(AK) Pastor Mielke acquited of all charges in self defense shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.

spacemanspiff

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
4,066
Location
alaska
http://www.adn.com/front/story/4260977p-4271781c.html

A preacher was acquitted Monday of two counts of manslaughter and two counts of criminally negligent homicide in the shooting deaths of two intruders at his Big Lake Community Chapel last spring.

Jurors deliberated for a day and a half in Superior Court before acquitting the Rev. Phillip D. Mielke, 44, in the deaths of Christopher Lee Palmer, 31, of Big Lake and Francis Marion Jones IV, 23, of Wasilla.

"We're relieved," Jim Gilmore, Mielke's defense lawyer, said after the verdicts were read.

Mielke had no comment.

Palmer and Jones were burglarizing the chapel at about 5 a.m. April 24 when Mielke heard a noise over a homemade intercom system that linked the church to his home, across the road.

He got his .44-caliber Magnum revolver and went to investigate.

The three men ended up together in a small, dark arctic entry.

Mielke testified that he ordered the men to stop and then fired when they kept coming.

He told investigating troopers that he saw one of the intruders get up and run toward a parked, idling car outside the church.

Palmer was found dead on a road near the church. He had been shot once in the lower back.

Several hours later, a woman called 911 to report that Jones had been shot and was at her house. When investigators arrived, they found him dead with a gunshot wound to the back and the left ankle.

In closing arguments last Thursday, Gilmore characterized Mielke as a mild-mannered man who carried a gun for self-defense. The preacher used it in a "totally unexpected, out-of-control" situation when Palmer and Jones rushed him inside his own church, he said.

"It was like a bear charging," Gilmore said. "The critical feature of this event (is) it happened in a matter of seconds ... and it happened in the dark. ... His fear that caused him to pull the trigger was reasonable under the circumstances."

If Mielke was acting in self-defense, why did he empty his gun out a window as the mortally wounded Jones fled toward his car, Collins asked in closing arguments.

"Once he started shooting, he couldn't stop shooting," Collins said. "This is the act of someone who isn't going to let them get away."

The burglars were stealing donated food the church planned to give away, Collins said.

"You don't take a gun to protect some old doughnuts," he said. "Those are not the actions of a reasonable person."


======================

good news for mr mielke!
but lets keep in mind the prosecutors arguments, and what his definitions of 'reasonable actions by a reasonable person' are.
 
As an old cop once told me..."Los muertes no habla"...

The pastor has been judged by man, anyhting else is up to him and his creator..

Hope everyone leaves him alone..

WildwannabethtereisacivilsuitAlaska
 
It's just a sad case.

In my not-even-a-little-bit-humble opinion, the pastor acted out of panic.

And some guys stealing donated food didn't deserve to die.

On the other hand, the pastor couldn't know their intentions or whether they were armed.

Mistakes were made all around:
Had the burglars just knocked on the door, they would have gotten fed.

Had they not panicked and run away when confronted, they would have lived -- and probably gotten fed.

Had not the pastor overreacted, they would have run away in the dark.

No winners here - just a survivor. And I'll bet one with considerable feelings of guilt.
 
How do we know they were trying to steal the food? Because the prosecutor said so? Did anyone really think the prosecutor would say that the deceased were planning on beating the pastor to death and stealing everything that wasn't bolted down?

MPayne, "some guys stealing donated food didn't deserve to die"....

Come on. You aren't repeating that old saw.
Is that like saying that the bank robber who is shot by police when he tries to shoot his way out was only "shot for taking a few dollars"?

Obviously the jury felt that the pastor had reasonable cause to believe his life was in danger.

Remember, the "shot in the back" could mean from the side, or even was shot when the deceased spun around quickly.

Saw a test a few months ago. Simple rules. You stand there holding a blank firing gun watching a video screen. Your job, shoot when you see the bad guy with his gun. In every test, the badguy was able to shoot, and turn around, before the defender could fire. The badguy was shot in the back EVERY TIME.
 
Other evidence

I read in the Anchorage paper awhile back that there was a loaded 357 magnum found on a water heater in the church basement with both the deceased mens fingerprints on them.
 
MPayne, "some guys stealing donated food didn't deserve to die"....

Come on. You aren't repeating that old saw.

Sure I am. And I'm right. But read my whole post. These dead idiots brought it on themselves.

The pastor had every right to shoot when the BGs were inside and approaching him, but had no right to continue firing after they ran past and were trying to escape.

