http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... nters_shot

Looks to me like that's the case.

Looks like he's still being charged with murder.

Sure, I think he should be. There should be a trial. But if he didn't fire the first shot, I don't think it matters how many people got killed and how many guns they had. A man's got a right to defend himself against a mob.

yea. origianlly the media blewit up as him going on a "Rampage" killing everyone.

then he finally spoke and said it was racist slurs and was fired at first.

now one of the injured has came out and has only said "its not what the media played it up to be..."

so we shall find out this afternoon.

yeah and every convicted murderer is "innocent" too.

If the last person lives he can corroborate. They can also check the area and the fire arm, as well as where the bullets intered the victims, he shot one in the back? Hell of a guy there. People running away from you are obviously a threat to your being. If he was afraid for his life, why not run and hide?

Race Card/self defense I don't buy it. Did they probably shout slurs at him. I have no doubt. That's no reason to murder 6 people "Ron Artest"
The guy is guilty of being a lunatic regardless and obviously the entire community needs to learn what "Posted" No Trespassing means. I'll be interested to see if they can prove one of the hunters fired first unprevoked


If they were prepared for him shooting at them ie they fired and missed, why would not one out of 6 people shoot back during the melee?, clearly they were trying to run away and he chased them down and attempted to kill them all. Now he's trying to save his skin. I don't believe a word of it.

i do believe it.

that doesnt excuse what he did. at all. hes obviosuly mentally unstable. and probably got carried away..out hunting, with a rifle...was angry. and insane.

Wether they were racists or not, that doesnt give anyone the right to open fire and shoot people in the back as they are trying to flee. I say lock the crazy sonofabitch up and throw away the key.

i do believe it.

that doesnt excuse what he did. at all. hes obviosuly mentally unstable. and probably got carried away..out hunting, with a rifle...was angry. and insane.

I totally believe that they shouted racial slurs at him. I'll even believe they fired the first shot.

But the facts seem to be that

1. The hunters had ONE gun between them.

2. Vang chased everyone around several hundred yards of woods shooting them down until he ran out of ammo.

Sorry, as much as the dead people may have sucked, Vang deserves to go away forever. No death penalty in Wisconsin.

--PunkDavid

I am more than a little disgusted that ANYONE would justify going on a shooting rampage after racial slurs. Those hunters were obviously not trying to kill Vang, although firing a shot was pretty stupid (assuming that's what happened).

Defending a psychotic murderous rampage is OK, but I get my threads locked.

Glad to see you finally joined in. The first lesson here is to only comment and not start threads. Good to see your computer persona again.

And I will say I agree with you. Unless you are in the inner city and say the N word. There should be no gun play over a racial slur. But that shouldn't have been said either. At least he didn't kill everybody so there should be another side to the story sooner or later.

uh. i dont think anyone was justifying what he did. did you read anything else in the thread?

he clearly is insane and is not justifiable in his actions.

but, as the story broke it was "on a murderous rampage" and nonoe else was at fault.and now as the story unfolds, he may have been shot at first and all that jazz. doesnt make it right. just changes the story and my perception on the psycho.

The truth, as always, will lie somewhere in between. Here is my take of the situation at this juncture. No one will ever know who shot first, this however is irrelevant because 1. "Vang said he continued firing as the group scattered, and at one point chased one of the hunters and shot him in the back, only to find the man had no gun, the document states." This is at the very least manslaughter and most juries will easily find him guilty of second degree murdger. 2. Regardless of exchanges that precipitated the attack The man shot and killed 6 people, some of whom were unarmed, this goes far beyond self defense. I dont know the state laws that are applicable here but in general he would have been justified of returning fire at the first individual (The prosecution will probably state that this person fired a warning shot and ballistic experts will testify whether or not the cartridge was discharged anywhere near the defendant). Unless they can find bullets discharged from the rifles of the others he is going to be charged with several counts of second degree and likely 1 count of first degree murder in addition to attempted murder in the case of the surviving member.

Bigotry, however despicable it is or what form it may take, is not a crime that requires lethal defense of oneself. And yes he will definately be charged.

just to get this clear, people admit the guy is crazy, that hes a few fries shy of a happy meal, but yet find his part of the story to be 100% true?

Another point.

Again the Prosecution will persuade the jury that this man is not a credible witness, and they will be predisposed to this conclusion because a man capable of killing 6 men is not usually trustworthy. This man will spend the rest of his life in prison.

geezes. lauren hessebecker or whatever has stated that what the media has said about the whole thing is inaccurate and will speak later today i believe...\

"He said that he had spent much of his time in the hospital talking to investigators about the shootings. On his porch, he declined to described the incident, except to say that much of what he has heard in media reports is not accurate.

A hunters' vigil at the courthouseRichard SennottStar Tribune"A lot of it is not true," he said. "But at this point, I just can't discuss anything.""

so yea. something else went on ....

i never said nothing else didnt go on, i just find it funny that people who agree that a guy is 100% not there, will believe his story

We read your posts.

--PunkDavid

Not to make light of this story because it is a tragedy and the only winner for a brief moment were the deer.

Did anyone happen to notice the "title" of this thread? Hmong hunter (how racist is that), lol.

Sounds to me like he just forgot what he was hunting