Auman is no hero
The Rocky Mountain News captured a great photo of Lisl Auman hugging her mom on Mother’s Day. It looked like it was truly a touching moment for each of them. It is just to bad that Bruce VanderJagt will never have the opportunity to hug his mother ever again because he was killed as the result of a crime that Auman set in motion.
Auman is not a hero, victim or even a crusader — she is a murderer and belongs in prison for the rest of her life.
It was very interesting that she dedicated the song she sang to the people she served time with and — as an afterthought — rededicated the song to the victims of crime (“Woman freed in cop killing speaks for juveniles in prison,” May 14).
Please excuse me if I refuse to feel sympathy for people who decide to murder.
Don Stanley, Littleton
so don I guess that fact that she was in the back seat of a police car handcuffed when Bruce was shot doesnt matter?
He was killed by a real jerk and I dont think Auman knew he would resort to anything like that. I am sorry for the loss of the son, husband, daddy, and friend to many, but I dont think she had anything to do with his murder.
I have no idea how someone who was already in police custody when the real murderer pulled the trigger and killed VanderJagt can really be a murderer, but hell, who am I to know? Obviously Don has all of the answers!
Posted by glow on May 24, 2007 05:56 AMI don't think Auman ever claimed to be a hero, Don.
She was a girl who was paying the consequences of someone's else actions.
Yes, she participated in what turned into a burglary when she was trying to retrieve her own belongings from her ex-boyfriend's home. By the way, this guy testified on her behalf.
Auman had been acquainted with Mattheus Jaehning for less than a day when all this occurred. He was someone else's friend who went along for the ride and she spent 8 years in prison for the mistake of jumping into his car when they found out the police were coming.
She didn't kill Officer Vanderjagt. As everyone has pointed out she gave herself up and was in the back of a police car in handcuffs when Jaehning shot him. She didn't know anything about Jaehning to be able to give the police any information about what guns he had, where he was going, etc.
It's interesting to note that no one ever talks about the fact that the officers at the scene changed their story after the fact. Initially they said that Auman was cooperative but after the shock of Vanderjagt's murder was replaced by anger they said that she refused to tell them anything. The fact that she didn't have anything to tell about a guy she barely knew was unimportant.
And by the way, I'm not anti-cop. My mother worked for the Denver police and knew officer Vanderjagt. I grew up around and have tremendous respect for police officers but I also recognize that they are human, too.
Auman is trying to turn something negative in her life into a positive. She could have written a book or sold her story to Lifetime for big cash. Instead she's dedicating her time and effort to try to help people understand what drives some women to lives of crime so that we can try to prevent it from happening.
She may not be a hero, but at least she's trying to do something good.
"I dont think Auman knew he would resort to anything like that."
She was steering the vehicle while he was shooting at the pursuing officers, so she must have had some idea.
She was involved in a felony, and someone was murdered during the commission of that felony; that's felony murder.
If you are sitting in the getaway car while your partners are robbing a bank, and they kill someone, you are guilty of murder as well; because of your involvement in the original crime, even if you had no idea they would "resort to anything like that".
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 07:08 AMAuman didn't pull the trigger that killed the officer, therefore she wasn't guilty of his murder. She was guilty of making poor choices. I hope she keeps doing positive things in her life.
Posted by CWW on May 24, 2007 10:17 AM"Auman didn't pull the trigger that killed the officer, therefore she wasn't guilty of his murder"- CWW
You need to look up the "Felony Murder Law".
If you are a participant in a felonious act, and someone dies as a result of that act, you can be charged with felony murder.
"She was guilty of making poor choices"
Let's look at those choices:
Recruits Jaehnig and others to break in to her ex-boyfriends room to get her belongings back. (rather than call the police like a rational person would do)
Is aware that two of the men are armed and asks Jaehnig not to kill the boyfriend if he is at his residence. Jaehnig states that he makes no promises. She goes ahead with the break-in anyway.
Acts as look-out during the break-in.
During the police chase she makes no attempt to get out of the car when it stops. She hands Jaehnig a weapon and holds the steering wheel while he leans out the window to shoot at police. (complicit in felony eluding and attempted murder)
When they reach the condominium complex, she gets out of the car and flees with Jaehnig.
She eventually comes out and surrenders. When police ask where Jaehnig is she states, "I don't know what you are talking about." Minutes later officer Vanderjagt is murdered.
She should still be in jail.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 10:56 AM"Please excuse me if I refuse to feel sympathy for people who decide to murder," says Don Stanley in his quest to label Lisl as a murderess. Every letter in this forum will denounce Don for his preposterous conduct.
