Submit your comments on this article | ||||||
-Lurid Crime Tales- | ||||||
[CO] Space Force cadet sobs as he's jailed for 54 years for killing 14 year-old who'd just stolen his car | ||||||
2025-08-21 | ||||||
![]() Orest Schur, 29, broke down in the Aurora, Colorado, courtroom on August 15 as he apologized for murdering Xavier Kirk, who died after being struck in the back and head while fleeing the scene in July 2023. 'I am sorry for the events that occurred that night, for the pain, for the grief and trauma that have followed and for the impact that my case had on so many lives,' a tearful Schur told the court. The boy's 13-year-old friend was also shot in the back but survived. He was hospitalized and later submitted a statement condemning Schur's actions. 'An adult chose to use deadly force against two unarmed teenagers. That is not justice, that is not safety, that is not accountability,' the teen wrote. 'I survived, but I am not the same. My friend didn't survive at all. And no matter what we did that night, I didn't deserve to be shot, and Xavier didn't deserve to die.'
As the unarmed teens drove away and ultimately crashed the car, Schur fired 11 shots at them, per the forensic testing results — some of which hit 14-year-old Xavier Kirk in the back and head. He was rushed to the hospital, where he died. The 13-year-old, whose identity has not been publicly revealed, was shot in the back but was able to get to a relative’s home for help.
| ||||||
Posted by:Skidmark |
#11 Common sense says shooting justified. But we don't live in that world. We live in the world where sexual mutilation of children is referred to as "gender affirming care". |
Posted by: Rex Mundi 2025-08-21 16:18 |
#10 The survivor is guilty of felony murder. When does the trial start? |
Posted by: Daffy Whusoting2705 2025-08-21 13:27 |
#9 Knew a couple of guys who moved to Denver to try their luck at carpentry, one of which ended up in Aurora. He explained around the campfire one night, he started his week wondering not if, but how many 'encounters' he would have that week, and at what degree, up to and including arriving home from work one day to catch a gentleman literally just leaving his apartment with his rather nice television. Let's just say he was able to convince this aspiring young lad to immediately and without damage return his property and find somewhere else to be, post haste. This was some 20 years ago; I imagine it isn't any better. Constant Action Stations, paying to live in a neighborhood which would be fine if not for the poachers, I get it. All the bad looks - on patrol after grabbing personal weapon, shot in back - not calling police to at least mark an incident, hey I just caught two teenagers attempting to steal my car and looks like they are trying again just down the road on the 911 tapes, nothing else matters. |
Posted by: swksvolFF 2025-08-21 13:24 |
#8 The key to this is the sentence "Instead of calling police, he grabbed a pistol, jumped into his car, and began circling the neighborhood." That's gonna be viewed as vigilante action wherever you are. |
Posted by: ed in texas 2025-08-21 12:30 |
#7 Yeah, not a puny property crime. Grand theft auto. These were not basically good kids making a mistake. They're hardened criminals. What other crimes might they commit if they're never stopped? |
Posted by: Abu Uluque 2025-08-21 12:21 |
#6 I wouldn't call it a puny property crime. You don't know if he had other valuables inside the car. Maybe the insurance would replace it but maybe not. I wouldn't expect a communist to understand. He caught the thieves red handed and they refused to stop. It was certainly not a cold blooded murder and it was certainly not unprovoked. Feral yoots would be well-served if they were taught that they are not immune from the consequences of committing crimes and doing other stupid things. Maybe it was wrong to shoot those thieves but not 54 years worth. That's essentially a life sentence for defending his home and his property and that's wrong too. |
Posted by: Abu Uluque 2025-08-21 12:15 |
#5 2 barely turned teenagers, but surprisingly, already well skilled thieving street thugs, were out late at night being criminals. They know the rules of the game, too, that once disengaged from the caught attempt, they just needed to move a block or so over and try again, because the original mark can't do anything and the police aren't coming anytime soon. This is Denver, where the mayor encouraged people to snitch on neighbors who were letting their cars warm up because auto theft was so rampant, basically blaming the auto owners for letting their cars get stolen. Probably the auto theft wasn't reported as auto theft and ledgered over to environmental pollution violation - "Huffing" - was the slur for allowing your vehicle to properly warm up. |
Posted by: swksvolFF 2025-08-21 11:25 |
#4 Make sure you know the Use of Force laws in your state. It goes without saying that 99% of what's found on the internet about this subject shouldn't be trusted. |
Posted by: Chantry 2025-08-21 10:50 |
#3 While the article painted picture reads more thinly veiled agenda based narrative of the events. If the guy chased them down of halted the crime in progress to get the car back. In the recovery process, they attempted to jump or fight him to keep it. -----> I see that as a justified shoot. If he just shot them w/o any threat of hostility, or because he watched 1 too many Hollywood crime movies, that is another issue and NO it was not justified. WHAT IS VERY CLEAR 2 barely turned teenagers, but surprisingly, already well skilled thieving street thugs, were out late at night being criminals. Little is clearly stated about the level of hostility the 2 presented on being caught. So one can only really ask foundational questions. Q: Where were the adults that should have been keeping check on these 2 skilled criminals in training? Q: Was the handed down 54-year sentence, more to avoid riots, Riots likely 3rd party funded to cause a national BLM resurgent near mid-terms, if the sentence had been something else? BTW: Go-Fund-Me needs to narrow it uses of donations. Like direct payments to Funeral Homes and not to the "camera grieving" people getting $$$$$. Any bets in 2 years an Appeal gets the sentence overturned, or seriously reduced, time served and probation? OBTW: Heartless as it sounds ..... How much SNAP or Gov Support will the dead teens mothers now lose? |
Posted by: NN2N1 2025-08-21 07:36 |
#2 Even in Texas this is murder. You can't chase down criminals and shoot them. A puny property crime? Gun owners are supposed to be wiser than that, and know the laws, unlike journalists who always take the criminials' side. |
Posted by: Jairong+Scourge+of+the+Gepids2435 2025-08-21 01:51 |
#1 Killed a yout stealing his car - should've been given a civil reward. |
Posted by: Grom the Affective 2025-08-21 01:31 |