Joplin Honkey's decades-long crime spree began when he killed Webb City couple

When reputed Joplin Honkey member Randy Forsythe killed Bonnie Freese Smith, 21, (pictured) and Gregory Lynn Smith, 24, he was only 18 years old.

Their lives would have been spared if Forsythe had been in prison after he burglarized the Neck City Post Office while on probation for stealing two cars.

Judge Herbert Casteel gave Forsythe a second chance during a hearing at Jasper County Circuit Court in Carthage in June 1987.

Three months later, driving drunk and at a high rate of speed on Highway 71A near Diamond, Forsythe slammed his car into the rear of a car containing the Smiths, killing both of them.

Forsythe pleaded guilty to two counts of involuntary manslaughter. He did not stay in prison for long and he has been commiting crimes ever since.

Another judge will have a shot at Forsythe, 52, Tuesday when he is sentenced for his role in a meth conspiracy. A sentencing memorandum filed Wednesday by Forsythe's attorney, Austin Knoblock said his client should receive the minimum sentence, 10 years, citing his troubled childhood.

The U. S. Attorney's office filed its sentencing memorandum today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri and not surprisingly wants him to remain behind bars a few years longer and cited Forsythe's lengthy criminal history

In the memorandum, U. S. Attorney Teresa Moore recommended a 13 1/2 year sentence for Forsythe, detailing the harm his actions have had on others.

From the memorandum:

One of the goals of sentencing under Section 3553 is to promote respect for the law. Anecdotally, the Government has heard that many of those who have gone to federal prison learn  that respect through a desire to not return there. 

That is apparently not a lesson that this defendant took from his previous two terms of federal incarceration. 

This defendant has lived a life where his addiction has made many victims. The known quantity of drugs in this case is limited to the drugs the defendant sold an undercover police officer, but it is unlikely that the defendant’s only buyer was that officer. 

Any total amount of distribution would be speculation, but the Court can logically and easily infer that the harm that this defendant caused was not completely forestalled by the fact that all we know about is his distribution to an undercover police officer. His distribution of methamphetamine has made victims and caused harm. 

The defendant’s criminal history also includes victims of his alcohol abuse. In 1987, he was drunk and killed two individuals when he wrecked into their car while speeding. 

Over the next nine years, he was convicted of six more DWIs and possession of a controlled substance. It appears he went to prison in 1996 and was then paroled in 2004. 

In 2005, he committed the crimes of domestic assault and tampering. 

In 2009, after his parole was revoked, he was finally discharged from prison. 

That brings us back to the 2010 gun conviction and his life since then. In 2014, just five months after he was released from federal prison, he was in possession of a stolen vehicle, assaulted a police officer, and had marijuana and drug paraphernalia. 

For the stolen vehicle and assault crimes, he was sentenced in Oklahoma to life in prison, but that was suspended and he was granted lifetime probation. He was discharged from federal prison after the revocation of his supervised release in June 2016. 

In 2019, he fled from a traffic stop when officers tried to stop him. He was, as he has many times before, driving without a license. 

Just two months after that is when he sold the drugs upon which this case is based. 

What rings true about this defendant is that, given not very much time, he will always return to his old ways. The defendant, who is now in his early 50s, is facing a sentence that will ensure he is prison until he is in his 60s. 

That is unfortunate, but it is due entirely to choices he has made to not deal with issues of addiction and his failure to change his life, to learn respect for the law, and to recognize that his actions harm so many others. 

A prison sentence at the top of the Guidelines is appropriate based on the danger he represents to the community, the need to deter him, and that such a sentence is the best chance to finally instill in him respect for the law. 

After a full consideration of the Guidelines and the 3553 factors, the Government believes that a sentence of 162 months takes into account all of the goals of sentencing and is a sentence that is sufficient to attempt to meet those goals, but is not longer than necessary.

Forsythe's sentencing is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Tuesday in U. S. District Court in Springfield.