ILNews

7th Circuit affirms cross burner's convictions

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found sufficient evidence to uphold a Muncie man's convictions stemming from his burning of a cross in front of the home of a family with biracial children.

Kyle Milbourn was sentenced to 121 months in prison for convictions of interfering with housing rights of another person, intimidation, using fire to commit a felony, and witness tampering. Milbourn and Kyle Shroyer decided after an evening of drinking to build and burn a cross in the front yard of Paula Tracy and Phillip Thrash's home in March 2006. Paula's three children from a previous relationship, who are biracial, lived there along with their African-American grandfather. Shroyer was dating Tracy's half-sister at the time, whom he later married. The two even took pictures of the burning and told others what they had done.

In United States of America v. Kyle Milbourn, No. 08-2525, Milbourn appealed because he claimed there was insufficient evidence to support the finding he was motivated by the racial makeup of the people who lived in the home and that the cross was burned to intimidate or interfere with their right to live there.

In addition to the photographs and statements made by Milbourn, the jury could have deduced he knew biracial children lived there because Shroyer was dating Tracy's half-sister, wrote Judge Terence Evans. Also, several witnesses said they heard Milbourn make racist comments about blacks and that he said it would be cool to join the Ku Klux Klan.

"And the frosting on the cake was that he picked, of all things, a cross to burn," he wrote. "And not just any cross, but one he and Shroyer constructed, crudely to be sure, in a shed near the trailer where they had been drinking and dancing."

The government presented evidence of the family's feelings of fear and anger after the cross burning and that they sought counseling for their oldest child, who had witnessed the event. The family even moved out of the home because of the incident.

The Circuit judges also found the prosecutor's comments during closing arguments on how Milbourn aspired to join the KKK didn't result in prosecutorial misconduct. A witness had testified that Milbourn had said he thought about joining the KKK.

Milbourn also waived his argument that the District judge should have disregarded the statutorily required mandatory minimum 10-year-sentence for the use of fire in commission of a felony.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. by the time anybody gets to such files they will probably have been totally vacuumed anyways. they're pros at this at universities. anything to protect their incomes. Still, a laudable attempt. Let's go for throat though: how about the idea of unionizing football college football players so they can get a fair shake for their work? then if one of the players is a pain in the neck cut them loose instead of protecting them. if that kills the big programs, great, what do they have to do with learning anyways? nada. just another way for universities to rake in the billions even as they skate from paying taxes with their bogus "nonprofit" status.

  2. Um the affidavit from the lawyer is admissible, competent evidence of reasonableness itself. And anybody who had done law work in small claims court would not have blinked at that modest fee. Where do judges come up with this stuff? Somebody is showing a lack of experience and it wasn't the lawyers

  3. My children were taken away a year ago due to drugs, and u struggled to get things on track, and now that I have been passing drug screens for almost 6 months now and not missing visits they have already filed to take my rights away. I need help.....I can't loose my babies. Plz feel free to call if u can help. Sarah at 765-865-7589

  4. Females now rule over every appellate court in Indiana, and from the federal southern district, as well as at the head of many judicial agencies. Give me a break, ladies! Can we men organize guy-only clubs to tell our sob stories about being too sexy for our shirts and not being picked for appellate court openings? Nope, that would be sexist! Ah modernity, such a ball of confusion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmRsWdK0PRI

  5. LOL thanks Jennifer, thanks to me for reading, but not reading closely enough! I thought about it after posting and realized such is just what was reported. My bad. NOW ... how about reporting who the attorneys were raking in the Purdue alum dollars?

ADVERTISEMENT