Intune
Member
Please show me where I said that?
Really? Once again, please show me where this “fact†was stated.
Two officers dead after 14-hour stand-off
- Thread starter Sportcat
- Start date
- Status
Look back at my post about the timeline. One source said that the state has owned the land since 1960. But these folks have been on the property 40 years. Here's how it MAY have worked:
State condemns a portion of Farmer John's property, and pays him. All done legally. (I didn't say RIGHTLY - not getting into that right now.) Farmer John's 10 acres is now something LESS than 10 acres, because the State now owns a strip of it that adjoins the road. They have a long term plan to widen that road, but bureaucracy and politics being what it is, 43 years go by before the funding finally gets approved. Meanwhile, Farmer John has no particular reason to take down his stock fences that run to the old property line, and the State doesn't really care if he does. Now all of this is pure speculation, but it IS how these kind of things sometimes work. There's nothing far-fetched here.
3 years after the condemnation, Farmer John sells out to these idiots. Not being very bright, and being abysmally ignorant of the very laws they like to spout about, they didn't read the paperwork, they just assumed that the fence line was the property line. No fences? Okay, they just assumed the property went to the road.
But it didn't.
Yeah, that's where the mailbox is - out at the end of the driveway by the road. But it's really 30 feet onto property that they State BOUGHT 3 years before this lunatic moved in.
So, since the condemnation and transfer of ownership took place 43 years ago, and wasn't contested, and is ancient history, do you really expect some low level bureaucrat at the Highway department is going to send out nice letters to every property owner to remind them they don't reallly own the 30 feet of 'their' parcel that adjoins the road?
More than likely, the whole thing was in the papers for a while, and everyone knew that the property was bought by the State a waaaaay back and everything was kosher.
Everyone except our darling lunatic.
So, did it happen that way? Dunno, but it COULD have, and it fits. And if so, it's not hard to understand him going ballistic. Some road crew shows up and starts messing with his property and he didn't even get a letter? (Oh, and I'm sure they were very polite when they told him to buzz off.)
Given his ignorance and instability, the rest would be a foregone conclusion.
None of which excuses murdering police officers.
Greg L
Member
Certainly is a plausable scenario. A couple of years ago the state bought/took 1/5 acre off the front of my property for a road widening project that was supposed to start right then & there. As of today the only sign of that is a little wooden stake in my front lawn that I try not to knock over every time I mow the lawn.
It is too bad that the county commissioners/city planners/etc who decide to take someone's property by questionable ED reasons (not necesarily in this case but a couple of local ones spring to mind) aren't the ones who have to go to the door to tell someone to get out. A few of them getting shot would do wonders to getting ED back to something that is truely for the public good rather than increasing the tax base a little bit.
Greg
Quartus,
That is a possible scenario, but I'd think that the surveyor would have notified the lunatics that that land no longer (or never) belonged to them.
*shrug*
Assuming they were telling the truth about getting a surveyor out there in the first place, of course.
That is a possible scenario, but I'd think that the surveyor would have notified the lunatics that that land no longer (or never) belonged to them.
*shrug*
Assuming they were telling the truth about getting a surveyor out there in the first place, of course.
Simple disagreement here, that seems to be based on whether you put more trust in the description offered by the accused, or that offered by the police. Which way you lean is likely colored by your past experience.
The accused's case: Not long ago, some gov't employees/contractors working for same came out to prep the land for a gov't project. When the accused went to the bureaucracy to see what the deal was (they'd never been contacted about it), he checked the database/map/whatever and said "nope -- it doesn't look like your land is involved at all."
Later DOT folks show up and want to start work. When asked, the DOT guy in charge says the land was sold to the state over 40 years prior, but their records show it was sold by a guy who, according to the land owner, never owned the land or had a right to sell it. (Apparently his map and the one at city hall for the project don't match.) The DOT burearcrat essentially said "look, I don't care if the name on my list is a guy who's never owned the land. According to the rules I have to follow, I've crossed by T's and dotted my I's, so the project is going through. My bonus and job performance numbers are based on getting work done on time, so if you try and slow down my timetable I'm gonna gave a sheriff show up to get things back inline. Got a problem? I don't care -- go to someone who does." Paraphrased, but likely reflects the homeowner's position.
