Court Ignored Alarms — Then Bodies Turned Up

Yellow police tape marking a restricted area at a fire scene with firefighters in the background

Neighbors on Hawaii’s Big Island say they begged the system to stop a dangerous man before three elderly farmers were murdered, but their warnings died in a courthouse file.

Story Snapshot

Two women reportedly sought restraining orders days before the killings, warning Jacob Baker was threatening lives on their rural road.
A judge denied those petitions for “insufficient evidence,” and within days three elderly men were dead, police say.
The case exposes how courts and law enforcement can dismiss red flags while law‑abiding citizens are told to trust the system.
The Hawaii tragedy raises national questions about public safety, judicial judgment, and the right of families to defend themselves.

Warnings From the Neighborhood Before the Bloodshed

Local reporting and national coverage now show that Jacob Baker, a 36-year-old man living in the rural Puna area, was the subject of at least two temporary restraining order requests filed the Friday before Memorial Day weekend.^[2] In those sworn petitions, two women alleged Baker had threatened their lives and the lives of people on a farm along Papaya Farm Road, saying he was entering property, taking items, and making residents feel unsafe.^[2] Neighbors later described an atmosphere of fear on the remote, heavily wooded road, where people rely on each other more than distant bureaucracies.

Those pleas for protection went into the same judiciary that routinely ties the hands of law‑abiding gun owners but often hesitates to act decisively against clearly unstable or menacing individuals. According to a journalist who reviewed the filings, the women said Baker was trying to squat in the area, making people uncomfortable, and explicitly threatening to kill people living on the farm.^[2] For residents on Hawaii’s Big Island, where emergency response can be slow and properties are isolated, those kinds of warnings are not academic; they are often the only early-warning system before violence erupts.

Judge Denies Restraining Orders, Then Three Men Are Killed

Despite those warnings, a judge rejected both restraining order petitions, finding “insufficient evidence” that the alleged harassment occurred or that anyone faced an imminent threat.^[2] Days later, police say a two-day killing spree left three elderly men dead in the same remote district.^[1]^[2] Investigators allege Baker murdered 69-year-old Robert Shine, 79-year-old Chida Morris, and 69-year-old John Carse at separate properties in rural Pahoa, two of them living near each other.^[1]^[2] Shine was reportedly found partially submerged in a cement pond, Morris discovered a few hundred feet away, and Carse located about 19 miles off, all within a span of roughly forty-eight hours.^[1]^[2]

Hawaii County authorities have now charged Baker with one count of first-degree murder, three counts of second-degree murder, and multiple counts of burglary, criminal property damage, theft, and unauthorized entry into a motor vehicle.^[1]^[3] Police say he was considered “armed and extremely dangerous,” prompting a massive manhunt that mobilized local, state, and federal law enforcement resources.^[1]^[2] Officers ultimately tracked him down after surveillance footage showed a man resembling the suspect hiding in a vacant lot, and they arrested him while he was concealed in a small cave nearby.^[1]^[2] For grieving families, those charges and the dramatic capture arrived only after three lives were lost in ways neighbors believe were avoidable.

System Failures, Public Safety, and Constitutional Rights

While courts insist the restraining orders were denied based on the evidence in front of them, the contrast between neighbors’ fears and the system’s inaction is glaring.^[2] Residents went through the official channels, filing paperwork and asking the government for basic protection. Days later, police were warning the public about an armed killer on the loose, identifying the same man as a grave threat to the community.^[2]^[4] This pattern is painfully familiar: ordinary people follow the rules, raise red flags, and then watch institutions claim there was nothing more they could legally do when tragedy strikes.

🔴 Hawaii man charged with murder in triple homicide across Big Island

Jacob Baker, 36, of Pahoa was charged Sunday with one count of first-degree murder and three counts of second-degree murder, plus burglary, property damage, and theft offenses. He is held without bond.

Baker… pic.twitter.com/Bb7rn5si58

— NewsTongue (@NewsTongueX) May 31, 2026

For many conservatives, the Hawaii case underscores why the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment are not theoretical talking points but life-and-death safeguards when government systems fail. Rural residents, especially seniors, are often the most vulnerable when dangerous individuals are left on the street after judges discount sworn warnings. At the same time, the same legal culture that hesitated to intervene here routinely backs aggressive red-flag proposals, speech policing, and “equity” experiments that burden law‑abiding citizens instead of focusing on credible threats. As the details continue emerging in this Big Island tragedy, the central question is one every American community must confront: when neighbors sound the alarm about a dangerous person, will the system act on those warnings—before, not after, it is too late?^[1]^[2]^[4]