I'm glad the pastor isn't going to jail. But he needs some more training and education.
 
bluesbear, i decided not to add to that original thread with this news article, as it was getting difficult to keep that thread on topic. i for one was having difficulty keeping THR mantra in mind when i posted in that thread, and maybe this way i'll be able to keep my comments in check.

how about a hypothetical question now?
you are confronted on the street by a mugger. he has a knife in his hand. you draw your keltec p32 out of your pocket holster and draw a bead on him, telling him in no uncertain terms to drop the knife. he instead takes a step backwards, turns, and runs. as he runs he pulls a pistol of his own out and turns his torso towards you.
you see the pistol in his hand and you fire, into his back.

stand up for a second, yes, physically stand up. without shifting your feet or legs, twist your torso. try it with an unloaded weapon, or if possible, an airsoft. can you hit a target directly behind you? obviously not using the sights, but by point shooting you can, correct? it may not be accurate, but it can be deadly.

okay, i know this isnt how it played out with Mielke. but the point still stands, just because a person is running the opposite direction does NOT mean you are safe.
i guarantee you Mielke will be spending the rest of his days wishing he had sought cover instead of firing out the window. in fact, he probably wishes he did a lot of things differently. but you know what? the armchair commando in me says that i would have opted for a shotgun to go investigate the breakin rather than just the 44 revolver.

maybe those badguys didnt even see Mielkes gun? maybe they would have reacted differently upon hearing Mielke chambering a round in a mossberg pump?
 
I feel that up until the Pastor shot the guy in the back running to his car, it was a good shoot. He had 2 or 3 guys charging him in the dark and was in fear for his life. That usually is the distinction for me. Fear for your life or someone elses.
As far as punishment for shooting the 3rd perp, I don't know what he should get. I do feel that if you decide that breaking and entering is what you are going to do, you should be prepared to get shot.
 
there was no 3rd perp. one of the two who was inside and shot made his way out the building and ran for his car. the other crawled outside to a ditch and bled out.

following is a letter to the editor printed in todays paper:
I think the "good" Rev. Phillip Mielke tried to pull the wool over our eyes. The man of God feels more comfortable talking to strangers when he's packin'. He's a multiple-gun owner and even upgraded his firepower to boot. He says this was so he would be more prepared, considering previous vandalism and break-ins.

It seems to me that Mr. Mielke has been preparing to head down this path to violence for some time now. If the men had been breaking into his house, I would agree with his actions. However, I think even God would say he overreacted with regard to the church. Where in Mr. Mielke's Bible does it say "pull thy .44 and fire till your finger is bruised"?


it seems to me that the two BGs had been preparing to head down the path to criminal behavior for some time. they chose to break and enter at night time, while armed. why be armed when going to someplace that is empty?

thankfully though, the paper followed with this letter:
There are thousands of Alaskans who carry concealed and openly defensive weapons, every day and everywhere it is legal to do so. We do this because we cannot predict when a bad thing will happen, to us, our loved ones, or even a complete stranger we encounter. And guess what. Neither can you.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of unprepared potential victims of violent crime in our society who feel they are safe because they hope they don't come across a criminal. Hope is not a strategy.

One letter writer asked what Mielke was doing with "a pistol that big. It's no good for hunting, only good for shooting people" ("A true man of God would have given suspected thieves food, not bullets," Oct. 12).

Obviously, that letter writer is an expert in firearms just like Sarah Brady or Rosie O'Donnell.
 
And some guys stealing donated food didn't deserve to die.

And how do you know that is what they were doing ? The third-hand newspaper account ?

That has no more merit than this point of view:

They were goblins. He acted to deal with them. They deserved it.

If they had not been there they would not have caused the outcome.

They chose to go there.

They caused the outcome.
 
I feel that up until the Pastor shot the guy in the back running to his car, it was a good shoot.

NOBODY got shot in the back running for the car. Both perps were shot at close range - within two feet of the Pastor.

One of the men did not drop on the spot, but pushed past Mielke and out the door. The Pastor continued to shoot at him as he ran away, but those were not the fatal shots and have no bearing on the shoot beyond indicating his state of mind - frightened.

Keith
 
Maybe the shots he fired out of the window were warning shots?

Maybe he was trying to disable the car so they couldn't escape.

Maybe it doesn't matter a hill of beans since all of the shots fired through the window were MISSES!

How many times have we read a post by a fellow THRer, who had a personal "confrontation", who said after it was all said and done he/she was SHAKING? An adrenalin dump is a powerful force.

I have seen, in person, with my own four eyes,on more than one occasion, well trained, seasoned/experienced, uniformed officers PANIC in a shoot no shoot situation.

If a trained professional can panic that proves anyone can.

As I have said before, until you actually see the Elephant with your own eyes, you DO NOT know how you will react. You may think you know. you may say you know. But you DON'T. And that's just a fact of life.

You train and you prepare, something the good preacher in this story didn't do very well. But the truth is at least he did something. He took a stand. He did the best he could under the conditions.

Granted he did a few, OK MORE than a few things wrong. Let's hope and pray that neither him nor any of us has to do that again. But IF any of us does, then I hope that this event will be just another learning lesson for each of us so that we may be petter prepared for what MIGHT happen.

There are lessons to be learned in every event. Open your minds and learn from them. Even the ignorant can be teachers. You can often learn more from a bad example than you can from a good one.

[/standing on soapbox]

Just my tuppence. YMNGAS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top