They send letters and do what they can to slow the process down; it doesn't help. They're in a position where the land will be taken, and to get anything in return it's gonna cost them a few tens of thousands of dollars and a long time for the legal process to work. They'll never get the land back (or recover the loss of value of the rest of their property," but they'll probably get something for the effort.
The workers show up, they alert the workers that the land is posted and they need to get off it, the workers call the local LEO who send a guy to look into the problem, there's a fight that results in the cop trying to bash the door in, they shoot him once with an AR and cuff him, and things go to hell from there.
The LAW's case: The bastards set up an ambush using weapons more powerful than we've ever seen before. They did it on purpose.
Now, questions for those involved in this debate:
The accused's case: Not long ago, some gov't employees/contractors working for same came out to prep the land for a gov't project. When the accused went to the bureaucracy to see what the deal was (they'd never been contacted about it), he checked the database/map/whatever and said "nope -- it doesn't look like your land is involved at all."
Later DOT folks show up and want to start work. When asked, the DOT guy in charge says the land was sold to the state over 40 years prior, but their records show it was sold by a guy who, according to the land owner, never owned the land or had a right to sell it. (Apparently his map and the one at city hall for the project don't match.) The DOT burearcrat essentially said "look, I don't care if the name on my list is a guy who's never owned the land. According to the rules I have to follow, I've crossed by T's and dotted my I's, so the project is going through. My bonus and job performance numbers are based on getting work done on time, so if you try and slow down my timetable I'm gonna gave a sheriff show up to get things back inline. Got a problem? I don't care -- go to someone who does." Paraphrased, but likely reflects the homeowner's position.
They send letters and do what they can to slow the process down; it doesn't help. They're in a position where the land will be taken, and to get anything in return it's gonna cost them a few tens of thousands of dollars and a long time for the legal process to work. They'll never get the land back (or recover the loss of value of the rest of their property," but they'll probably get something for the effort.
The workers show up, they alert the workers that the land is posted and they need to get off it, the workers call the local LEO who send a guy to look into the problem, there's a fight that results in the cop trying to bash the door in, they shoot him once with an AR and cuff him, and things go to hell from there.
The LAW's case: The bastards set up an ambush using weapons more powerful than we've ever seen before. They did it on purpose.
Now, questions for those involved in this debate:
- Is is possible that the land was actually "sold" by someone who didn't have deed to the property?
- Is it possible that the maps reflecting the proposed project could differ between DOT and local governmental folks?
- Is it possible that the points in 1 and 2 are closely related? Some bureaucratic SNAFU here?
- Is it possible that the cases presented by the cops and the landowner are both "currect" for the most part?
- What's the correct course of action when a governmental SNAFU results in the seizure of most of your family's wealth? What if the sale of everything you own won't result in the $30,000 required to sue the state for some return on the seizure (when the settlement may be significantly less than $30k?)
- Is it a legal requirement that you sit back and watch your land be taken?
- Replace the word "legal" in the last question with "moral."
- Assume low education level, bad experiences with law enforcement in the past, poor/rude communication skills, and something of a "the system is screwing us -- we're being persecuted! It's a conspiracy to take our land without paying!" mentality on the part of the landowner. Was this a predictable result of sending a cop over who might have been a little hot-headed with white rednecks refusing to acknowledge his authority? If these folks are at all racist, is sending a black officer the best choice (seems hard to get the land owner to identify with the officer, if he is racist.)
Straight Story
I know this thread is almost 2 yrs old.. However, I just ran across it today.. Im not going to lie I was outraged at some responses..But I do understand that everyone has different opinions on the matter, Im sure that most of everyone has forgotten about this.. but unfortunally I cant forget about it... This happened in MY town.. Trust me you dont think somehting like this will EVER happen but it can and it does.. and in my case it did!!
