Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 41

Thread: Washburn County Self Defense shooting

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Washburn County Self Defense shooting

    http://lacrossetribune.com/news/loca...cc4c002e0.html

    SARONA, Wis. - One man is dead and another is in custody in a Washburn County shooting.


    Sheriff's deputies say the shooting happened early Sunday at the suspect's house in Sarona. Authorities say the suspect called 911 and said he shot someone several times in self-defense. When deputies arrived, they found the suspect in the woods near the house.


    Authorities say the victim, identified as Michael T. Elliott, was found in the house with multiple gunshot wounds.

  2. #2
    bhancock
    Guest

    Another news article

    http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/99207639.html

    Not sure if it has any more info because I didn't read the trib account yet.

    Yup it has full press release from sheriff
    Last edited by bhancock; 07-26-2010 at 10:42 AM. Reason: added info

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    They are already charging him with 1st degree intentional, Another story where the guy is convicted before he goes to trial.
    I guess they don't understand what self defense means. They shouldn't list any charges until after the investigation.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Press Release from Sheriff

    Yea, the second story is more complete.

    Full Press Release From Washburn County Sheriff's Office:

    Washburn County Sheriff’s Dispatch received a 911 call at approximately 12:17 AM July 25, 2010, The caller, Jess R. Carsello, DOB 03/10/62 of N1930 Ripley Spur Road, Sarona WI, County of Washburn, stated that he just shot someone multiple times but Carsello alleged he did so in self defense.

    Washburn County Deputy’s, Spooner Police, Shell Lake Police, Wisconsin State Patrol and North Ambulance responded to the scene.

    On arrival deputies found Mr. Carsello who appeared to be under the influence of alcohol and/or controlled substances, in the woods near his residence. Mr. Carsello reiterated that he had just shot the guy inside his residence but he claimed he did so in self defense.

    Deputies/officers secured the residence and then entered and found Michael T. Elliott, DOB 03/06/79 of N1712 Ripley Spur Road, Sarona WI, lying face down with what appeared to be multiple gunshot wounds to his body. Medical personnel could not detect any signs of life and shortly thereafter the Washburn County Coroner arrived on scene and pronounced Mike Elliott deceased. Sheriff Dryden contacted District Attorney Mike Bitney for assistance in drafting a search warrant for the Carsello Residence. An autopsy will be performed by the Ramsey County Medical Examiner’s Office, St. Paul, MN, to determine the exact cause of death of Mike Elliott.

    The State of Wisconsin Department of Justice, Crime Laboratory was called by Sheriff Dryden to assist Washburn County in the processing of the scene. The Wisconsin State Patrol was asked by Sheriff Dryden to map the scene with their Forensic mapping capabilities.

    Jess Carsello was detained on probable cause of First Degree Intentional Homicide. This incident remains under investigation by the Washburn County Sheriff’s Office and the Washburn County District Attorney’s Office. Criminal charges are pending the outcome of this investigation.

    C. Dryden
    County Sheriff

  5. #5
    McX
    Guest
    shoot in self defense, get charged with murder. how many times does this have to happen?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  6. #6
    Regular Member Cobra469's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Allis, WI, , USA
    Posts
    218
    Hiding in the woods? Under the influence? while I feel that just because you were drinking earlier you shouldn't lose your right to self defense but one has to ask how much had he drank. Or more importantly what was their reasonable suspicion that it wasn't self defense? In addition if I just shot somebody in self defense I am not moving anywhere. I would stand my ground with my firearm making sure the perpetrator didn't get up. I have no obligation to retreat FROM my home only to retreat within. Too many questions with this story for me to form an opinion either way about it.


    Added:

    Also wondering since I take ambien how likely that would be used against me if this happened to me? If I can't drive on it..... Damned if you do...Damned if you don't...
    Last edited by Cobra469; 07-26-2010 at 12:09 PM. Reason: added

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran logan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Greeley, CO
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by Cobra469 View Post
    Hiding in the woods? Under the influence? while I feel that just because you were drinking earlier you shouldn't lose your right to self defense but one has to ask how much had he drank. .
    I'd agree. Just because lets say you were at home drinking and watching a sports game, you shouldn't have to give up your right to self defense. But, since he was out in the woods wondering around, his self-defense claim won't be very credible. When I first read the story, I thought the bad guy was out in the woods, like he'd been shot and ran then died. So ya, I find it very weird he was the one in the woods.
    Logan - Laugh lots, Love Often, and Defend the Irreplaceable
    Walther PPS 9mm, Ruger LCP
    CC permits: MN, FL, NH, PA and CO

    Member of:
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc., Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, and National Rifle Association

  8. #8
    Regular Member hardballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    Posts
    925
    To early to call. For me that is. Seems he's already been tried and convicted by the authorities. They should keep their yaps shut if a suspect is to be treated fairly. What are they doing releasing particulars of the case before the investigation is complete?

