GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #3

[sorrell skye]

Police don't disregard unsubstantiated rumors because they often help solve crimes. They become facts in a case when the investigation substantiates them. But they start as unsubstantiated rumors and need to be heard and considered and ruled out.

I don't think it's victim bashing to consider the possible scenarios in an attempt to determine who is her killer. TM is the only victim. EN is a suspect. He's not a murderer until he is found guilty by a jury. It is possible he's innocent and someone else is the killer. As a result, anyone is a potential suspect worthy of being investigated.

The lies were too great to view this as cut and dry. If the Meyerses hadn't lied soooooooooo many times, I wouldn't be questioning what happened that night to the extend I am now. Since motive is relevant, what TM was involved in can point to the motives of others and possibly turn out another suspect. It's not victim bashing to take that all into consideration.

It would be great to move forward with a respectful exchange of ideas. Not accusing people of victim bashing would help contribute to that goal. We're all here for the same reason---to figure out what happened to TM and hope justice is served.

BBM

I don't disregard rumors - I just don't take them as fact until they're substantiated. I keep them in mind until they're either corroborated or refuted.

LE chases down every lead in an effort to substantiate whether or not that lead is credible.

Posting unsubstantiated rumors from comments sections beneath news articles is against the TOS of Websleuths. Bessie posted a link to the rules upthread when she locked the thread last night.

There's a fine line between speculation about possible scenarios and blaming the victim (whether outright or by innuendo). TM made mistakes the night she was shot. I agree with everyone who says she should have never gone out with her armed son to look for the silver car. Tragically, she paid for that mistake with her life. Based on the currently available information, I don't think she deserved to be shot & killed, nor do I believe she bears responsibility for getting shot & killed, despite her mistakes that night and regardless of EN's motive.

Prior to the arrest warrant affidavit being released, I, too, was very suspicious of what went down, as some of my previous posts reflect. After reading the affidavit several times, I'm much less suspicious as to the sequence of events. IMO, EN's friends' accounts and BM's & the daughter's accounts line up with one another in several crucial areas, although I agree that the whole backstory still hasn't been revealed by any of the involved parties.

I realize that some of my posts and some of the posts of a few other members don't share the majority opinion in these threads, but respectful space must be given to those who don't believe that TM brought this on herself - regardless of the motive of the accused murderer or any alleged 'underlying conflict' between any of the parties.

Even if TM was, indeed, buying illegal drugs from EN, she didn't deserve to be gunned down in front of her home after fleeing from the gunman.

Forgive me for defending the victim. I had no idea that was such an offensive stance to take in a murder case. Despite the seeming discrepancies in some of the statements the Meyers family members have made (primarily RM, who wasn't even there), I firmly believe the victim deserves the greater benefit of the doubt until & unless irrefutable evidence comes to light to support otherwise.

Unsubstantiated rumors do not constitute irrefutable evidence.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Even if TM was, indeed, buying illegal drugs from EN, she didn't deserve to be gunned down in front of her home after fleeing from the gunman.

Of course she didn't deserve it! We're wondering IF that's how it really happened. Asking these questions is not blaming her. Drugs being involved might help figure out who killed her.

With the exception of the prescription pads, drugs have not merely been comments at the bottom of a news article. The drug aspect of this case has been reported by the media and a neighbors who have spoken about it in video. Drugs are part of this case. After all, I'm sure you believe EN is a dealer. We can't just not talk about drugs because it might be motive that would lead to another suspect.

 

[Gin]

BBM

I don't disregard rumors - I just don't take them as fact until they're substantiated. I keep them in mind until they're either corroborated or refuted.

LE chases down every lead in an effort to substantiate whether or not that lead is credible.

Posting unsubstantiated rumors from comments sections beneath news articles is against the TOS of Websleuths. Bessie posted a link to the rules upthread when she locked the thread last night.

There's a fine line between speculation about possible scenarios and blaming the victim (whether outright or by innuendo). TM made mistakes the night she was shot. I agree with everyone who says she should have never gone out with her armed son to look for the silver car. Tragically, she paid for that mistake with her life. Based on the currently available information, I don't think she deserved to be shot & killed, nor do I believe she bears responsibility for getting shot & killed, despite her mistakes that night and regardless of EN's motive.

Prior to the arrest warrant affidavit being released, I, too, was very suspicious of what went down, as some of my previous posts reflect. After reading the affidavit several times, I'm much less suspicious as to the sequence of events. IMO, EN's friends' accounts and BM's & the daughter's accounts line up with one another in several crucial areas, although I agree that the whole story still hasn't been revealed by any of the involved parties.