I do want to clear up some pointers in some of these post
1st of all the Bixby's have only lived there for about 10yrs before all of this happened... Let me tell you alittle bit about the property that this happened on.. you have the main hwy which is hwy 72... you can bare off to the right to take a short cut to Hwy 28... right beside the house in question there is a dirt road... OK.. Back in 1960 the DOT purchased the right of way to the dirt road.. and 15 feet on both sides of the road...which was the cornor lots of both houses on top of the dirt road.. (does that make sense?) The dirt road was man made, It is a dead end... Back at that time the only people that lived on that road was the Napiers, Tillers, I cant remember the other people that lived on top of the dirt road, and the Johnson... the Johnson's house was the one that this happened too..
When Mr and Mrs Johnson passed away their family sold it.... the "land" that the DOT was trying to put stacks up at was on the corner lot caddy cornor to the dirt road....So TECHNICALLY it wasnt there land to begin with it was already DOT's...
Now here is the good part.. .That fri the DOT workers were threatened... The Sup on duty did go and get the blueprints from the COURTHOUSE.. The Bixby's were still not satisfied.. It was a heated arguement... AT that time the Bixby's DID indeed say that if ANYONE tried to take their land they would kill them and anyone that got in there way... On Monday Morning SGT Danny Wilson went to the home to TALK the Bixby's BECAUSE Danny was that kind of person... also because he had picked of the son on more then one occassion when he was drunk and instead of taking him to jail he would take him home... So when he went to that house it wasnt to arrest him, to serve him with papers or anything like that.. If he was there to bring anyone in.. he would have let dispatch know.. it wasnt anything like that.. I honestly DO NOT believe that Danny tried to kick the door in or anything like that.. there is NO evidence that he tried to kick ANYTHING in or down... Danny was shot standing OUTSIDE on the porch and drug inside, and handcuffed.. (blood spatters backs up that evidence) Danny bleed to death.. When Danny did not call back in, and no one was able to get him on his phone... everyone was starting to try to find out where he was... at that time a 911 call came in it was one of the Dr in Abbeville that the Bixby's had called and told him that they had one of our deputies, as that 911 call came through our Sheriff called because HE had recieved a call from the AG office where they had called Cola... Thats when everything started happening... The LT on duty was dispatched out, when she drove up the Dr was there she stopped over by him he was explaining what was told to him, Well since Donnie was in the area he pulled up for back-up... Keep in mind at that point NO one knew what was going on.. Everything was still speculation.. When Donnie pulled up he got out, the LT and DR started yelling at him to get down, Thats when he was shot in the back...
Pretty much everything else is pretty acurate...
But let me tell you the hardest thing I had to see that night... WAS having a very close and dear friend brought out in a body bag, and Arthur Bixby brought out on a stretcher and EMT having to save his life...
That day is one that I will NEVER forget,
The trial will finally begin in Oct.. I hope they fry these "people"
I know this thread is almost 2 yrs old.. However, I just ran across it today.. Im not going to lie I was outraged at some responses..But I do understand that everyone has different opinions on the matter, Im sure that most of everyone has forgotten about this.. but unfortunally I cant forget about it... This happened in MY town.. Trust me you dont think somehting like this will EVER happen but it can and it does.. and in my case it did!!
I do want to clear up some pointers in some of these post
1st of all the Bixby's have only lived there for about 10yrs before all of this happened... Let me tell you alittle bit about the property that this happened on.. you have the main hwy which is hwy 72... you can bare off to the right to take a short cut to Hwy 28... right beside the house in question there is a dirt road... OK.. Back in 1960 the DOT purchased the right of way to the dirt road.. and 15 feet on both sides of the road...which was the cornor lots of both houses on top of the dirt road.. (does that make sense?) The dirt road was man made, It is a dead end... Back at that time the only people that lived on that road was the Napiers, Tillers, I cant remember the other people that lived on top of the dirt road, and the Johnson... the Johnson's house was the one that this happened too..
When Mr and Mrs Johnson passed away their family sold it.... the "land" that the DOT was trying to put stacks up at was on the corner lot caddy cornor to the dirt road....So TECHNICALLY it wasnt there land to begin with it was already DOT's...
Now here is the good part.. .That fri the DOT workers were threatened... The Sup on duty did go and get the blueprints from the COURTHOUSE.. The Bixby's were still not satisfied.. It was a heated arguement... AT that time the Bixby's DID indeed say that if ANYONE tried to take their land they would kill them and anyone that got in there way... On Monday Morning SGT Danny Wilson went to the home to TALK the Bixby's BECAUSE Danny was that kind of person... also because he had picked of the son on more then one occassion when he was drunk and instead of taking him to jail he would take him home... So when he went to that house it wasnt to arrest him, to serve him with papers or anything like that.. If he was there to bring anyone in.. he would have let dispatch know.. it wasnt anything like that.. I honestly DO NOT believe that Danny tried to kick the door in or anything like that.. there is NO evidence that he tried to kick ANYTHING in or down... Danny was shot standing OUTSIDE on the porch and drug inside, and handcuffed.. (blood spatters backs up that evidence) Danny bleed to death.. When Danny did not call back in, and no one was able to get him on his phone... everyone was starting to try to find out where he was... at that time a 911 call came in it was one of the Dr in Abbeville that the Bixby's had called and told him that they had one of our deputies, as that 911 call came through our Sheriff called because HE had recieved a call from the AG office where they had called Cola... Thats when everything started happening... The LT on duty was dispatched out, when she drove up the Dr was there she stopped over by him he was explaining what was told to him, Well since Donnie was in the area he pulled up for back-up... Keep in mind at that point NO one knew what was going on.. Everything was still speculation.. When Donnie pulled up he got out, the LT and DR started yelling at him to get down, Thats when he was shot in the back...
Pretty much everything else is pretty acurate...
But let me tell you the hardest thing I had to see that night... WAS having a very close and dear friend brought out in a body bag, and Arthur Bixby brought out on a stretcher and EMT having to save his life...
That day is one that I will NEVER forget,
The trial will finally begin in Oct.. I hope they fry these "people"
leadcounsel
member
When will the government stop imposing it's power, with the threat of armed men, against citizens?
When will police officers refuse to obey unlawful orders or make decisions for themselves when given questionable ethical orders (you mean we're taking this mans property by force when he has done nothing wrong)?
Unfortunately courtrooms, and justice, are generally reserved for the wealthy.
When will police officers refuse to obey unlawful orders or make decisions for themselves when given questionable ethical orders (you mean we're taking this mans property by force when he has done nothing wrong)?
Unfortunately courtrooms, and justice, are generally reserved for the wealthy.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
you claiming
he owned this property via a proscriptive easment? wasn't it sold by previous parcel owner?
he owned this property via a proscriptive easment? wasn't it sold by previous parcel owner?
In this situation the gov't wasnt imposing power.. The land wasnt his to begin with it was already the Gov't... Mr Johnson, the previous owners had already sold the land to DOT back in the 60's.. So basically to sum it up, 2 Officers was killed for a stupid reason... and SO what even if DOT workers were in the wrong... Is that reason enough to kill 2 officers???
Ooops; gotta check those dates.
---------------------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
---------------------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
They are still in the process of widening the road... I do know for along time they had to stop the project in that area, Because of the investigation... I did hear a few weeks ago that the trail will be taking place in Abbeville, Which in my opinion is pretty stupid...
I wish I could draw a demostratation of how much of the land was needed... You would be amazed at it... because it wasnt the yard itself that DOT needed.. It was a senseless act
I wish I could draw a demostratation of how much of the land was needed... You would be amazed at it... because it wasnt the yard itself that DOT needed.. It was a senseless act
FWIW,
Wikipedia has a narrative on this event: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Abbeville_Horror
With linked footnotes from different sources, including editorial content from...
The Southern Poverty Law Center: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=391
and
a private citizen from North Carolina: http://www.gulftel.com/firstfreedom/32.htm
I've not digested these links as of yet.
Wikipedia has a narrative on this event: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Abbeville_Horror
With linked footnotes from different sources, including editorial content from...
The Southern Poverty Law Center: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=391
and
a private citizen from North Carolina: http://www.gulftel.com/firstfreedom/32.htm
I've not digested these links as of yet.
