By Sharyn L. Decker
Lewis County Sirens news reporter
CHEHALIS – Ronald A. Brady took the witness stand yesterday in his first-degree murder trial for the fatal shooting of a suspected burglar.
The 60-year-old’s testimony was mostly, but not entirely, similar to what jurors have already heard he told a detective in a taped statement from hours after the incident.
Prosecutors made their closing arguments this morning in Lewis County Superior Court.
After lunch, jurors will hear from defense attorney Don Blair.
Then the case will be given to the jury of six men and six women to decide.
More to come
•••
Scroll down to read previous news of the trial
Tags: By Sharyn L. Decker, news reporter
wow!!!!!!!!!
I agree with you George. I’m afraid you are addressing McKenzie well above his IQ level therefore there is no point in trying to have an intelligent discussion with him. Frankly his arguments, (or lack of legitimate argument), grammar and spelling lead me to believe that he is a fourth grader.
In the meantime, there is one less thief in our community, and Mr. Brady is paying the price for his bad decision.
Get a life Goerge,get the facts. You set on the computer all day, get off your butt. and get a job. Mr know it all
John McKenzie, if all you can do is call others names and defending those who are robbing and thieving from others, you might want to think about how you are trivializing the crimes they are committing against hard-working folks who EARN their way through life, not looking for their next “score” or “target”.
And when it comes to whether or not I value human life over my belongings, then just try to steal my belongings, and see what value your life has to me…. none. I worked hard to get the things I have, what little there is, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to let some drug-addled criminal take it from me.
Your a Fool
John, your denial cracks me up…to quote you…”Tom was murdered while running away…” Running away from what? From a place he shouldn’t have been in the first place??? There ARE Gods laws, AND mans laws. Apparently he had no respect for either!
George, your not as informed as you think you are. More like Mr know it all. Take a break, get a life.
Your opinions dont mean anything. Not one of you listened to the facts and testimony , at trial . Tom was murdered while running away from this fool. Dont you people value human life over your personal belonging. Stop taking the law into your own hands. Radicules
I would have perferred to hear a “reckless endangerment” charge; but given the options I think the jury did a good job.
The problem as I see is he waited for “who-ever” to show back up and they were not in the residence but still outside. Had he stayed in the house and they were actually in the garage I think there would never have been his day in court.
It’s important to protect your life from others who would cause harm; and in the sitation the tension would be extrememly difficult to think out each step. Homeowners who decide to have a weapon and would be willing to use that weapon need to think hard about the timing of discharging that weapon or may find they too will have a day in court.
Perhaps if our courts were as strict with the offending thieves and intruders on to private property there would never be these type of cases.
Even more so when the family members of those who are deeply involved in the drug community scream about “how good their ________ (insert family member title here) is, and how they could NEVER have done anything like that!”… something like what you hear from the parents of murdered gang members (“Oh, he was such a good boy, he was trying so hard to be a leader in the community…”). In a sense, the sheer denial is also a major enabler. Truth be told, though, nobody is holding a gun to these folks’ heads saying “snort this, smoke that, steal from here to buy more…”, so their claims of being a “victim” are nothing more than a load of bullplop.
By convicting the homeowner for protecting his property against thieving drug users (or against ANY thief, for that matter), the jury blew the whole “self defense” motive. On the other hand, however, they came to what would be the right conclusion in that the guy acted without fully thinking through his actions. His best bet, being that he was not in PERSONAL danger, would have been to call the police (911 does work…), and let them handle it.
If the cops had been called, then instead of having an old man in jail for defending his property, we’d have a thief behind bars NOT stealing from the rest of us…
The jury failed, but they still did the right thing… just my humble opinion. Now, the best sentence would be to send him home and tell him to not do it again… just like they tell all the druggies and thieves.
its sad that hes guilty, guilty of protecting his hard earned property from the drug infesatation theiving community who ruthlessly prey on the working class nightly. I just hope it send a message to all the night shift theives out there…, keep stealing.. you might just meet death! I dont blame this man one bit for waiting for the next break in.. I suppose some people are going to say.. ” oh that poor man who got shot.. all they wanted was to sell some girl scout cookies..!”
well, there is only one reason someones out at that time a night.. and the woman already admitted that what they were there for. so no… we punish the property owner. I hope he gets home monitoring. its a sad day.. now the sign outside should read.. “this home guarded by smith and wesson three nights a week… you guess which three. ” I am sorry if i sound like a cold hearted person, I am not but I am sick of the drug community stealing from people who work for a life..