I realize that some of my posts and some of the posts of a few other members don't share the majority opinion in these threads, but respectful space must be given to those who don't believe that TM brought this on herself - regardless of the motive of the accused murderer or any alleged 'underlying conflict' between any of the parties.

Even if TM was, indeed, buying illegal drugs from EN, she didn't deserve to be gunned down in front of her home after fleeing from the gunman.

Forgive me for defending the victim. I had no idea that was such an offensive stance to take in a murder case. Despite the seeming discrepancies in some of the statements the Meyers family members have made (primarily RM, who wasn't even there), I firmly believe the victim deserves the greater benefit of the doubt until & unless irrefutable evidence comes to light to support otherwise.

I think when posters here say they care about the victim, that is a worthy statement that should be taken at face value, period. I absolutely won't get into who cares more. Caring about victims is what brought me to Websleuths. I will say this here just to be clear:
I care about TM, and I am very sorry TM lost her life. No equivocating.


I am able to listen, read, ponder and reason. If something does not add up to me, that's my opinion. Frankly, it takes a lot for me to start say, "Gosh, something is odd here. Could there be more to this story?" It's OK for me to express that, it's not OK for me to demand that others see things my way. I believe in justice. Whether it turns out only one person is allegedly responsible, or there are others, I want to see all the allegedly responsible persons have their day in court.

I am not bothered by other points of view. They can state theirs, I will read and ponder. What I'm not a fan of is challenging, debating, and snark. If I see that, I try to step away before it gets contentious.

And now it's time for me to figure out dinner, so I'll step away. All the best, G.

 

[sonjay]

BBM

I don't disregard rumors - I just don't take them as fact until they're substantiated. I keep them in mind until they're either corroborated or refuted.

LE chases down every lead in an effort to substantiate whether or not that lead is credible.

Posting unsubstantiated rumors from comments sections beneath news articles is against the TOS of Websleuths. Bessie posted a link to the rules upthread when she locked the thread last night.

There's a fine line between speculation about possible scenarios and blaming the victim (whether outright or by innuendo). TM made mistakes the night she was shot. I agree with everyone who says she should have never gone out with her armed son to look for the silver car. Tragically, she paid for that mistake with her life. Based on the currently available information, I don't think she deserved to be shot & killed, nor do I believe she bears responsibility for getting shot & killed, despite her mistakes that night and regardless of EN's motive.

Prior to the arrest warrant affidavit being released, I, too, was very suspicious of what went down, as some of my previous posts reflect. After reading the affidavit several times, I'm much less suspicious as to the sequence of events. IMO, EN's friends' accounts and BM's & the daughter's accounts line up with one another in several crucial areas, although I agree that the whole backstory still hasn't been revealed by any of the involved parties.

I realize that some of my posts and some of the posts of a few other members don't share the majority opinion in these threads, but respectful space must be given to those who don't believe that TM brought this on herself - regardless of the motive of the accused murderer or any alleged 'underlying conflict' between any of the parties.

Even if TM was, indeed, buying illegal drugs from EN, she didn't deserve to be gunned down in front of her home after fleeing from the gunman.

Forgive me for defending the victim. I had no idea that was such an offensive stance to take in a murder case. Despite the seeming discrepancies in some of the statements the Meyers family members have made (primarily RM, who wasn't even there), I firmly believe the victim deserves the greater benefit of the doubt until & unless irrefutable evidence comes to light to support otherwise.

Unsubstantiated rumors do not constitute irrefutable evidence.

BBM. I myself found, after reading the arrest warrant affidavit several times, that I'm more suspicious about the sequence of events. IMO, EN's friends accounts and the son's and daughter's accounts differ in several crucial areas that convince me that the incident could not have unfolded the way the victim's family members described it.

I haven't seen anyone claim or imply that TM deserved to be gunned down -- not for any reason whatsoever.

Under the scenario that I think is more likely, TM would be even more of an innocent victim than she would be in the story claimed by the Meyerses. I don't think she went home and told her son to arm up and go hunting for EN. I don't think she was even in the car that evening, for any of incident.

 

[sorrell skye]

BBM. I myself found, after reading the arrest warrant affidavit several times, that I'm more suspicious about the sequence of events. IMO, EN's friends accounts and the son's and daughter's accounts differ in several crucial areas that convince me that the incident could not have unfolded the way the victim's family members described it.

I haven't seen anyone claim or imply that TM deserved to be gunned down -- not for any reason whatsoever.

Under the scenario that I think is more likely, TM would be even more of an innocent victim than she would be in the story claimed by the Meyerses. I don't think she went home and told her son to arm up and go hunting for EN. I don't think she was even in the car that evening, for any of incident.

