FROM HIS RIFLE AND TURNED AROUND AND STARTED SHOOTING. VANG SHOT SEVERAL TIMES AND HIT WILLERS. PRIOR TO BEING SHOT WILLERS RETURNED FIRE BUT DID NOT HIT VANG. VANG SHOT SEVERAL MORE SHOTS AND STRUCK DENNIS DREW AND MARK ROIDT. LAUREN HESEBECK ATTEMPTED TO HIDE BEHIND THE “MULE” BUT VANG MOVED AROUND THE “MULE” AND SHOT LAUREN HESEBECK IN THE SHOULDER. ROBERT AND JOE CROTTEAU RAN AWAY FROM THE SCENE. VANG THEN PERSUED ROBERT AND JOE. BOTH ROBERT AND JOE WERE LOCATED AWAY FROM THE INITIAL SCENE AND HAD BEEN SHOT TO DEATH.

WHILE VANG WAS PURSUING ROBERT AND JOE, LAUREN HESEBECK WAS ABLE TO CALL ON THE WALKIE TALKIE TO THE CABIN AND ADVISED THAT HE HAD BEEN SHOT AND NEEDED HELP. HELP ARRIVED AND REMOVED TERRY WILLERS FROM THE SCENE. A SHORT TIME LATER LAUREN HEARD ANOTHER ATV APPROACHING AND THEN HEARD MORE GUN SHOTS. LAUREN ADVISED THAT VANG THEN APPEARED AGAIN WHERE THE SHOOTING ORIGINALLY STARTED. LAUREN HESEBECK HEARD VANG SAY SOMETHING LIKE “ONE OF YOU ARE STILL ALIVE”. LAUREN HESEBECK INDICATED THAT HE RETURNED FIRE AT THAT TIME BUT IS UNSURE HOW MANY TIMES.

ROBERT CROTTEAU, JOE CROTTEAU, MARK ROIDT, JESSICA WILLERS AND ALLAN LASKI WERE ALL DECEASED AT THE SCENE FROM WHAT APPEARED TO BE GUN SHOT WOUNDS.

TERRY WILLERS WAS SHOT IN THE NECK AND WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL. DENNIS DREW WAS SHOT IN THE ABDOMEN AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL. LAUREN HESEBECK WAS SHOT IN THE SHOULDER AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL.

ON NOVEMBER 22, 2004 AT APPROXIMATELY 10:15 AM INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS AND FBI AGENT KEN MEMMOSER INTERVIEWED CHAI VANG AT THE SAWYER COUNTY JAIL. VANG WAS READ HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS WHICH VANG INDICATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD AND ALSO SIGNED THE FORM INDICATING THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THEM. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS ALSO ASKED VANG IF VANG COULD READ AND WRITE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. VANG STATED THAT HE COULD. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS ASKED VANG TO READ OUT LOUD THE WAIVER OF MIRANDA RIGHTS. VANG READ THE WAIVER OUT LOUD TO INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS AND S/A MAMMOSER. VANG STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THE WAIVER BUT AT THIS TIME WISHED TO TALKE TO A LAWYER FIRST BEFORE MAKING A STATEMENT. AT THIS POINT THE INTERVIEW ENDED.