    I am way more curious about that.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096
    Similar thing happened in Idaho a couple of years ago. Both parties intoxicated. Man defends himself from a known abusive MMA fighter and goes to prison. I think alcohol is the key thing in these incidents.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Canard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SE, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    148
    I wonder if they knew each other as well since they were neighbors. Not that a neighbor couldn't break, enter, and threaten life.

  11. #11
    bhancock
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Cobra469 View Post
    Also wondering since I take ambien how likely that would be used against me if this happened to me? If I can't drive on it..... Damned if you do...Damned if you don't...
    I've also wondered that a little because I take a prescription narcotic based pain reliever in low doses. I am not restricted from driving or operating heavy machinery, just cautioned to exercise special care. I have not found any case law that eludes to this angle at all. There always seem to be some negative connotations about such. When prescribed the doctor and the researchers agree that it is low dose but when the press reports on prescription drug abuse they almost always refer to them as 'powerful' or 'potent' drugs.
    Last edited by bhancock; 07-26-2010 at 02:41 PM. Reason: grammar

  12. #12
    Regular Member Cobra469's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Allis, WI, , USA
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by Canard View Post
    I wonder if they knew each other as well since they were neighbors. Not that a neighbor couldn't break, enter, and threaten life.
    Huh. I didn't even catch that the first time reading it. That does make an interesting point. Being in such close proximity was it some sort of domestic altercation gone wrong? Then again a lot of crimes are committed in the same neighborhood as the perp. Hope they report more of this story as it becomes known rather than just leaving it hanging as it is.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    GREEN BAY, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    They are already charging him with 1st degree intentional, Another story where the guy is convicted before he goes to trial.
    I guess they don't understand what self defense means. They shouldn't list any charges until after the investigation.
    If you'd read the end of the Press Release you'll see that they're holding him on PROBABLE CAUSE of 1DEG, which is usual and customary in these types of cases. "Pending investigation"

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484
    I will not speculate nor judge based on what has been reported at this time, though I will follow closely

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by logan View Post
    I'd agree. Just because lets say you were at home drinking and watching a sports game, you shouldn't have to give up your right to self defense. But, since he was out in the woods wondering around, his self-defense claim won't be very credible. When I first read the story, I thought the bad guy was out in the woods, like he'd been shot and ran then died. So ya, I find it very weird he was the one in the woods.
    I don't think that you do forfeit your right to self defense if you are drinking, HOWEVER, you do open yourself up to a lot more scrutiny than you might otherwise get if you were not drinking or if your blood alcohol level were under a 0.04. It is your choice.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by qball54208 View Post
    If you'd read the end of the Press Release you'll see that they're holding him on PROBABLE CAUSE of 1DEG, which is usual and customary in these types of cases. "Pending investigation"
    Well I obviously read the report or I wouldn't have made the comment. They are publicly charging him with 1st Degree IH before the investigation is even complete. Not that hard to understand. Guilty until proven innocent.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    SNIP They are publicly charging him with 1st Degree IH before the investigation is even complete.
    I have a question in this area. There is something I am not clear on.

    The article said the shooter is being held on probable cause for murder while the investigation occurs. But, did not say he is charged with murder.

    Can police hold someone for a period without charging them? And, if they can, how long before he must be charged or released?

    If police can hold someone for a period before charging them, I am all for requiring the police to disclose which citizen they have seized from his home or public, and why. No incognito seizures, thank you.
    Last edited by Citizen; 07-27-2010 at 01:09 AM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Cobra469's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Allis, WI, , USA
    Posts
    218
    Guess that would depend on ones lawyer. If you don't have a lawyer they can hold you for a certain amount of time I am sure. I wonder if this is the time they have to get you in front of a judge for an arraignment. Dougie would probably have a legal cite about this somewhere. It may be possible that he was being held until the DA reviewed the case. Or that they booked him on these charges but the DA has not filed the charges formally yet or something.

