To: Usenet (alt.satanism...)
From: Truth@alt.satan
Subject: Teen murder/satanic motivation
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 05:20:00 GMT
Brian SIMMONS, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
No. 24932.
Supreme Court of Nevada
Feb. 29,1996
Defendant was convicted in the Third Judicial District Court, Lyon County, Archie E. Blake, J., of first-degree murder with deadly weapon, burglary, and possession of explosive device. He appealed. The Supreme Court, Steffen, C.J., held that: (1) defendant's friend who received telephone call from defendant that was recorded by wiretap did not act as a government agent; (2) book concerning witchcraft and expressing satanic themes could be seized under plainview doctrine; (3) neighbor's testimony about not hearing anything on night of murder was not sufficent evidence on which to base granting of new trial; and (4) evidence was sufficient to support verdict.
Affirmed.
Springer, J. dissented with separate opinion.
(cut)
FACTS
On the morning of February 23, 1993, fifteen-year old
Jason Kopack was murdered in Lyon County, Nevada. The
Lyon County Sheriff's office investigation of the crime
scene indicated no signs of a struggle but the victim's
body revealed an oval-shaped wound in the back of the left
shoulder. The investigating officers initially believed
that Jason had been mortally wounded with a crowbar
or blunt instrument and began searching the premises
for such an implement.
(cut)
At school during the morning of the same day, Simmons,
who had reportedly become preoccupied with Satanism,
mutilation, rape and killing, attended school and told
or suggested to three friends that he had killed
Jason. Simmons' friend, Mike O, (hereafter "Mike")
testified that Simmons explained the details of his
activities leading up to the shooting and admitted to
Mike O that he, Simmons, had shot Jason. Another of
Mike O's acquaintances, Dan, testified that Simmons
told him that there were now only four left on the
list of five that Simmons had earlier told Dan that
he intended to kill. This corroborated Mike O's testimony
indicating that Simmons had told him, about two weeks
before the killing, that Simmons had made a list of five
people he planned to kill, including the victim Jason.
Footnote 1
In handwritten journals admitted into evidence, Simmons
had copied satanic invocations from books and expressed
his desire to please Satan by murdering and mutilating
people he knew. He reportedly told the victim's girlfriend
that if Satan told him to kill someone, including Jason,
he would do so. Simmons shared his murder plans with
other friends and told his friend, Dan, that he had a list of
five individuals that he planned to kill in the near future.
(cut)
....Simmons who sought, unsuccessfully, to have the
district court suppress all items taken from his home,
including the book Witchcraft, from which the State read
excerpts at trial to demonstrate that Simmons was
involved in Satanistic rituals. In denying Simmons' motion
to suppress, the district court found that all items had
been properly seized and removed from Simmons' house
and that the book Witchcraft was both in plain view and
constituted relevant evidence.
At trial, Simmons did not deny telling his friends of
his "hit" list, but testifed that he refered to the names
on the list only as characters in the game
"Dungeons and Dragons". He insisted that all of his talk
about Satan and Satanism was also simply part of the
game. Simmons also testifed that his friends lied about
him telling them that he killed Jason.
(cut)
(5) Simmons contends that the book Witchcraft was illegally seized and should not have been admitted at trial bcause the book was not listed on the search warrant and neither the plain view doctrine nor the good faith exception applies (or has only limited application) to material protected by the First Amendment. Because the satanic themes expressed in Witchcraft are protected by the First Amendment and the police did not have any rational nexus between satanism and Jason's death prior to the search, Simmons maintains that the warrant requirement that items to be seized be listed on the warrant should be strictly construed and that the police improperly engaged in the ad hoc seizure of the book.
(6) We disagree. The standard for probable cause in seizing material "presumptively protected" by the First Amendment is no higher than any other material. See New York v. P.J. Video, 475 U.S. 868, 874-75,106 s. Ct. 1610, 1614-13, 89 L.Ed. 2d 871 (1986). In the instant case, police did not seize the book because its materials were criminal, but rather because the contents of the book were relevant to the crime under investigation See Bennet v. State, 106 Neb. 136, 140 787 P.2d. 797, 800 (1990) (poetry in plain view detailing defendant's desire to kill was lawfully seized). Consequently, we conclude that the district court did not err in finding that the book had evidentiary value and was validly seized pursuant to the plain-view doctrine. (Cut)
- The Ordur of Kaos Under Satan (TOKUS)
-- the underlying k@s that makes all this possible
- Satanism Archive
- Smackers -- self-described Satanist expressions
- Compare outsiders' descriptions of Satanism and satanism:
- Propaganda -- non-Satanist religious and academics
- Delusion -- 'satanic ritual abuse' fear-mongering
- Mother Church (CoE)
-- the progenitrix of eco-ethics
items referenced in this archive are
copyright the authors cited per the Berne standard.
Illustr. credits: "krampustile" was cybercrafted by tyagi nagasiva, scanned from a 1932 postcard printed by "Erika" with krampus on red and white background, 1998; 'Snake Bar Devils' is an improvement on the 'Authentic Candle of Desperation' packaging from Botanica Del Leon Rayon (Mexico) by t. nagasiva, 1998.