Dont feel bad.. its been almost 2 yrs and I still cant digest it all....All I know was that Danny Boy was always there for me.. And Donnie I had known all my life....I dont care how people try to spin it.. Those people are the worst kind!!! I hope they get whats coming to them... I do wish that they wouldnt hold the trial in Abbeville..
here is a piece of info that i dont think was ever let out
... That Sunday night a phone call was made to an officer.. The officer was told that the Steven Bixby had been at a house and was talking that war was going to begin... They had planned on shooting the DOT workers if they came back in yard.. They had their guns loaded... That officer was going to talk to Bixby in the morning... that officer never made it out there because that mon morning his son was sick and he took the day off..... I think God everyday that it wasnt that officer that was there... It hurts to know that Danny Boy went in his place...
here is a piece of info that i dont think was ever let out
... That Sunday night a phone call was made to an officer.. The officer was told that the Steven Bixby had been at a house and was talking that war was going to begin... They had planned on shooting the DOT workers if they came back in yard.. They had their guns loaded... That officer was going to talk to Bixby in the morning... that officer never made it out there because that mon morning his son was sick and he took the day off..... I think God everyday that it wasnt that officer that was there... It hurts to know that Danny Boy went in his place...
You really want the answer?
The media reports would "look" exactly like this one looks. Of course it appears to be a clear-cut case of murder. When was the last time the media reported a story about someone resisting the government for any reason, and NOT making it look like a clear cut case of murder?
The previous owner granted an easement in 1960. The amount of land needed by the government was within that easement, and wouldn't have required the family to move. The family had only lived there for 10 years, so the notion that they could be emotionally attached to the land is tenuous at best.
There's a difference between taking a stand against the government for righteous reasons, and picking an invalid reason to fight against the government just because you don't like the government -- even though dislike of the government may be justified. This case seems to be the latter.
However, there's a curious lack of information about the alleged dispute over county land records.
IF the land was sold to the Bixbys with no mention of the easement, and IF county records at the time of sale did not indicate an easement, THEN the seizure was unjustified, because there would have been no way for the Bixbys to know about the easement. Even in that case, I think it's ridiculous for them to have started a shootout over a small bit of their property when they'd only lived on the property for approximately 10 years.
There's a difference between taking a stand against the government for righteous reasons, and picking an invalid reason to fight against the government just because you don't like the government -- even though dislike of the government may be justified. This case seems to be the latter.
However, there's a curious lack of information about the alleged dispute over county land records.
IF the land was sold to the Bixbys with no mention of the easement, and IF county records at the time of sale did not indicate an easement, THEN the seizure was unjustified, because there would have been no way for the Bixbys to know about the easement. Even in that case, I think it's ridiculous for them to have started a shootout over a small bit of their property when they'd only lived on the property for approximately 10 years.
I bet you said the same thing about the Branch Davidians and the Weaver family...
The guy in the last link is not all there, no, but he's probably giving a much more accurate account of the event than the media and police are despite his mental hangups. At the very least, I'd say they're equally inaccurate.
See that's the thing: I'm reluctant to to believe they just started the conflict for no reason. These kind of incidents are never as black-and-white as the media likes to make them seem.
Optical Serenity
Member
You know, not everyone here thinks that the govt messed up in Waco...
God be with the families of the dead Officers in this thread.
God be with the families of the dead Officers in this thread.
"These incidents?"
This case is about an allegedly valid easement. The only way the seizure was unjustified is if the easement was not documented in county land records.
Waco and Ruby Ridge began as alleged violations of unconstitutional firearms laws. That's totally different.
I'm not interested in who did what, whether the deputy went to the home to "talk," to arrest them, or to "warn" them not to interfere with the surveyors. I'm interested in the root cause(s) of the conflict. In this case, it appears the family had no just cause to be pissed off about the taking of an easement.
This case is about an allegedly valid easement. The only way the seizure was unjustified is if the easement was not documented in county land records.
Waco and Ruby Ridge began as alleged violations of unconstitutional firearms laws. That's totally different.
I'm not interested in who did what, whether the deputy went to the home to "talk," to arrest them, or to "warn" them not to interfere with the surveyors. I'm interested in the root cause(s) of the conflict. In this case, it appears the family had no just cause to be pissed off about the taking of an easement.
Pward
Member
hey FIX
edited due to not reading the entire posts before posting
edited due to not reading the entire posts before posting
Last edited:
No I didnt say that about any other family!! Im saying it about this one, Because they took A FRIEND from me!!