    I know something similar happened to my sister. She was booked for a OWI and DC. The DA only charged the DC. Her lawyer aid that since she was never formally charged with OWI than she can't complain about it. Of course they did nothing to determine that she was driving or under the influence for that matter.

    I just think the paper worded it that way rather than saying that he was arrested pending the DA formal filing in case the DA filed something else.
    Last edited by Cobra469; 07-27-2010 at 11:19 AM. Reason: clarified

  19. #19
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    They are publicly charging him with 1st Degree IH before the investigation is even complete. Not that hard to understand. Guilty until proven innocent.
    I guess I'm not following you. The state has to charge you before they try you. I would think they think they have enough evidence to go forward.

    I believe the steps are:

    1. Discover a potential crime.
    2. Investigate
    3. Arrest
    4. Refer case to DA
    5. If DA sees a case, case is filed.
    6. Preliminary hearing and judge decides whether there is sufficient evidence to hold over for trial.
    7. Trial

    It sounds like they are at step 3 and 4 right now.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    I guess I'm not following you. The state has to charge you before they try you. I would think they think they have enough evidence to go forward.

    I believe the steps are:

    1. Discover a potential crime.
    2. Investigate
    3. Arrest
    4. Refer case to DA
    5. If DA sees a case, case is filed.
    6. Preliminary hearing and judge decides whether there is sufficient evidence to hold over for trial.
    7. Trial

    It sounds like they are at step 3 and 4 right now.
    I agree, seems that before the investigation is complete, they believe that there is sufficient evidence to detain him and will more than likely refer charges. Otherwise they could release him under OR or signature bond.
    I just find it amazing that these LEO all agree that we have the right to self defense yet when we use it they want to throw the book at us.
    If this guy was in this mans house uninvited and he was shot because the person thought his life was in danger. I don't see that as 1st degree IH. So what if he fled his home in retreat. Maybe he felt that was what he needed to do to create distance. It is a real shame that you have to retreat from your own home.

  21. #21
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    This is why we need a Castle Doctrine or at least a better defined self-defense law.

    It seems that in cases of self-defense that they will wait for the jury to determine that.

  22. #22
    bhancock
    Guest

    1 Million Dollar Bond-No charges

    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    This is why we need a Castle Doctrine or at least a better defined self-defense law.

    It seems that in cases of self-defense that they will wait for the jury to determine that.
    Not every self defense shooting needs a jury to determine the facts. If the investigation reveals clear evidence and especially if the officers had a couple reliable witnesses, not just the one left standing, self defense could be determined and no arrest or charges referred. Not being on the scene of this one or having any knowledge about the parties it is impossible to determine by the press release.

    It would be nice if you could expect a fair evaluation by LEO no matter where you are. we have seen some extreme differences in how Agencies differ in their standard operating procedures.

    Link to latest News article: http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/99435664.html
    Last edited by bhancock; 07-28-2010 at 12:05 AM. Reason: added Title and link

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by bhancock View Post
    Not every self defense shooting needs a jury to determine the facts. If the investigation reveals clear evidence and especially if the officers had a couple reliable witnesses, not just the one left standing, self defense could be determined and no arrest or charges referred. Not being on the scene of this one or having any knowledge about the parties it is impossible to determine by the press release.

    It would be nice if you could expect a fair evaluation by LEO no matter where you are. we have seen some extreme differences in how Agencies differ in their standard operating procedures.

    Link to latest News article: http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/99435664.html
    Gee, another Rights violation. Unreasonable Bail. Even Jesus Gonzalez had a bond amount much lower. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    1
    Just because the accused claims self defense doesn't always mean it was. What if the gun shot wounds are in the back-that doesn't look like self defense. Also maybe the accused wants to be in jail for fear of retaliation from the victims friends and family? There is far too little reported to judge whether Rights have been violated.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    $1,000,000.00 Bail is unreasonable when compared to bail in comparable cases here in Wisconsin. I don't believe that Steven Avery even had a bail that high.

    An 8th Amendment Right

    Or do we only stand up for some rights?
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 07-28-2010 at 01:45 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •