GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
re possibility of M fam kids testifying at trial

sonjay said:
I would really love to see that.
I don't think I'll get to. But I would sure like to.
It would make it even more interesting if they exercised their 5th amendment rights.
Click to expand...
bbm

Yes, it w/be interesting, but if that was their stance, and if it was known pre-trial,
prosecutor w/have a tough time pursuing - even for a plea bargain.
Def Team already has advantage of multiple, conflicting versions from diff M fam members who were there (or maybe not) at various times.
Mince meat on cross exam. Conflicting w'in each person's stories and conflicting w one another.
Plus MrM = not an eyewitness to alleged crime, who has projected himself into public eye in multiple unsympathetic ways.

So someone else here summarized succinctly --
ATM, physical forensic evidence from scenes = shell casings & fuzzy vid's, plus perhaps other items LE has not revealed yet.

JM2cts.
 
question if any of the others were doing stuff they shouldn't have been doing then all parties could be charged with the murder - right?
 
This case is a mess. I am more accustomed to younger people not trusting LE. But it seems like this family has damaged their reputation and, possibly, the case by being less than forthcoming.

I don't think EN will get away with this. That said, I can imagine the prosecuter will want to put this to bed fairly quickly for a couple of reasons. First, if the neighbors are right and there is an unidentified gang problem, then LE has a bigger community issue. Second,if there was an illegal connection between EN and TM, they could be seen as unsupportive to victims. Third, does the son with the gun get charged? Fourth, EN has a powerful, vocal lawyer who can really erode the relationship between LE and informants, LE and the community, LE and victim's rights groups, and LE and local gangs. My thinking is that the state needs to tie the EN bullets to TM and get a reasonable plea. The truth of this may be more harmful to the community than the alternatives.
 
Miss Muffet said:
They might be relieved they won't have to testify, but that won't stop Bob from being upset and having something to say about it.
Click to expand...

What is prosecutor's case against EN, without M fam kids' testimony at trial,
(besides shell casings & fuzzy vid's, plus perhaps other items LE has not revealed yet)?
 
Gin said:
I have no predictions, this is too crazy a case. Your thoughts make sense, though.
I still can't quite get my head around the whole family lying about knowing the suspect, what a charade. That would be interesting at trial. "So, in the days and hours after your loved ones death, did you deliberately mislead the police?"
Click to expand...


the best part!.? -- these ''car'' people can't identify the car or even what kind it was!!

so..........what audi?????

lad doesn't even drive - maybe he was mistaken:blushing:

:moo:
 
al66pine said:
What is prosecutor's case against EN, without M fam kids' testimony at trial,
(besides shell casings & fuzzy vid's, plus perhaps other items LE has not revealed yet)?
Click to expand...

EN talked with friends about shooting someone. So, there is some more evidence that can be used at trial.

On that note, they said that he had said, "We." If EN's friends testify that he had referred to himself and friends shooting at TM and the car, there might a crack that can form of EN being the shooter or the only shooter.
 
Just like us, and most of the public, jurors are not going to understand or find reason why Tammy fetched her son to go back out and "find" the car and person who she exchanged words with. If the real reason doesn't come to light during trial - they are going to be left asking the same questions we are asking.
 
Gypsy Road said:
Just like us, and most of the public, jurors are not going to understand or find reason why Tammy fetched her son to go back out and "find" the car and person who she exchanged words with. If the real reason doesn't come to light during trial - they are going to be left asking the same questions we are asking.
Click to expand...

enough to cast 'reasonable' doubt.......for sure......sadly for the M Family
 
1977-9 or so.
Dad was driving our family home from a local restaurant. Upper middle class white neighborhood.
Young men teens/early twenties in a tan Volkswagon Squareback pulled up alongside us, apparently buzzed, and were taunting.
Dad pulled the tire iron out from under the front seat and told them to knock it off.
They followed us home.
Dad made Mom take us all inside and call the police. He stood outside to make sure nothing happened to us. Did he come in for his pistol? No.
Guys came back and came out of the car swinging a baseball bat in our front yard. We could hear the crack of Dad's elbow from the kitchen.
They were gone before the police got there.
We kids knew the car.
The boys were caught.
Did my Dad press charges? Even after emergency room, surgery, and physical therapy?
No.
He didn't want them to have police records to ruin their chances to go to college.

That was road rage of a different sort.
This case is about money and greed.
 
kaen said:
This case is a mess. I am more accustomed to younger people not trusting LE. But it seems like this family has damaged their reputation and, possibly, the case by being less than forthcoming.

I don't think EN will get away with this. That said, I can imagine the prosecuter will want to put this to bed fairly quickly for a couple of reasons. First, if the neighbors are right and there is an unidentified gang problem, then LE has a bigger community issue. Second,if there was an illegal connection between EN and TM, they could be seen as unsupportive to victims. Third, does the son with the gun get charged? Fourth, EN has a powerful, vocal lawyer who can really erode the relationship between LE and informants, LE and the community, LE and victim's rights groups, and LE and local gangs. My thinking is that the state needs to tie the EN bullets to TM and get a reasonable plea. The truth of this may be more harmful to the community than the alternatives.
Click to expand...


Its a HOT mess.
 
charminglane said:
1977-9 or so.
Dad was driving our family home from a local restaurant. Upper middle class white neighborhood.
Young men teens/early twenties in a tan Volkswagon Squareback pulled up alongside us, apparently buzzed, and were taunting.
Dad pulled the tire iron out from under the front seat and told them to knock it off.
They followed us home.
Dad made Mom take us all inside and call the police. He stood outside to make sure nothing happened to us. Did he come in for his pistol? No.
Guys came back and came out of the car swinging a baseball bat in our front yard. We could hear the crack of Dad's elbow from the kitchen.
They were gone before the police got there.
We kids knew the car.
The boys were caught.
Did my Dad press charges? Even after emergency room, surgery, and physical therapy?
No.
He didn't want them to have police records to ruin their chances to go to college.

That was road rage of a different sort.
This case is about money and greed.
Click to expand...


Your Dad is amazing -- I hope those kids realize how lucky they were!
 
newone said:
enough to cast 'reasonable' doubt.......for sure......sadly for the M Family
Click to expand...

Yup! And combine that with all the lies the Meyer family has told - including the omission to police that they knew all along that EN was the shooter and had been banging on his door all week - Jurors are going to be suspicious of the M's. Not saying they won't convict EN, but they may convict him on a lesser charge.
 
sonjay said:
Yes, we know that we can't trust the Meyers' version of the story. Er... well... any of the many versions they've told.

It could be that one or more of the Meyers owed EN -- owed him money, drugs, weapons, or something else. There's an argument. He thinks owe more than they think they do, or something. Words are exchanged. Shots are fired. But ultimately the Meyers tell EN, "Come on back to our house, we'll take care of it." EN follows them home (as requested), BM pulls his gun, EN fires. Self defense?
Click to expand...

This scenario doesn't fit with the evidence. There are two shooting scenes. Firs scene only has 45 caliber bullets. Not from Brandon's gun. You are suggesting that after he shot at them, they invited him to their home?
 
charminglane said:
1977-9 or so.
Dad was driving our family home from a local restaurant. Upper middle class white neighborhood.
Young men teens/early twenties in a tan Volkswagon Squareback pulled up alongside us, apparently buzzed, and were taunting.
Dad pulled the tire iron out from under the front seat and told them to knock it off.
They followed us home.
Dad made Mom take us all inside and call the police. He stood outside to make sure nothing happened to us. Did he come in for his pistol? No.
Guys came back and came out of the car swinging a baseball bat in our front yard. We could hear the crack of Dad's elbow from the kitchen.
They were gone before the police got there.
We kids knew the car.
The boys were caught.
Did my Dad press charges? Even after emergency room, surgery, and physical therapy?
No.
He didn't want them to have police records to ruin their chances to go to college.

That was road rage of a different sort.
This case is about money and greed.
Click to expand...

Why should he care about their chance to go to college? I wouldn't have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 165 more.
Total: 2,709 (members: 166, guests: 2,543)

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
2,543
Total visitors
2,709
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,579
Messages
18,173,808
Members
232,689
Latest member
Drumgirl29
Back
Top