Dont get me wrong.. I think the Government is screwed up, I dont agree with how the Grovernment runs the country.. I dont believe we are as free as they claim we are,,, Thats the reason I am busting my ass in Law school.. So there is a voice that can be heard.. But killing is not the way...
Besides what I dont get.. is Steven Bixby spewing about him being so free in NH.. Heck if he was there he would be in jail.. he wouldnt have been that free
Dont get me wrong.. I think the Government is screwed up, I dont agree with how the Grovernment runs the country.. I dont believe we are as free as they claim we are,,, Thats the reason I am busting my ass in Law school.. So there is a voice that can be heard.. But killing is not the way...
Besides what I dont get.. is Steven Bixby spewing about him being so free in NH.. Heck if he was there he would be in jail.. he wouldnt have been that free
This Was caused by eminent domain. Stealing private property.
Would this be different if it was in CT?
It could be said make sure you know the constitution before enforcing unjust decisions by bureaucrats.
Sad for all involved, to see officers die and citizens charged. Just look at the division it has created on this board.
Look at it who to believe? not enough to make up my mind that’s for sure.
1st of all that is INCORRECT!! Donnie Ouzts was not the 1st one there.... Danny Boy was the 1st officer and he was out there to TALK to the BIXBY'S because they had THREATENED the DOT workers... Donnie Ouzts went out there when the 911 dispatched back-up because they had received calls from the DR. and the sheriff had received the call from the sec. out of cola...
and 2nd it was emmiant domain because the land was already given/sold to DOT in 1960..
Unfortuanlly I know the truth.. I was there.. I lived through it.. and I gave up my career because of it...
and 2nd it was emmiant domain because the land was already given/sold to DOT in 1960..
Unfortuanlly I know the truth.. I was there.. I lived through it.. and I gave up my career because of it...
http://www.independentmail.com/news/2007/feb/18/guilty-guilty/
Guilty, guilty
Bixby convicted of slaying two officers in land dispute
By Charmaine Smith-Miles (Contact)
Sunday, February 18, 2007
ABBEVILLE — It took a jury a little more than two hours to make a decision that two Abbeville families had been waiting three years to hear.
Steven Vernon Bixby was found guilty of gunning down Abbeville County Sheriff’s Sgt. Danny Wilson and S.C. Constable Donnie Ouzts in cold blood on Dec. 8, 2003. And that news was "like winning the lottery without getting the money," Sgt. Wilson’s sister, Marilyn Lee, said.
Now the Wilson family and the Ouzts family are praying for another round of justice.
"I hope they fry him," said Mr. Ouzts’ grandson, Blake Ouzts.
"He needs to feel what we feel. He needs to feel the fear over losing his life that our loved ones felt."
It was a quiet courtroom here in this small town Sunday night as Judge Alexander MacCaulay read "guilty" 17 times on charges of double murder, kidnapping, conspiracy, assault with intent to kill and possession of a deadly weapon.
Bixby showed little emotion when the verdicts were read.
Now the jury is allowed a 24-hour resting period before it comes back to court to hear testimony in the sentencing phase.
Before the jury decides whether Bixby will receive the death penalty, the state and the defense have to present testimony as to the New Hampshire native’s character.
For the Wilson and Ouzts families, there is no doubt as to Bixby’s character. As they hugged, cried and whispered praises of joy outside the courthouse, they also spoke of how Bixby kept a smirk on his face during the five-day trial.
Bixby and his parents were upset the state wanted about 20 feet of land near their home on S.C. 72 to widen the highway. Bixby and his father had threatened to gun down any officer on their land, according to witnesses.
"We can’t bring them back, but it feels good to know justice has been served," Sgt. Wilson’s oldest sister, Joanne Wilson, said. "For the first time, not to see a smirk on Steve Bixby’s face. …"
Hugs were shared and sighs of relief were released from the courtroom that held its largest audience to date for the trial, which started Wednesday.
Bixby had stockpiled shotguns and ammunition in his parents’ home and told a former girlfriend he was ready for a fight, according to testimony in the case.
Later, he bragged in a letter that he could have killed more people.
"Well, he’s just a hell of a nice guy, isn’t he? He only shot two people and he could have shot eight," Mr. Peace said during his closing statements.
Sgt. Wilson was the first to die in the shootings at the Bixby home. He had gone there to discuss the family’s anger over the road, only to be mowed down while standing on the front porch, his body then dragged inside, according to authorities.
Mr. Ouzts arrived to check on Wilson once radio contact with the officer was lost. He was shot as he stepped out of his patrol car and died on the way to the hospital.
Police surrounded the house for the rest of the day and the standoff finally ended after hundreds of rounds were exchanged. Bixby’s father, Arthur Bixby, was wounded in the fusillade and also charged with murder. No trial date has been set in his case.
Rita Bixby, Steven’s mother, was charged as an accessory because authorities say she knew her family planned to harm police officers. She was not home when the shootings took place.
Approximately 150 people turned out for the closing arguments. They all sat and listened intently as defense attorney Bill Nettles and Eighth Circuit Solicitor Jerry Peace made their pleas for the jury to consider how that fateful December day played out.
Ultimately, the jurors had two choices:
Did Bixby shoot down Sgt. Wilson and Mr. Ouzts that day and then engage 100-plus officers in one of the most violent firefights in the state’s recent history?
Or was he acting in his and his father’s defense in that shootout?
In a half-hour closing argument, Mr. Nettles asked the jury to consider the second option.
"Nobody thinks Steven Bixby should be given a key to the city," Mr. Nettles told the jury. "But they only shot people that made them feel threatened. It wasn’t about shooting people on Dec. 8, 2003. It was about their property."
The claim of self defense should be thrown out, Mr. Peace argued.
"When you are charged with murder, you do three things," he told the jury. "It’s either, ‘I didn’t do it.’ ‘It was an accident.’ Or, ‘It was self defense.’ It is clear it wasn’t an accident when Mr. Ouzts was shot in the back."
He held up Mr. Ouzts’ shirt and told the jury that Mr. Ouzts put that piece of clothing on to go out and make a living. And then he was shot for trying to help a fellow officer.
As for Sgt. Wilson, Mr. Peace said that’s an open-and-shut case as well. He said Sgt. Wilson simply knocked on the door of the Bixby home that morning and was met with gunfire.
For emphasis, the solicitor also held up Sgt. Wilson’s blood-soaked shirt. Then the clink of metal was heard in the courtroom. Mr. Peace pulled out Sgt. Wilson’s handcuffs and put a photo on the screen of the sergeant’s hands that were cuffed behind his back while he bled to death on the Bixbys’ living room floor.
"His life is running out on the floor right there, and this guy is reading him his Miranda rights and putting him under citizen’s arrest for trespassing," Mr. Peace said, his voice rising in anger. "What kind of crap is that?
"Ladies and gentlemen, we can’t let that happen in this county. We can’t let that happen in this state. We can’t let that happen in this country. We don’t care if it’s ‘Live free or Die,’" he said, citing a New Hampshire motto. "We can’t let that happen in this country."
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Guilty, guilty
Bixby convicted of slaying two officers in land dispute
By Charmaine Smith-Miles (Contact)
Sunday, February 18, 2007
ABBEVILLE — It took a jury a little more than two hours to make a decision that two Abbeville families had been waiting three years to hear.
Steven Vernon Bixby was found guilty of gunning down Abbeville County Sheriff’s Sgt. Danny Wilson and S.C. Constable Donnie Ouzts in cold blood on Dec. 8, 2003. And that news was "like winning the lottery without getting the money," Sgt. Wilson’s sister, Marilyn Lee, said.
Now the Wilson family and the Ouzts family are praying for another round of justice.
"I hope they fry him," said Mr. Ouzts’ grandson, Blake Ouzts.
"He needs to feel what we feel. He needs to feel the fear over losing his life that our loved ones felt."
It was a quiet courtroom here in this small town Sunday night as Judge Alexander MacCaulay read "guilty" 17 times on charges of double murder, kidnapping, conspiracy, assault with intent to kill and possession of a deadly weapon.
Bixby showed little emotion when the verdicts were read.
