Local News

Police: Butcher kills romantic rival in Piggly Wiggly

Posted July 16, 2009

Map Marker  Find News Near Me

Map

— A butcher at a local Piggly Wiggly supermarket on Thursday shot and killed a man who was dating his ex-girlfriend, police said.

The shooting occurred at about 8:45 a.m. inside the store at 229 E. Church St., said Detective Chris Young of the Laurinburg Police Department.

Laurinburg Police Department generic Girlfriend tipped off suspect before confrontation

Three customers and 10 other employees were in the store at the time, but no one else was injured, Young said.

Police arrested the butcher, identified as Aubrey Odum, 28, and charged him with murder.

Young said Odum's ex-girlfriend, Victoria Blackwell, went to the Piggly Wiggly Thursday morning with her new boyfriend, Brian McLean, 35, and her cousin. McLean went to the back of the store to confront Odum over something, and an altercation ensued, Young said.

It was unclear why McLean confronted Odum, he said.

"What I understand is that there was some type of domestic situation that took place between the two men," Laurinburg Police Capt. Kimothy Monroe said.

Blackwell, who didn't go inside the store, had tipped Odum off that McLean planned to confront him at the store, Young said, so Odum armed himself with a small-caliber handgun.

Odum shot McLean three times, including once in the back, and he staggered to the front of the store before collapsing near the checkout register. Young said.

Paramedics took McLean to Scotland Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Odum, who had two children with Blackwell, ages 2 and 5, then drove over to the Laurinburg police station and surrendered.

"That's an unusual situation for us and took us by surprise," Monroe said. "He actually walked in with the gun and said, 'I'm the one who did the shooting.' Just like that."

Odum told investigators that he often carries a gun to work, Monroe said, despite that fact that he doesn't have a concealed weapons permits and Piggly Wiggly policy prohibits firearms in the store.

Store employees declined to talk after the incident, but Kevin Gibson, who works at a neighboring mechanic's shop and often spoke with Odum, said the bloodshed came out of the blue.

"Nothing seemed odd this morning at all," Gibson said. "He always seemed like a nice gentleman."

92 Comments

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
View all
  • Lightfoot3 Jul 17, 11:21 a.m.

    “Once the man had his back turned...he was no longer a threat.” - jafarmg2


    I don’t know. If the rounds were fired fast and furious, the back shot could have been fired as the person turned.


    I’m thinking more and more this might be a valid case of self defense. Even if the, uh, “victim” wasn’t armed, it sounds like he was there to attack the other dude. Perhaps the dude thought he was armed? Perhaps the “victim” was big and bad enough that he could have done serious bodily injury if not stopped?


    I hope the dude gets a good attorney. I don’t support shooting people willy-nilly, but the “victim” obviously went there to start trouble. Given he want straight to the police, I wonder how much “damage” he done to any self defense case he might present?

  • jafarmg2 Jul 17, 11:14 a.m.

    If one of the shots hadn't been in the back...it might be "self defense". Once the man had his back turned...he was no longer a threat.

  • Lightfoot3 Jul 17, 10:10 a.m.

    “WHY would she warn her ex that the current boyfriend was going to confront him? Was he violent or did she want to start trouble?” - OHn8tive


    Instead of warn, it was probably more like threaten (i.e. I’m bringing my new boyfriend to the store to beat your tail).

  • OHn8tive Jul 17, 8:23 a.m.

    According to the story "Blackwell, who didn't go inside the store, had tipped Odum off that McLean planned to confront him at the store, Young said, so Odum armed himself with a small-caliber handgun." Blackwell was the ex-girlfriend. WHY would she warn her ex that the current boyfriend was going to confront him? Was he violent or did she want to start trouble?

  • celong Jul 16, 7:59 p.m.

    If you bring children in the world you need to be married and work things out trying to have a united home for them. All this other "mess", messes with folks minds and emotions. It all goes back to "living right"

  • Lightfoot3 Jul 16, 7:47 p.m.

    “No not really!....You can think Laurinburg is Mayberry if you want too!” - wake_up_jeff_0


    Yes, really. It’s nothing like Mayberry. I remember the Colonial and A&P.

  • Heatherbrook Jul 16, 7:17 p.m.

    Blackwell is a player in this . Hopefully someone will take the children, and provide them a loving, stable home.

  • Common Sense Man Jul 16, 5:22 p.m.

    "But NOTHING in this story supports that, and anyone who claims this is justifiable self defense based upon this article is speaking from a position of abject ignorance."

    Agreed!

  • seaturtlesrule Jul 16, 5:03 p.m.

    Innocent people's lives (including babies and children) were put in danger...for no good reason.

    They needed to take this outside away from innocent citizens.

  • confederateyankee Jul 16, 5:02 p.m.

    I'd like to ask if anyone here who claims this is "clearly" self defense if they are either police officers or concealed carry permit holders.

    Oh, wait. I already know the answer is "no."

    I know this because they would have told you something far different in training. You cannot shoot someone for merely confronting you. You cannot shoot someone merely because someone called you on the phone and said a person was coming after you.

    You may only pull a weapon if your life is in imminent, mortal danger... and perhaps his was. But NOTHING in this story supports that, and anyone who claims this is justifiable self defense based upon this article is speaking from a position of abject ignorance.

    Let's hope none of you are ever put in a position where someone's life hangs in the balance based upon what you "know" of the law.

More...