Statement of Chai Vang(Hunter who killed 6)

[wischeez]

I found this in todays paper......... Statement It's in PDF form.

 

[Ausm]

Hey Welcome , It is nice to see a fellow Wisconsinite on this BBS. I have a buddy who lives in Port Edwards.

AUsm

 

[wischeez]

Originally posted by: Ausm
Hey Welcome , It is nice to see a fellow Wisconsinite on this BBS. I have a buddy who lives in Port Edwards.

AUsm

I've lived in Port Edwards about 2 years now. Bought a house here. Nice little community. Thanks for the Welcome too Ausm.....

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: Ausm
...on this BBS.

old skool! 😀

 

[Viper GTS]

Even if it happened exactly as he says it did he's in deep sh!t.

Shooting the guy he claims fired at him MAY have been justified (though at that range missing by 30-40 feet is hardly accidental), but chasing down unarmed people & shooting them in the back (his own description) is going to put him in a world of trouble.

Viper GTS

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

<---Oshkosh

 

[new2AMD]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Even if it happened exactly as he says it did he's in deep sh!t.

Shooting the guy he claims fired at him MAY have been justified (though at that range missing by 30-40 feet is hardly accidental), but chasing down unarmed people &amp; shooting them in the back (his own description) is going to put him in a world of trouble.

Viper GTS

Plus screaming, You're not dead yet? shows malice.

 

[wischeez]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
<---Oshkosh

b'gosh.....


Had to do that

🙂

 

[vood0g]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Even if it happened exactly as he says it did he's in deep sh!t.

Shooting the guy he claims fired at him MAY have been justified (though at that range missing by 30-40 feet is hardly accidental), but chasing down unarmed people &amp; shooting them in the back (his own description) is going to put him in a world of trouble.

Viper GTS

agreed. i wonder how old the dead people are. anyone know?

 

[Pliablemoose]

So he's claiming the other hunters were rude to him, was walking away, they fired on him, he crouched &amp; shot back, killing 2 people, hunted down 2 more, then killed 2 more that were coming towards him on an ATV.

He was running away, threw his extra ammo into a swamp, heard an airplane, caught a ride with another hunter to the cabin &amp; turned himself in.

If the state is smart, they'll charge him with the simplest murder, convict him of 2nd degree murder, and keep the other murders ready to prosecute in case the conviction is overturned on appeal.

Does Wisconsin have the death penalty?

 

[wischeez]

No, no Death Penalty here...... best we can hope for is Life without parole. Karma will get him if he ends up in prison, just like Jeffery Dahmer........

 

[T2T III]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
So he's claiming the other hunters were rude to him, was walking away, they fired on him, he crouched &amp; shot back, killing 2 people, hunted down 2 more, then killed 2 more that were coming towards him on an ATV.

1) Yes, claimed they were rude - called him names, etc.
2) The hunters who owned the property apparently just pointed the weapon at Vang, but did not fire shots at him. It was Vang who crouched, attached his scope and started to fire first.

Or, at least that's how I understood it after reading the .PDF document.

 

[Pliablemoose]

The surviving hunters say he shot first, he says they shot first.

 

[iamwiz82]

Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

 

[NesuD]

Not much doubt here. He gunned down 6 people apparently only one of which was armed.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

They were under no obligation to be polite to him, particularly since he didn't have any right to be there in the first place.

Uncalled for (if it actually happened), but completely within their rights.

Viper GTS

 

[vood0g]

Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
So he's claiming the other hunters were rude to him, was walking away, they fired on him, he crouched &amp; shot back, killing 2 people, hunted down 2 more, then killed 2 more that were coming towards him on an ATV.

1) Yes, claimed they were rude - called him names, etc.
2) The hunters who owned the property apparently just pointed the weapon at Vang, but did not fire shots at him. It was Vang who crouched, attached his scope and started to fire first.

Or, at least that's how I understood it after reading the .PDF document.

From the pdf document:

"Vang stated that Vang observed the subject with the rifle point 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 30-40 feet behind Vang."

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

Doesn't matter one bit.

Someone could call me every name under the sun, but that still doesn't give me the right to start blazing away at them with a semi-auto rifle.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

So, calling someone names is grounds for gunning them down?

Perhaps he will be using the famous "They hurt my feelings" defense...

 

[T2T III]

Should the private property have been flagged with "no trespassing" signs?

 

[vood0g]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

Doesn't matter one bit.

Someone could call me every name under the sun, but that still doesn't give me the right to start blazing away at them with a semi-auto rifle.

maybe you missed the part that one of them actually took a shot at him. if true, then there must be some serious adrenaline going on at the time. i think i would be very cautious also if i was there especially due to the fact that i am on private property and it's hunting season. not saying what he did was right, but it was something that got totally out of hand. not that the people who are dead deserved to be killed or anything, but it could have been easily prevented if they werent being such an ass about it.

i really dont want to go off on a racial tangent, but vang's story does seem very likely that it happened the way he said it. still it doesnt give him the right to shoot those people. but like i have said, it could have turned out differently if it was handled better by both sides.

 

[RaymondY]

interesting reading!

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Me thinks that it is not wise to call an armed hunter a "beloved patriot" to his face. He deserves to fry, but the other hunters should shoulder some of the blame, as well.

So, calling someone names is grounds for gunning them down?

Perhaps he will be using the famous "They hurt my feelings" defense...

Never said that, but you go around today calling every person you see a derogatory name, and see how many people react. If someone acts like an idiot (especially to a person with a RIFLE!) they are asking for trouble. Just because the law has stated that making fun of someone isn't enough reason to shoot someone does not mean people would not do it. Look at all the people who die because of incidents of road rage.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
So he's claiming the other hunters were rude to him, was walking away, they fired on him, he crouched &amp; shot back, killing 2 people, hunted down 2 more, then killed 2 more that were coming towards him on an ATV.

1) Yes, claimed they were rude - called him names, etc.
2) The hunters who owned the property apparently just pointed the weapon at Vang, but did not fire shots at him. It was Vang who crouched, attached his scope and started to fire first.

Or, at least that's how I understood it after reading the .PDF document.

You understood wrong. Vang stated that Vang stated that Vang....god I hated reading that.

Anyway, he said he saw the guy who kicked him out point his rifle at him while he was walking away. He crouched just as the guy shot and missed and then Vang dropped the guy with two shots, the guy next to him, and hunted the rest down.....after removing his scope. Perhaps the other hunter had a single-shot gun, 'cause if he had been bent on shooting Vang he would have certainly shot more than once in the time it takes to remove a scope.

Frankly, I don't believe Vang's part of the story of the other hunters shooting at him. We'll have to see what forensics pulls up.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech
Should the private property have been flagged with "no trespassing" signs?

It probably was. But if it's really 400 acres he was tresspassing on then that's alot of signs. It's easy to walk in between two signs and never see them.