In fact: Lisl did not set into motion the drama that took Bruce's life. She was attempting to rescue her personal belongings from some guy who had appropriated them.
Listen up Dan: The thief that took Lisl's personal belongings is responsible for Bruce's death. But for that thief, Bruce would be alive today assuming some illigal immigrant or other didn't shoot him at a later date. I respect the thin blue line; however, your finding of culpability is erroneous.
"In fact: Lisl did not set into motion the drama that took Bruce's life. She was attempting to rescue her personal belongings from some guy who had appropriated them."
You can't be serious, Richard. If I have your belongings in my house, that isn't justification to break in to my house to retrieve them. You call the police and handle the matter that way.
If you do break in and flee police when they attempt to stop you, then you are responsible for what happens.
The ex-boyfriend is guilty of theft, and nothing more.
"The thief that took Lisl's personal belongings is responsible for Bruce's death."
Preposterous.
Keep crying, numb nuts.
Posted by [Poor Mike] FYK on May 24, 2007 11:37 AMMike: The police will say: "It is a civil matter, " and they won't even say, "sorry." By the time Lisl initiates court proceedings her personal belonging will be gone and she will have no proof. Very unfortunately Lisl's abatement by self help goes awry; nonetheless, her ex-boyfriend put the drama in motion.
Perhaps if she had embraced a faith initiative and prayer, her ex-boyfriend would have acquiesced to god's mandate as with the Bush administration with its faith initiatives.
Faith initiatives are 9/11, Holy Crusades, Inquisition along with winning a football game or help from god to pummel your boxing opponent into a bloody pulp. Sorry Mike: I just had to get some religion in so my title as "deicide" wouldn't take a beating.
Posted by Richard Grimes: Risen Ape, deicide that slays gods. r22037@yahoo.com on May 24, 2007 11:47 AMMike, if you are in a car and the nutcase you are with yells at you to take the wheel while he leans out the window to shoot - and the car is speeding down a cayon road, are YOU just going to refuse on principle and die in a crash?
You, sir are an idiot. The "she steered the car" argument is silly.
The felony murder statute needs a common sense decision behind its' use. The fact than a good officer died made many in the community blind in their rage to what really went on here and resulted in the overcharging in this case.
As for letter writer Don, I don't recall anybody attempting to make Auman into a hero. She was a young person who made a bad decision and paid dearly for it. Surely, you have never made any mistakes, right?
Posted by RU Serious on May 24, 2007 11:49 AMCop gets killed...someone will pay with a life sentence, innocent or not. Cop kills a citizen......2 week suspension, promotion in 6 months.
Posted by Ace on May 24, 2007 12:41 PMCop gets killed...someone will pay with a life sentence, innocent or not. Cop kills a citizen......2 week suspension, promotion in 6 months.
Posted by Ace on May 24, 2007 12:41 PMCop gets killed...someone will pay with a life sentence, innocent or not. Cop kills a citizen......2 week suspension, promotion in 6 months.
Posted by Ace on May 24, 2007 12:42 PM[quote]
if you are in a car and the nutcase you are with yells at you to take the wheel while he leans out the window to shoot - and the car is speeding down a cayon road, are YOU just going to refuse on principle and die in a crash?
You, sir are an idiot. The "she steered the car" argument is silly.
[/quote]
In the first case, the car she was in wasn't speeding down the canyon when she held the wheel so Jaehnig could kill the Jeffco deputy - it was slowly rolling through the parking lot near where Vanderjagt was murdered. It's very doubtful she *couldn't* have bailed out.
Secondly, yes - I would die on principle. And that's what cops or people with principles/values would do. Criminals don't.
Though I disagree, I can understand how some feel about the case not knowing that she did this (it's almost never mentioned). Anyone whose mind isn't changed after learning of this fact is just apologizing for a murderer.
"Mike, if you are in a car and the nutcase you are with yells at you to take the wheel while he leans out the window to shoot - and the car is speeding down a cayon road, are YOU just going to refuse on principle and die in a crash?
You, sir are an idiot. The "she steered the car" argument is silly."
No, sir (or madam) you are an idiot.
The car was STOPPED (twice), not speeding down a canyon road.
She knew they were armed before the break-in and still chose to go through with it. There was even the implication that her ex-boyfriend would be harmed if he were there.
She jumped out of the car and fled with Jaehnig AFTER he had been shooting at the police.
If the choice is between:
1) Assisting someone in murder to save myself, or
2) Not assist and risk harm to myself
I will choose the second one.