Now the jury is allowed a 24-hour resting period before it comes back to court to hear testimony in the sentencing phase.
Before the jury decides whether Bixby will receive the death penalty, the state and the defense have to present testimony as to the New Hampshire native’s character.
For the Wilson and Ouzts families, there is no doubt as to Bixby’s character. As they hugged, cried and whispered praises of joy outside the courthouse, they also spoke of how Bixby kept a smirk on his face during the five-day trial.
Bixby and his parents were upset the state wanted about 20 feet of land near their home on S.C. 72 to widen the highway. Bixby and his father had threatened to gun down any officer on their land, according to witnesses.
"We can’t bring them back, but it feels good to know justice has been served," Sgt. Wilson’s oldest sister, Joanne Wilson, said. "For the first time, not to see a smirk on Steve Bixby’s face. …"
Hugs were shared and sighs of relief were released from the courtroom that held its largest audience to date for the trial, which started Wednesday.
Bixby had stockpiled shotguns and ammunition in his parents’ home and told a former girlfriend he was ready for a fight, according to testimony in the case.
Later, he bragged in a letter that he could have killed more people.
"Well, he’s just a hell of a nice guy, isn’t he? He only shot two people and he could have shot eight," Mr. Peace said during his closing statements.
Sgt. Wilson was the first to die in the shootings at the Bixby home. He had gone there to discuss the family’s anger over the road, only to be mowed down while standing on the front porch, his body then dragged inside, according to authorities.
Mr. Ouzts arrived to check on Wilson once radio contact with the officer was lost. He was shot as he stepped out of his patrol car and died on the way to the hospital.
Police surrounded the house for the rest of the day and the standoff finally ended after hundreds of rounds were exchanged. Bixby’s father, Arthur Bixby, was wounded in the fusillade and also charged with murder. No trial date has been set in his case.
Rita Bixby, Steven’s mother, was charged as an accessory because authorities say she knew her family planned to harm police officers. She was not home when the shootings took place.
Approximately 150 people turned out for the closing arguments. They all sat and listened intently as defense attorney Bill Nettles and Eighth Circuit Solicitor Jerry Peace made their pleas for the jury to consider how that fateful December day played out.
Ultimately, the jurors had two choices:
Did Bixby shoot down Sgt. Wilson and Mr. Ouzts that day and then engage 100-plus officers in one of the most violent firefights in the state’s recent history?
Or was he acting in his and his father’s defense in that shootout?
In a half-hour closing argument, Mr. Nettles asked the jury to consider the second option.
"Nobody thinks Steven Bixby should be given a key to the city," Mr. Nettles told the jury. "But they only shot people that made them feel threatened. It wasn’t about shooting people on Dec. 8, 2003. It was about their property."
The claim of self defense should be thrown out, Mr. Peace argued.
"When you are charged with murder, you do three things," he told the jury. "It’s either, ‘I didn’t do it.’ ‘It was an accident.’ Or, ‘It was self defense.’ It is clear it wasn’t an accident when Mr. Ouzts was shot in the back."
He held up Mr. Ouzts’ shirt and told the jury that Mr. Ouzts put that piece of clothing on to go out and make a living. And then he was shot for trying to help a fellow officer.
As for Sgt. Wilson, Mr. Peace said that’s an open-and-shut case as well. He said Sgt. Wilson simply knocked on the door of the Bixby home that morning and was met with gunfire.
For emphasis, the solicitor also held up Sgt. Wilson’s blood-soaked shirt. Then the clink of metal was heard in the courtroom. Mr. Peace pulled out Sgt. Wilson’s handcuffs and put a photo on the screen of the sergeant’s hands that were cuffed behind his back while he bled to death on the Bixbys’ living room floor.
"His life is running out on the floor right there, and this guy is reading him his Miranda rights and putting him under citizen’s arrest for trespassing," Mr. Peace said, his voice rising in anger. "What kind of crap is that?
"Ladies and gentlemen, we can’t let that happen in this county. We can’t let that happen in this state. We can’t let that happen in this country. We don’t care if it’s ‘Live free or Die,’" he said, citing a New Hampshire motto. "We can’t let that happen in this country."
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked