NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Newsworthy => Topic started by: NE Bull on August 21, 2013, 09:26:12 AM
-
Too close for comfort! :o :o
My kids reside just down the road from there. :'(
The man of the house heard popping noises, but went back to bed. ???
OMG! I'da been locked and loaded and up all night! >:D
http://www.kmtv.com/news/local/Woman-Found-Dead-In-Street-220486501.html (http://www.kmtv.com/news/local/Woman-Found-Dead-In-Street-220486501.html)
Omaha, NE - The Douglas County Sheriff's Department is investigating the death of a woman, found in the road, near 168th and Fort.
Deputies responded to the area on reports of shots fired just after 2:00 a.m. Wednesday.
When they arrived, they found a woman, lying in the street with wounds consistent to gunfire. She died on the scene.
-
Kind of a terse, tiny, vague little news snippet to signify the termination of a human life.
Just a random, everyday event around these here parts.
Some folks will think that if we could just get rid of guns, such things wouldn't happen.
Other folks of a more insightful mindset will think that if the Lady had possessed a gun, maybe such thing wouldn't have happened.
A minor footnote in the everyday chronicles of Time's Passage in a Midwestern American City. Such stuff happens all the time. Last week we had the body of a strangled lady dumped into an open grave. Somebody else's grave: Also a homicide victim, as it happened.
sfg
-
I live right off of Fort St and a bit to the east of where this happened.
This isnt random out here in West Omaha. The houses surrounding the incident are mostly less than 10 yrs old.
-
This is sad. Saw the photos of the family; three cute kids left behind. Nothing worse than that.
Agree that this is not a common occurrence for that part of West Omaha and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. In Criminal Justice 101 many years ago they said that murder cases are some of the easiest to "clear", because they so often involve an acquaintance. Will have to wait and see if it was something like that, or truly and totally random.
-
Well, latest update says she was coming home from her job at a lounge/ bar. Car was found in North O (imagine that). My money is on her being followed home- but I just can't get a feel on a motive- I have thoughts, but none that feel right.
-
Her vehicle was found in the alley by MoneyMakers Guncraft gun shop on 43rd and Charles st. news reports that police went onto the roof of the gun shop to remove evidence.
-
I came in on the end of the press conference but I thought I heard the sheriff say to call 911 if pulled over to verify that it was indeed an LEO. WTH!?! I hope I heard wrong because it would imply that the killers may have been impersonating law enforcement. If so that will really open a can of worms for citizens and LEO's alike. Not something anyone needs.
-
Everyone inform your loved ones that they should call 911 if pulled over. This wouldn't be the first time this has happened in Omaha.
-
Very sad for the family and friends and community. You torch a car to erase fingerprints. Because the vehicle did not ignite, we can assume they have fingerprints of the killer (s).
My wife took a Refuse To Be A Victim class at Big Shots Wed night. Had this woman had such a class under her belt, maybe the outcome would have been different.
Union Bank in every community is taking donations for the family.
-
I came in on the end of the press conference but I thought I heard the sheriff say to call 911 if pulled over to verify that it was indeed an LEO. WTH!?! I hope I heard wrong because it would imply that the killers may have been impersonating law enforcement. If so that will really open a can of worms for citizens and LEO's alike. Not something anyone needs.
That was one of several suggestions. While we do not know what actually happened that night other than she was killed, as NENick has said there has been people pose as law enforcement in Omaha and Lincoln before (and I am sure in other parts of the State). If this is not in a busy place (lots of traffic) or at a visible time (can you see that it is a marked police car?), or anything else is out of place or you just feel uncomfortable. Call 911 before pulling over, or as soon as you have but before you open a window while your doors are locked. A dispatcher should be able to verify that police are pulling someone over in your area and give a description of your vehicle (possibly even your name).
-
http://www.omaha.com/article/20130904/NEWS/309049944/1685 (http://www.omaha.com/article/20130904/NEWS/309049944/1685)
Nikko A. Jenkins, 26, a robber who was released from a 10 1/2-year prison stint in late July. Today was charged with 4 counts of murder.
He was in prison on a 21 year sentence. In prison, he was not a model inmate. He attacked a guard, attempted an escape, and was in and out of the regional center for mental problems. He sent letters to Judges, threatening them. Upon his release, court houses were put on alert, warning to be on the lookout for him.
Andrea was shot with a 12 gauge shotgun, deer slugs, point blank range, 5 times, once in the head. She pulled up to a stop sign, behind another car. The man in the car got out, with a 12 gauge, and pulled her from her car. Killing her on the ground.
Prosecutors say they will seek the death sentence. In this case, that does seem like a good way to keep him under wraps forever.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7401/9673621005_a3f72ebf2a_c.jpg)
-
Why the hell did this guy get out of prison to begin with?
-
Because state law requires that he be released since he finished his sentence under the good time law. An inmate gets 1 day off for every day served. Since his bottom number was 18 years and he lost 1 and 1/2 year good time, that means he gets out in 10 1/2 years (18 divided by 2 equals 9 plus 1 and 1/2 years loss of good time). End of sentence, completed. Until they change the laws (build more prisons) inmates will continue to utilize the good time laws (and a majority don't commit crimes when they get out-only 17% do).
-
Because state law requires that he be released since he finished his sentence under the good time law. An inmate gets 1 day off for every day served. Since his bottom number was 18 years and he lost 1 and 1/2 year good time, that means he gets out in 10 1/2 years (18 divided by 2 equals 9 plus 1 and 1/2 years loss of good time). End of sentence, completed. Until they change the laws (build more prisons) inmates will continue to utilize the good time laws (and a majority don't commit crimes when they get out-only 17% do).
Agreed on the prison time comment (you can't keep someone in prison longer than their sentence, folks).
...disagree on the recidivism rate. It is certainly true that Nebraska has one of the lowest in the nation (not the lowest, but certainly one of the lower ones) however, including parole violations, it is more like 32%, not 17%. So--one in every three inmates who jam out end up back in. Yay.
Someone could potentially argue that the prison recidivism rate (not counting parole) is around 26% or so, and there are some claims to back that.
This is excellent, compared to the national average of around 67.5%.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm (http://www.bjs.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm)
And yet, in Nebraska this means that one in every three inmates who jam out end up back in. Yay.
It is also certainly true that individuals who are in the prison system once normally already have a significant rap sheet, and that rap sheet doesn't get smaller once they get out. In particular, something important to remember is that the number of times a person goes to prison may not accurately reflect their actual amount of crimes. Especially with violent criminals, whose victims may not want to or be able to testify.
Last bit---it is certainly true that Jenkins was a piece of garbage, and a continuing threat. It interests me that people are now trying to find a way to blame the corrections system for not keeping him longer. And the court system for not sentencing him longer. And the police for not keeping a 24-hour watch on him after he was released.
All of which are ridiculous and stupid, in my opinion. Corrections follows the law, they don't have a choice. The court sentenced him to 21 years---what part of that wasn't sufficient for his crime at the time? And it is not the police's job (nor is it even possible for them to do this) to keep tabs on any one person all the time.
Jenkins was going to commit more crimes. Duh. And yet---unless people want to start saying "we can go ahead and lock up people if we THINK they are dangerous" then sometimes, that's the way it goes.
So learn to defend yourself, and carry the tools to do so. Jenkins isn't the only one out there. When I worked at the State Penitentiary, we let all SORTS of scumbags out when their time was up. (And I worked there long enough to see a number of them come back.)
That's how it goes.
-
Jenkins committed more crimes while in prison and still qualified for good time. Problem 1
He did not get more time for prison crimes. Problem 2
He was threatening people in the justice system and was still let out. Problem 3
They protected themselves but didn't tell anyone else. Problem 4
His record should disqualify him from good time benefits. Problem 5
Hopefully these issues will see some review.
-
Jenkins committed more crimes while in prison and still qualified for good time. Problem 1
And he lost good time for it, yes? (As a question, do you actually know what is required for an inmate to lose good time?) You can't lose the concept of good time---merely specific amounts of good time.
He did not get more time for prison crimes. Problem 2
Other than losing good time. Which is more prison time.
I'm curious, though---did any prosecutor decide that his "assaults" (not in quotes because I don't believe it, merely because we don't know exactly the circumstances) were worthy of prosecution further, instead of loss of good time?
He was threatening people in the justice system and was still let out. Problem 3
Did any of those threats move to the level required for prosecution?
We can't just "leave someone in prison" because they threatened someone. Unless, of course, it goes through a court system and they get convicted or "terroristic threats" or something similar. Did any of them? No?
So---what exactly was the department of corrections supposed to do? (Again---on their jam day, the DoC has to let the inmate free. Otherwise, it is a remarkably painful lawsuit, which the state will lose.) What grounds did they have to extend the sentence?
They protected themselves but didn't tell anyone else. Problem 4
Which "they" is this? If I recall correctly, the department notified the police, who of course cannot monitor everyone 24 hours a day. Who else should have been notified? The public?
If so, you are in for a shock with respect to how many criminals are let go each and every day.
His record should disqualify him from good time benefits. Problem 5
Then you will need to completely change the way that the State of Nebraska runs its correctional system, which is set by the legislature. I look forward to seeing your election to the Unicameral.
Hopefully these issues will see some review.
I'm sure there will be a lot of politics, for little substantive change. It would be nice if the good-time laws were made more strict, and less "nice," that's true. But I'm not holding my breath for any change that does anything real.
After all---letting out violent criminals happens all the time. When the sentence is over, that's it.
-
No, he didn't lose any good time and was sentenced to time served for additional crimes. He bit the ear off a prison guard and assaulted two more and tried to escape. Also, caused a prison riot. Judge that he threatened warned secutity at court house but did not notify the prison or police.
You should not let someone out for being good when they are not being good and telling somebody that they are coming for them. Leaving someone to do FULL time is not unjust when they are misbehaving.
Yes, I am saying they completely have screwed up this policy and it should be reviewed. Twenty-four percent re-offending is way too much. This is a pattern, not isolated case. They go after semi-auto rifles when only about 300 people die each year from rifles of any kind, just because of a couple high profile dirtbags.
I would run, but I could not live on what they pay senators.
-
Which "they" is this? If I recall correctly, the department notified the police, who of course cannot monitor everyone 24 hours a day. Who else should have been notified? The public?
When Mntnman said, "They protected themselves but didn't tell anyone else," I take that as a reference to Gary's information that, "Upon his release, court houses were put on alert, warning to be on the lookout for him."
That's a double standard.
I notice that at the federal level there are "no double standard policies" so that the public must be alerted to a threat if government officials are. Witness the recent alerts that had to accompany the closure of U.S. Embassies due to concerns about an imminent threat. That policy can be found here: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86560.pdf (http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86560.pdf) and is also referenced in several other places on the web. Basically, you can't tell official workers "we believe there is a threat to the Embassy this week" and NOT tell the public.
That's good governance, but it looks like similar thinking wasn't exercised at the courthouse level in this case. No, you can't put out an alert for every person who gets released from prison, but something about this guy was different to the point that it made people legitimately afraid.
-
Apparently, extreme violence is a family trait:
http://columbustelegram.com/news/state-and-regional/sister-of-omaha-killings-suspect-loses-her-cool/article_f350471c-67c1-59dc-b1e6-713c119048fd.html (http://columbustelegram.com/news/state-and-regional/sister-of-omaha-killings-suspect-loses-her-cool/article_f350471c-67c1-59dc-b1e6-713c119048fd.html)
-
Editorial in the OWH this morning notes that the Nebraska legislature passed a law in 1992 (presented by Ernie Chambers and promoted by BRAD ASHFORTH) to change the "good behavior" definitions which has resulted in the current "1/2 of the actual sentence" being reduced. Brad tells us that the result was "not what we intended". Well, Brad... what have you done for the past 20 plus years to FIX what YOU screwed up ??
The editorial also notes that Ernie was receiving letters from Jenkins while in prison about his 'harsh treatment' and 'lack of mental health considerations'.
Editorial... http://www.omaha.com/article/20130906/NEWS08/130909256/1677#world-herald-editorial-good-time-bad-behavior (http://www.omaha.com/article/20130906/NEWS08/130909256/1677#world-herald-editorial-good-time-bad-behavior)
-
Assford has been all over the map on this one. Backpeddling and changing his story. During the hearing to modify "good time" this past session he claimed that early release wasn't happening. I hope he gets a lot of heat over this.
-
I hate the "logic" behind the whole Good Time law...as I heard Ashford explain it, you need to provide an incentive for following the rules in prison and gaining release.. Shouldn't BEING IN PRISON be the incentive to follow the rules and get out? Maybe even an incentive to not commit acts that will put you there in the first place?
Unicameral will debate this severely but with Chambers already vowing filibuster/scathing debate/exposing the underlying racist inside every state senator, nothing will happen unless they can find a way to double existing sentencing guidelines to bring equilibrium back to the system.
-
CliffD and I were talking about good time laws at work and were thinking that it would be better if it was earned by an act of betterment versus just being there. You could earn good time by working a job at the prison, taking classes, learning life skills for when you get out, getting your GED or any number of things. Of course this was 2 minutes at the coffee machine chatter so we didn't get into any of the specifics. I'm sure that these things would cost money in prison, as in not self sustaining, but the benefits for the "rehabilitation" and transition to a functioning member of society would probably pay dividends for reducing repeat offenders and probation officer costs.
-
I'm not usually one for Big Money Retribution Lawsuits, but I hope they take the state to the cleaners for this.
After reading the previous post- Maybe Bradley and Ernie should be also named in the suit!
http://www.jrn.com/kmtv/news/Kruger-Family-Files-Claim-Against-State--228878521.html (http://www.jrn.com/kmtv/news/Kruger-Family-Files-Claim-Against-State--228878521.html)
-
I hope they take the state to the cleaners for this.
Remember the "state" is US !!!!
We will eventually end up paying for the bill one way or another, either in subtle tax increases - reduction of services - job reductions....
-
In the heat of pissoffedness, I too forget that.
But the system failed this family, AND the other families affected, AND society. How do we bring them justice and closure without costing us in the end?
-
How do we bring them justice and closure without costing us in the end?
#1 make certain it never happens again!
#2 vote the idiots out that made this possible.
There is nothing we can do to replace a wife and mother, but these two things would honor their memory.