Vang Defenders Question American Jurisprudence
Print Friendly and PDF
Accused mass murderer Chai Vang was found guilty on Friday after just three hours of jury deliberation. He was the Hmong immigrant who shot eight Wisconsin hunters, killing six, last fall. He complained that the hunters had berated him with racist speech, something the survivors always denied.

The presumably liberal jury imported from Madison didn't buy the self-defense defense, probably because Vang testified that some he killed "deserved to die" since they were rude to him.

HAYWARD, WIS. — A courtroom full of people sat in stunned silence Thursday as Chai Soua Vang ended his murder trial with the bold declaration that some of the six deer hunters he killed deserved to die because they were disrespectful.

In a cross-examination that may devastate Vang's claim that he was acting in self-defense, he said landowner Robert Crotteau and his 20-year-old son, Joe, deserved what they got when Vang chased them down and fatally shot each in the back, though Vang acknowledged that neither was armed.

[ "Vang: 3 Hunters Deserved to Die" Minneapolis Star-Tribune, 9/16]

Despite such homicidal arrogance, the family and other ethnic boosters couldn't resist attacking the judicial process, digging a deeper chasm between Hmong and Americans.

Outside court, one of Vang's friends questioned the all-white jury's makeup and maintained that Vang is innocent.

"All Caucasian, all American. Why can't there be one Hmong? Why can't there be one minority in there?" Pofwmyeh Yang said.

[ "Man Convicted in Slaying of 6 Hunters" Washington Post, 9/17]

Vang's sister voiced similar comments

"Every single one of them was white. They would not understand. They would never understand what my brother went through out there," said Choua Vang.

The real question is why can't Hmong understand that mass murder is not accepted in America.

Print Friendly and PDF