AT APPROXIMATELY 10:30 AM INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS WAS CONTACTED BY THE ON DUTY JAILER. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS WAS ADVISED THAT WHILE JAILER FRANK METZINGER WAS GOING TO MOVE VANG BACK TO VANG’S CELL. VANG ADVISED METZINGER THAT WANG WAS WILLING TO TALK TO INVESTIGATORS. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS ADVISED LT KURT BARTHEL OF THIS AND ADVISED THAT THE REQUEST BY VANG NEEDED TO BE IN WRITING. LT. BARTHEL THEN MET WITH VANG AND GAVE VANG A SAWYER COUNTY JAIL INMATE REQUEST FORM. VANG WROTE OUT AND SIGNED THE FORM. VANG WROTE “I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THE INVESTIGATOR NOW. I DON’T WANT A LAWYER AT THIS TIME”. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS AND S/A MAMMOSER AGAIN MET WITH VANG IN THE INTERVIEW ROOM AT THE SAWYER COUNTY JAIL. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS SHOWED VANG THE INMATE REQUEST FORM AND ASKED VANG IF VANG HAD FILLED IT OUT AND SIGNED IT. VANG INDICATED THAT HE DID. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS ADVISED VANG THAT THE INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS NEEDED TO READ VANG HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS AGAIN. VANG STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS READ THE MIRANDA RIGHTS AND VANG STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD HIS RIGHTS. INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS THEN ADVISED VANG TO READ THE WAIVER OF RIGHTS WHICH VANG DID AND SIGNED THE WAIVER OF RIGHTS AT 10:35 am INDICATING THAT VANG WANTED TO TALK WITH INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS AND S/A MAMMOSER.

VANG STATED THAT VANG HAD BEEN HUNTING PUBLIC LAND AND GOT LOST. VANG STATED THAT VANG LOCATED A TREE STAND NEXT TO A SWAMP. NOBODY WAS IN THE STAND SO VANG CLIMBED INTO IT. VANG STATED THAT AFTER APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES ANOTHER HUNTER APPROACHED VANG. THE HUNTER ASKED “WHY ARE YOU IN THE STAND. YOU’RE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY” VANG STATED THAT VANG TOLD THE SUBJECT THAT VANG DID NOT KNOW THAT THE LAND WAS PRIVATE AND THAT VANG DID NOT SEE ANY “NO TRESSPASSING” SIGNS. VANG STATED THAT VANG CLIMBED DOWN AND STARTED TO WALK AWAY. VANG STATED THAT WHILE WALKING AWAY VANG HEARD THE OTHER MALE SUBJECT CALL ON A WALKIE TALKIE. VANG DID NOT HEAR WHAT WAS SAID.

VANG STATED THAT A FEW MOMENTS LATER 2 ATV’S APPROACHED HIS LOCATING WITH 5 OR 6 GUYS ON THEM. VANG STATED THAT VANG WAS CONFRONTED BY THIS GROUP ALSO. VANG STATED THAT ONE OF THE SUBJECTS THAT VANG BELIEVED TO BE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY STATED “WHY WERE YOU IN MY SON’S STAND”? VANG STATED THAT VANG TOLD THE MAN THAT VANG DID NOT KNOW IT WAS PRIVATE LAND AND THAT VANG DID NOT SEE ANY SIGNS INDICATING THAT LAND WAS PRIVATE. VANG STATED THAT THIS MAN STATED “YOU JUST TRESPASSED THROUGH 400 ACRES OF PRIVATE LAND. VANG STATED THAT THE OTHERS IN THE GROUP SURROUNDED VANG. VANG STATED THAT THE MAN THAT VANG THOUGHT TO BE THE OWNER THEN STARTED CALLING VANG NAMES LIKE “EDIT, EDIT, EDIT ASIAN”. VANG STATED THAT AT THIS POINT THE ONLY ONE THAT VANG SAW WITH A GUN WAS THE FIRST SUBJECT THAT KICKED VANG OUT OF THE STAND.

VANG STATED THAT VANG WAS TOLD TO GET OFF THE (Contact US Regarding This Word) PROPERTY AND NEVER COME BACK. VANG STATED THAT AT ONE POINT THEY WROTE DOWN HIS LICENSE NUMBER AND STATED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO CALL LAW ENFORCEMENT. VANG STATED THAT SOME OF THE OTHERS IN THE GROUP STARTED CALLING VANG NAMES ((Contact US Regarding This Word), (Contact US Regarding This Word)) AND WERE ALSO SWEARING AT VANG. VANG STATED THAT VANG STARTED WALKING AWAY AND GOT APPROXIMATELY 20 YARDS AWAY AND TURNED AROUND AND OBSERVED THE MAN THAT HAD THE RIFLE WALKING TOWARD THE REST OF THE GROUP. VANG ALSO OBSERVED THE MAN TAKE THE RIFLE OFF HIS SHOULDER AND TOOK THE RIFLE INTO HIS HANDS. VANG STATED THAT VANG WAS APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET AWAY AND LOOKED BACK AGAIN. VANG STATED THAT VANG OBSERVED THE SUBJECT WITH THE RIFLE PINT THE RIFLE AT VANG. VANG STATED THAT VANG IMMEDIATELY DROPPED TO A CROUCH POSITION AND THE SUBJECT SHOT AT VANG AND THE BULLET HIT THE GROUND 30 TO 40 FEET BEHIND VANG.

VANG STATED THAT VANG REMOVED THE SCOPE FROM HIS RIFLE. VANG STATED THAT VANG SHOT 2 TIMES AT THE MAN WITH THE RIFLE AND THE MAN DROPPED TO THE GROUND, VANG SAW ALL THE OTHERS RUN TOWARD THE ATV’S AND VANG CONTINUED TO SHOOT. VANG STATED THAT 2 OR 3 MORE MEN FELL TO THE GOUND. VANG STATED THAT A COUPLE OF THE MEN STARTED TO RUN. VANG STATED THAT VANG CHASED AFTER ONE OF THE MEN THAT RAN TOWARDS THE CABIN. VANG STATED THAT THE MAN WAS YELLING “HELP ME! “HELP ME!”. VANG STATED THAT THE MAN DROPPED TO THR GROUND. VANG STATED THAT THE MAN DID NOT HAVE A GUN. VANG STATED THAT VANG WALKED UP TO THE MAN AND HEARD THE MAN GROAN AND THEN VANG WALKED AWAY. (THIS IS BELIEVED TO BE THE BODY OF JOEY CROTTEAU.)

VANG STATED THAT AT THIS POINT VANG HEARD ONE OF THE OTHER MEN CALL ON THE WALKIE TALKIE AND STATE “WE’VE BEEN SHOT AND NEED HELP.” VANG STATED THAT VANG OBSERVED 3 OTHER SUBJECTS COMING ON AN ATV. VANG STATED THAT VANG THEN RETURNED HIS REVERSIBLE COAT FROM ORANGE TO CAMO. VANG STATED THAT HE ALSO RELOADED HIS MAGAZINE WITH 5 OR 6 BULLETS. VANG STATED THAT VANG DID NOT SHOOT AT THESE MEN BECAUSE THEY HAD GUNS WITH THEM. VANG STATED THAT THE MEN WERE IN BY THE OTHER INJURED MEN AND LESS THAN A MINUTE AND THEN LEFT. VANG DID NOT KNOW IF THE MEN TOOK ANY OF THE WOUNDED OUT WITH THEM.

VANG STATED THAT VANG THEN OBSERVED ANOTHER ATV COMING WITH 2 MORE PEOPLE ON IT. VANG STATED THAT THE DRIVER OF THIS ATV HAD A GON ON HIS SHOULDER. VANG STATED THAT VANG BEGAN TO RUN AND VANG STATED THAT THEY SAW VANG RUNNING AND WERE GOING TOO FAST TO STOP AND DROVE PAST VANG. VANG STATED THAT THEY STOPPED APPROXIMATELY 10 TO 15 FEET PAST VANG AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE. VANG STATED THAT THE MAN REMOVED THE GUN FROM HIS SHOULDER WITH ONE HAND WHILE THE OTHER HAND WAS ON THE HANDLE BARS OF THE ATV. VANG STATED THAT VANG SHOT 3 OR 4 MORE TIMES AND BOTH PEOPLE FELL OF THE ATV AND ONTO THE GROUND. (THESE ARE THE BODIES OF ALLAN LASKI AND JESSICA WILLERS.)

VANG STATED THAT VANG THEN STATED TO RUN BACK TOWARDS WHERE THE ORIGINAL SHOOTING STARTED. VANG STATED THAT VANG LOOKED UP THE TRAIL AND SAW THAT ONE OF THE MEN WERE STANDING. VANG STATED THAT VANG YELLED “YOU’RE NOT DEAD YET”? VANG STATED THAT VANG SHOT ONE MORE TIME IN THE DIRECTION OF THIS MAN BUT DOESN’T KNOW IF HE HIT THE MAN OR NOT. VANG STATED THAT HE CONTINUED TO RUN AWAY AND DID NOT RETURN. VANG STATED THAT AT ONE POINT WHILE RUNNING VANG DECIDED THAT HE DID NOT WANT TO SHOOT ANYBODY ELSE SO VANG THREW HIS REMAINING AMMUNITION INTO A SWAMP.

VANG STATED THAT APPROXIMATELY AN HOUR AFTER THROWING THE AMMUNITION AWAY VANG HEARD THE AIRPLANE OVERHEAD. VANG STATED THAT VANG WAS THINKING THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR VANG SO VANG WAS THINKING ABOUT TURNING HIMSELF IN. VANG STATED THAT VANG CAME UPON A HUNTER WITH AND ATV AND ASKED THE HUNTER FOR A RIDE TO THE ROAD. VANG STATED THAT THE WARDENS WERE AT THE CABIN WAITING FOR HIM.

AT THE SCENE THERE WAS ONLY 1 RIFLE LOCATED. THAT RIFLE WAS LOCATED NEAR THE BODY OF MARK ROIDT.

ALL OF THE VICTIMS WERE DRESSED IN BLAZE ORANGE CLOTHING.

PRELIMINARY AUTOPSY RESULTS CONDUCTED BY THE FORENSIC PATHOLOGY TEAM UNDER THE DIRECTION OF DR. McGEE OF THE RAMSEY COUNTY MINNESOTA MEDICAL EXAMINAR’S OFFICE ARE AS FOLLOWS:

ROBERT CROTTEAU—GUN SHOT

JOEY CROTTEAU—GUN SHOT

AL LASKI—GUN SHOT

JESSICA WILLERS—GUN SHOT

MARK ROIDT—GUN SHOT

DENNIS DREW—AUTOPSY PENDING

INVESTIGATOR GARY GILLIS

NOVEMBER 23, 2004

[Tom Linderholm]

Thanks for the translation, Hard to call out after hearing both sides of the story, one part of me says WTF to Vang but just as much as we think that he was the cause of this, whats to stop us from the ability of 8 others to pose the same crime upon Vang? Not that he was right in his actions but if he is right in his testimony then where does that leave us? How many threads have we all read about people wandering off of state land and on to private? How many false accusations and outright slandering have we been faced with because of ones race? None the less my heart goes out to the families of the victims of this horrible crime. I guess the jury will be out until we hear an outcome and more evidence arrises.

PS those of you who will take this and bash my thoughts well then you need to open your mind up to possibilities, this is a messed up world we live in and all it takes is one individual to set it off!

[wall-i-king]

Cheffrey

I agree with you on this one. I am glad that I have now heard both sides. I still don't condone the s at all and never will. This was a horrible thing that one human being did to a number of others, but if His story on it is what really happened then that makes it just a little more understandable, however no less tragic. I just hope that justice gets done in this situation. Lets remember the families of the victims in our prayers, and really count all of the things that we have to be thankful for. Have a great thanksgiving.

keep fishin'

wall-i-king

[Fergus Mor McErc]

I agree, both sides are going to have an interset in puting their side of the story in the best light they can. Vang's credibility, however, comes into question when he claims he found himself lost but continues to hunt. He has no idea where he is but climbs into a strange deer stand and contines to try and get a deer? What's he going to do, drag it around with him while he tries to find his way out of the woods? I think the natural human reaction to being lost is to try and find out where you are, not try and aquire a couple hundred pounds to drag around with you while you figure things out. Vang's story leads one to ask so many more questions. Just what the heck was he up to out there?

[fishtrap3]

Looks like they are looking into Vang in the death of another hunter three years ago. Pic kinda looks like him but will have to wait and see what transpires!!!!!!

[Powerstroke]

Yes its nice to hear the other side of the story, but is it even remotely logical to think that one fired shot would be responsible for murdering people....including the blatant run down and shooting of the father and son in the back. The body was 100 yds away and he admits to shooting in the back.

We're talking about someone who has several 911 calls to his home for domestic violence, who has been cited for trespassing before, and is an awarded sharpshooter in the California Army National Guard.

The SKS rifle is not the most accurate rifle out there...especially the chinese model, yet this guy found time to remove his scope and free shoot several fatal shots all relating to the center mass area of the body (shoulder, neck, abdomen) andthose are the ones repoted as injuries.

And who carries around a whole box of shells, changes from blaze to camo in order to avoid being seen and set ambush...

I respect your opinion, but nothing adds up to the outcome here. 1 shot from 1 rifle. ONly 1 rifle at the scene yet he contends there was 2 or more. You know it happens to people in traumatic situations, but he was better off running in whatever direction was opposite the other hunters rather than running down a terrified screaming boy and shooting him in the back.

[N_Foster]

I am pretty confident that if someone shot at me, I would not take the time to take my scope off to return fire!! Too many holes in his story. He better not get off free on this.

[knoppers]

in vangs story, he says the last two to show up on a ATV had guns, but the police report says there was only one gun, from the first individual. too many holes in vangs story for sure.

[Jim Hudson]

When I first heard about this situation, I thought to myself, the man must have been provoked to do such a thing or either he set up this situation, knowing or hoping there would be conflict so he could go on a killing spree. As we all know how some people think and have seen what people can do.

I figured when they interviewed Vang he would claim self defense but as you all have seen there are many holes in his story that conflict to what was found at the scene and what was said by other parties. So truthfully, I do not think we will know the entire story of what all panned out that day. There is only one thing sure about it, even though Vang was shot at by ONE person, from his story, he made it plain to the investigator he KILLED the remaining people as they were fleeing from his first shots at who he said shot at him first. If you are able to plainly see and be able to recollect that only ONE man has ONE weapon, why shoot the rest of the people around him? In self defense, by his story he had the right to protect himself in lieu of being shot at but he had no right to continue to shoot people after he seen the man who shot at him fall to the ground. He is guilty no matter which way I look at it, provoked or not.

[fisherman-andy]

First of all let me start by saying that sometimes you may think you know who a person really is, but in reality you may have no idea. This goes for both the good and bad.

In hearing so far, it seems that both parties are guilty... and things got out of hand when it shouldn't have. The question to ask is was there some justification in the actions that happen?

There is just too many loop holes in the story and I don't think both sides are telling the exact truth. It seemed obvious that there was some sort of verbal exchange, which lead to the confrontation. I found it hard for a person who willingly agreed to leave all of suddenly turned around and started killing. Something must've sparked.

It was certainly wrong for Vang to go on a shooting rampage,

but for a person who is trained in the military & war, you can sorta see why he did what he did even though it's wrong. It's pretty hard to stop once your at a rage and you know your own life is at hand be it if your the victim or not. I am not justifying Vang's action, only making a point.

What has really been bad so far is that the Media/News is blowing things up in big proportions. For such a tragedy, the media has created much tension among the white & asian communities. The media has only made matters worse trying to tell a half story and going so far as to even revealed Vang's residence on the news which could put in part his innocent family in danger along with creating tension in that neighborhood. Fortunately the Police came and took the family members in custody.

As I see it, there is no justification in the killing of the victims. Vang will definately serve time or some sort of consequences, regardless whether the issue was on a defensive side or not.

It is best to not take judgement, until the whole complete story is revealed in full detail, even then you may still not know what really happened.

If your going out to hunt this weekend, steer away from confrontations and be safe. It's hard, but let's not let this whole ordeal ruin the deer hunting season. Make sure you buddy up with a friend if you are going. Happy holidays and safe hunting...

[lawdog]

Both parties are guilty??? I'm sorry but that is pure bunk! Even suppose these guys were jerks to this guy when they told him to leave, SO WHAT?!! Being a jerk to someone doesn't mean they can shoot you. AND, suppose (despite the obviously glaring holes and inconsistencies in the statements) that the first shot was fired by the landowner. MAYBE, that excuses shooting back in self defense, although Vang's own statement says he was maybe 100 feet away and he thought the bullet hit 30 feet away??? Come on, you aren't being "shot at" if someone with a deer rifle misses you by 1/3 of the distance between you and him at only 100 feet. So that MAYBE (giving him the benefit of a HUGE doubt) covers the ONE of EIGHT victims, but NO others, no way no how.

There is just no two ways about this, VANG IS A MURDERER! There is no need for debate about race, motives or two years ago, this guy is a cold blooded killer and should never see the light of day again! This statement he gave is really about all they even need to convict this guy, its gold to a prosecutor! If this guy doesn't plead guilty he's just wasting time and tax dollars!

[ironranger420]

I agree!!! What I don't get is Vang says that as soon as he was asked to leave, he climbed downa and started walking away. Then the indicidual who confronted him got on the walkie talkie. A few minutes later Vang heard an ATV approaching and saw 5-6 people on two ATV's approaching. I'm sorry, but in the amount of time it took for these other people to show up, Vang should have been several hundred yards away from the scene. That would mean these others would have had to chase him down in order to confront him again.

Also, Vang admitted that after he shot the first individual with a gun, he only shot the people who were unarmed. I don't remember the exact quote, but it went something like that. I'm sorry, but "protection" doesn't invlove shooting unarmed people that are running for their lives.

I hope he gets what he deserves!

[Lake Alice]

This was a duplicate post.

[Lake Alice]

I spent the first five years of my career as a prosecutor. I like Lautenschlager's chances. Vang's credibility looks to be nil.

Fact: Vang speaks fluent or nearly fluent English.

Fact: Vang owns 40 acres of private hunting land near Brook Park, MN.

Fact: Vang was cited for trespassing during hunting season before, and apparantly never paid the fine.

Fact: Vang was apparantly once cited for having 96 crappies over his limit.

Fact: Rather than retreat when he could have, Vang shot unarmed people in the back.

Fact: he's threatened violence with a firearm before.

I don't see him headed anywhere but to prison, for the rest of his life, even if one of those folks got in his face a little bit.

[lawdog]

Lake Alice...

From a fellow attorney who also does some prosecution work, I concur and that's what I was getting at earlier. This guy has no real defense. I think its an easy case for the prosecution. He blows self defense by going after all these others (even if you believe his "they shot first story") and he blows insanity when he consciously decides "I didn't want to shoot anymore people" and so he "unloaded the gun and threw the rest of the bullets in the water".

The guy is going to the big house forever... and I didn't even know many of the things you added in your post.

[2dalake]

How many deer hunters do you suppose the defense will allow on the jury?

[lawdog]

Doesn't matter.

BUT, in Wisconsin, it seems EVERYONE is a deer hunter. One of the few places you will ever see a traffic jam at 5 in the morning and all cars occupied by blaze orange...

[Eric_Sieve]

Shoot the guy........there is NO reason for what he did no matter what anyone said!

[Perch Jerker]

FYI,

I haven't heard this stated anywhere yet but there's a reason he took the scope off his rifle. With a scope on the rifle you cannot use the 10rd stripper clips designed for the SKS. When you pull the bolt back there is a slot on top of the boltface that allows you to guide a 10rd clip into the magazine. You then push down on the top round and they all are fed into the magazine. It takes less than 5 seconds to reload and chamber the rifle. IF there is a scope on the rifle you cannot line up the vertical 10rd clip and need to load it 1 round at a time under the scope. THIS is why he removed the scope, in preperation. When I heard that he did that I knew why and that it's important to note.

I have a couple SKS rifles and one with a scope. They are not bad deer guns in the close quarters of a pine woods. I have used them for deer and they work well.

Just thought I'd toss in my $0.02,

PJ

[big drift]

I am waiting to see if there is going to be a change venue and if so where they would get it. yes the evidence is circumstantially overwhelming wait to see what science and forensics come back with.

big drift