And, Richard, this has nothing to do with religion. Take your meds.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 02:19 PMMike: You have to be a misogynist with a hatred of women. Lisl's ex-boyfriend is probably still laughing. His conduct cost the life of Bruce and imprisoned his ex-girlfriend and all you can say is that she is a murderess for action that even you would take to retrieve personal belongs being held by another. By condemning Lisl for her boyfriend's conduct you are complimenting him. In spite of all the letters that go against you, you will place so much value on your own opinion that you will roast others on account of it. You attach no culpability to the one person who started it all. Rev. Falwell has a friend in you.
Posted by Richard Grimes Risen Ape: Deicide, slayer of gods. r22037@yahoo.com on May 24, 2007 02:50 PM"Mike: You have to be a misogynist with a hatred of women."
Nope.
"...for action that even you would take to retrieve personal belongs being held by another."
Nope. I would call the police and if my belongings were gone, I would take that person to court. I wouldn't break in to someone else's residence.
"Rev. Falwell has a friend in you."
I don't know what Rev. Falwell has to do with this. Your obsession with religion is bizarre.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 03:16 PMIn the first case, the car she was in wasn't speeding down the canyon when she held the wheel so Jaehnig could kill the Jeffco deputy - it was slowly rolling through the parking lot near where Vanderjagt was murdered. It's very doubtful she *couldn't* have bailed out.
Secondly, yes - I would die on principle. And that's what cops or people with principles/values would do. Criminals don't.
Though I disagree, I can understand how some feel about the case not knowing that she did this (it's almost never mentioned). Anyone whose mind isn't changed after learning of this fact is just apologizing for a murderer.
Posted by Brad on May 24, 2007 01:01 PM
Gee, Mike...you could at least get your facts straight...
1. Bruce Vanderjagt wasn't a Jeffco deputy. He was a Denver police officer.
2. Jaehning wasn't anywhere near the car when he shot Vanderjagt.
He had forced Auman to drive to his own apartment complex near Monaco and Hampden a short distance from where they exited I-25. She never had a chance to bail out. Jaehning, however, bailed out and ran as soon as she turned into the lot leaving her to face the pursuing officers on her own. . She remained in the car and immediately surrendered to the police officers. Jaehning ran through the complex with other officers in pursuit and then ambushed Vanderjagt in a stairwell.
Auman didn't know Jaehning had a gun. We have no idea what happened in the car as they drove away from the site of the burglary. We don't know what he may or may not have said to her. It's not unreasonable to assume that a person, being threatended by a man they barely know with a gun, would make the choice to follow their demands believing that the police would understand they were not a willing participant. It happens more often then you probably know.
Posted by Thomas on May 24, 2007 04:23 PM"Posted by Brad on May 24, 2007 01:01 PM
Gee, Mike...you could at least get your facts straight"
Thomas, please get your names straight.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 04:51 PMThomas- You really need to get YOUR facts straight.
"He had forced Auman to drive to his own apartment complex near Monaco and Hampden a short distance from where they exited I-25."
Wrong. She wasn't driving; he was. At one point, the car stopped behind traffic; she didn't get out. She held the steering wheel while he leaned out and shot at the police.
"She remained in the car and immediately surrendered to the police officers."
Wrong. They got out and ran into the alcove together. She came out and surrendered; Jaehnig hid in the alcove. She refused to tell police where he was, so Vanderjagt went back to check the alcove. That's when Jaehnig shot him. Perhaps if she had said he was still there Vanderjagt wouldn't have poked his head around the corner and been shot by Jaehnig.
"Auman didn't know Jaehning had a gun."
Wrong. She acknowledged that she knew the men carried guns. She even told Jaehnig not to hurt her ex-boyfriend. He said that he couldn't promise anything.
"It's not unreasonable to assume that a person, being threatended by a man they barely know with a gun, would make the choice to follow their demands believing that the police would understand they were not a willing participant."
Then that person would probably tell the police where he was hiding, and not put them in more danger by making it necessary to proceed without knowing where he was.
She set the events in motion by enlisting bad men to help her commit a felony. She had opportunities to either stop it, or help police along the way; she chose not to.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 06:19 PMSorry, all you hate-filled morons look and sound alike to me.
Posted by Thomas on May 24, 2007 06:21 PMThomas- You, of all people, shouldn't call anyone else a moron.
Posted by Mike on May 24, 2007 06:29 PMSome Q. Mike, since you KNOW so much.
1) Were you on the jury?
2) Were you in the courtroom every day of the trial?
3) Are you a Denver cop?
4) Are you related to the officer killed?
5) Are you related to the D.A. or somebody in his office?
How are you so sure of your facts?
Posted by RU Serious on May 24, 2007 06:37 PMRichard "deicide" -
Give it a rest freakshow.
Thomas-
Get a clue.
6:37
The facts of the case came out during the trial and were widley reported.
Posted by Get Real on May 24, 2007 07:13 PM1) No
2) No
3) No
4) No
5) No
I read.
Dear BRAD:
Your claimed: "Secondly, yes - I would die on principle. And that's what cops or people with principles/values would do. Criminals don't."
I think it is safe to assume that your eyes are brown. (you're so full of sh*t)
Posted by Sheila on May 25, 2007 10:18 AMDear BRAD:
Your claimed: "Secondly, yes - I would die on principle. And that's what cops or people with principles/values would do. Criminals don't."
I think it is safe to assume that your eyes are brown. (you're so full of sh*t)
Posted by Sheila on May 25, 2007 10:18 AMYo again Mike: I know you are just a kid who without consulting dictionary.com alleges erroneously and contemptuously branding Lisl a "murderess." Defined: To kill another human unlawfully, to kill brutally or inhumanly, to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously is murder.
Your wicked allegation contends that Lisl brutally and inhumanly and barbarously killed another human being. May the Fruit of the Virgin have mercy on you for such libel.
Just like you blame Eve for man's downfall, you blame Lisl for her boyfriend's conduct, I repeat: Though ex-boyfriend may not be a murderer as you allege Lisl is a murderess, it is his determination that put the events into motion.
Rev. Falwell has a friend in you because you both think alike: Blame Eve; blame Lisl. You even shed tears over Falwell's demise.
Michael J Mee's statement (in another forum) suggests imbecility: "If you don't have the time don't do the crime." He blames Lisl when it is her ex-boyfriend whose culpability should have put him in jail. You, two boys, Mike and Mee, must go to the source which sires the event.
Don Stanley's irresponsible allegation: Please excuse me if I refuse to feel sympathy for people who decide to murder," is so stupid. Lisl did not decide to murder; she sought only the return of her property.
Perhaps if she had fallen on her knees before her ex-boyfriend and offered to bring him comfort he would have surrendered her personal items, otherwise it was a civil matter to be resolved in Court and by the time it got there her items would have vanished.
Why three macho-male chauvinists have to blame the female is clear: They are Jewish, Muslim or Christian.
Posted by Richard Grimes Risen Ape: Member of the deicide that slays gods: r22037@yahoo.com on May 26, 2007 11:26 AMRichard-
You have the definition of 'murder'; now look up the legal definition of 'felony murder'.
"Rev. Falwell has a friend in you because you both think alike: Blame Eve; blame Lisl. You even shed tears over Falwell's demise."
I don't know what in the world you are talking about. Again, your bizarre obsession with religion.
"You, two boys, Mike and Mee, must go to the source which sires the event."
So, if I commit a crime against you and you decide to unlawfully retaliate against me; I am culpable for the damage you do to others?
Uh, no.
"Why three macho-male chauvinists have to blame the female is clear: They are Jewish, Muslim or Christian."
I'm not a "macho-male chauvinist".
I'm not Jewish, Muslim, or Christian.
I'm not "blaming the female". I'm blaming the person; she happens to be female.
"I know you are just a kid"
Not a kid. And also not some obsessed wacko who has to drag religion into every topic.
Posted by Mike on May 27, 2007 11:20 AMI recognize what the bulk of readers are thinking: "Deicide Grimes is brilliant, however: don't fall into this canard (a deliberately misleading fabrication). The reality is that I steal a lot; I even steal from Sharon: Risen Ape. I steal from dictionary.com: Lisl is a "murderess," says Mike: Defined: To kill another human unlawfully, to kill brutally or inhumanly, to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously is murder. Mike is reduced to name-calling while ex-boyfriend laughs at the saga his conduct created. I chide Mike.
Actually, I am a manager of a cemetery called Mythology where gods are dieing to get into. You will find 3 freshly dug graves not for the Trinity but for the god of Abraham, the jealous, genocidal, priggish and self-contradicting tyrant of the bible and the Koran who could not exist because no god can be that cruel. This includes the transmogrified Jew from the "loins of David" who should be grateful that Allah did not turn into a monkey, him being Jewish, the same Allah that creates virgins without menses, stools or urine for his male slaves (women get nothing).
You can meet this Risen Ape deicide manager of Mythology cemetery on June 2 between 12 and 3 Saturday at the People's fair where he will park your bicycle with Keith saying: "Oh, yah, brilliant my ___. You fill in the blank lest I be stricken.
I don't care if you are Jewish, Muslim or Christian: The graves are for gods not duped humans. I'll park your bike as an old guy with white hair wearing a blasphemous tee shirt horny enough to be a TV evangelist.