Which particular areas in the sequence of events do you believe their accounts may differ (from the warrant affidavit)? I'm genuinely curious. I welcome your reply and insights.

 

[sorrell skye]

I think when posters here say they care about the victim, that is a worthy statement that should be taken at face value, period. I absolutely won't get into who cares more. Caring about victims is what brought me to Websleuths. I will say this here just to be clear:
I care about TM, and I am very sorry TM lost her life. No equivocating.


I am able to listen, read, ponder and reason. If something does not add up to me, that's my opinion. Frankly, it takes a lot for me to start say, "Gosh, something is odd here. Could there be more to this story?" It's OK for me to express that, it's not OK for me to demand that others see things my way. I believe in justice. Whether it turns out only one person is allegedly responsible, or there are others, I want to see all the allegedly responsible persons have their day in court.

I am not bothered by other points of view. They can state theirs, I will read and ponder. What I'm not a fan of is challenging, debating, and snark. If I see that, I try to step away before it gets contentious.

And now it's time for me to figure out dinner, so I'll step away. All the best, G.

BBM

Challenge and debate are good things, IMO. If a theory isn't challenged or debated, or can't withstand the scrutiny of challenge or debate, how can any potential holes in it be discovered?

 

[sonjay]

Which particular areas do you believe their accounts may differ (from the warrant affidavit)? I'm genuinely curious. I welcome your reply and insights.

Thank you for asking.

For me, the single most important difference is that EN's friends reported EN describing the incident as one extended incident -- he saw the green car, he thought it was "after" him, the cars chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house where TM was shot.

The original story as reported by the Meyers was similar to that -- the two cars encountered each other, they chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house, where TM was shot.

However: The revised Meyers story -- the one related by BM and KM in the arrest affidavit -- describe it as two separate incidents: The original encounter, the escape, TM & KM arriving home safely, KM going inside, BM getting his gun and entering the car and leaving with his mother to go hunt for EN.

That is, IMO, an extremely important difference.

In the original Meyers version, as in the version related by EN's friends, whoever was in the Meyers car was present for the entire encounter. There was no going home to send KM inside and get BM.

If KM & TM were in the car for the first encounter, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If KM & BM were in the car, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If all 3 were in the car, then all 3 were in the car for the chase and shootout back home.

That would also mean that if, in fact, EN saw someone in the Meyers car pointing a gun at him, that person was in the Meyers car for the entire incident, from the beginning of the initial altercation all the way to the shootout in the cul de sac.

I tend to believe the version related by EN's friends, which also happens to match (in that respect) the version originally told by the Meyerses.

Which version do you believe? I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Gin]

BBM

Challenge and debate are good things, IMO. If a theory isn't challenged or debated, or can't withstand the scrutiny of challenge or debate, how can any potential holes in it be discovered?

I have no problem with scrutiny and bringing facts to the light of day. I probably prefer civil discourse, exchange of ideas and thoughtful discussion to snarky challenges and debates.

Just my personal opinion on the subject--We (and I mean everyone, not just you and me) don't have to agree to learn from one another. It's just a matter of being a bit civil as we share ideas and thoughts.

And obviously folks can choose whatever style they prefer. Personally, after awhile I tend to scroll past the snark.

 

[sonjay]

Afterthought to my prior post:

In the revised Meyers version -- the one attributed to both the son and the daughter in the arrest affidavit -- the son and daughter seem to be doing some victim bashing of their own. "We got away safely -- mom wanted Brandon to get his gun and help her go hunt down the silver car." That version makes mom look pretty bad, doesn't it?

In the original Meyers version, and the version attributed to EN's friends in the affidavit, mom didn't deliberately have Brandon get his gun to go hunting for EN after getting safely away from the silver car. This version allows for TM to be innocent. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't, but this version allows for innocence on her part, while the revised Meyers version does not.

So in rejecting the version cited by BM and KM in the affidavit, I'm actually engaging in anti-victim-bashing. I'm embracing a version of events that allows for the victim to be innocent.

 

[jayme1133]

Finally all caught up on the thread. It seems to me this site is for us to resolve crimes. I think we are ALL victim advocates! What happened to TM is a horrific death regardless of her issues. Personally I don't care if she was a nurse or not....or if she did/didn't do drugs.
This is why I am here and what I care about.....THE TRUTH and WHAT HAPPENED! The lies from so many during the investigation cause people to question the validity of what "really" happened. Many people are behind bars because they murdered someone due to a life insurance policy. And, circumstantial evidence proved they had money problems to convict such. Why is this case any different?? We can't speculate or question the so -called evidence without someone thinking we are against the victim? This makes no sense to me.
Who knows if EN hasn't told his attorney everything and might be the reason Atty is asking for a residue exam? And, the missing (audi) car is a non issue to prosecutors now, or is it? We come here to discuss what we read and try to determine what happened to TM!
The mysterious sketch is what got me curious about this case. It just continues getting crazier and crazier every time something happens. It seems any answers just make for more questions. It is baffling and regardless if you agree, it isn't adding up!

For TM sake I hope we get the truth someday. Until then I want to know why/how/when to make some sort of sense out of it!
Peace to you all!eace:eace:

 

[sorrell skye]

Thank you for asking.

For me, the single most important difference is that EN's friends reported EN describing the incident as one extended incident -- he saw the green car, he thought it was "after" him, the cars chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house where TM was shot.

The original story as reported by the Meyers was similar to that -- the two cars encountered each other, they chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house, where TM was shot.

However: The revised Meyers story -- the one related by BM and KM in the arrest affidavit -- describe it as two separate incidents: The original encounter, the escape, TM & KM arriving home safely, KM going inside, BM getting his gun and entering the car and leaving with his mother to go hunt for EN.

That is, IMO, an extremely important difference.

In the original Meyers version, as in the version related by EN's friends, whoever was in the Meyers car was present for the entire encounter. There was no going home to send KM inside and get BM.

If KM & TM were in the car for the first encounter, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If KM & BM were in the car, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If all 3 were in the car, then all 3 were in the car for the chase and shootout back home.

That would also mean that if, in fact, EN saw someone in the Meyers car pointing a gun at him, that person was in the Meyers car for the entire incident, from the beginning of the initial altercation all the way to the shootout in the cul de sac.

I tend to believe the version related by EN's friends, which also happens to match (in that respect) the version originally told by the Meyerses.

Which version do you believe? I'm genuinely curious.

I think you've detailed a very compelling comparison of the possible sequence of events.

As told by the involved parties, all three versions do not reconcile with one another.

If the silver car was following TM & KM from the school, then where did the silver car go during the time TM dropped KM at home, picked up BM with his gun, and then went to allegedly find them again before the shoot-out began?

You've definitely given me something to ponder. Thank you.

 

[SStarr33]

Thank you for asking.

For me, the single most important difference is that EN's friends reported EN describing the incident as one extended incident -- he saw the green car, he thought it was "after" him, the cars chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house where TM was shot.

The original story as reported by the Meyers was similar to that -- the two cars encountered each other, they chased each other, they ended up back at the Meyers house, where TM was shot.

However: The revised Meyers story -- the one related by BM and KM in the arrest affidavit -- describe it as two separate incidents: The original encounter, the escape, TM & KM arriving home safely, KM going inside, BM getting his gun and entering the car and leaving with his mother to go hunt for EN.

That is, IMO, an extremely important difference.

In the original Meyers version, as in the version related by EN's friends, whoever was in the Meyers car was present for the entire encounter. There was no going home to send KM inside and get BM.

If KM & TM were in the car for the first encounter, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If KM & BM were in the car, they were in the car for the chase and shootout back home. If all 3 were in the car, then all 3 were in the car for the chase and shootout back home.

That would also mean that if, in fact, EN saw someone in the Meyers car pointing a gun at him, that person was in the Meyers car for the entire incident, from the beginning of the initial altercation all the way to the shootout in the cul de sac.

I tend to believe the version related by EN's friends, which also happens to match (in that respect) the version originally told by the Meyerses.

Which version do you believe? I'm genuinely curious.

Do you think that LE would put what would essentially be Brandon lying in the warrant when they would have had to have seen surveillance video of of the green car returning to the home and going back?

 

[katydid23]

Sonjay, I think you are correct that the kids revised version kind of throws Mom under the bus. BM says he told her " No Mom, let's just call 911, but she made him go with her because otherwise she was going alone ..." ....SERIOUSLY?

That revised version made BM out to be the hero and Mom the one making bad choices. I am just not buying it.

 

[jjenny]

How does anyone know if the supposed original version of what Meyers kids told police isn't the version in the affidavit?
How was it "revised?"

 

[sonjay]

Do you think that LE would put what would essentially be Brandon lying in the warrant when they would have had to have seen surveillance video of of the green car returning to the home and going back?

LE has been behaving very mysteriously, IMO. The whole thing with the sketch -- no, it's not the shooter, no, no one needs to keep looking for the guy in the sketch, it will all become clear eventually. That's weird. LE seemed (IMO) reluctant to admit that the Meyerses hadn't told them they knew EN. That's weird. The car -- are they still looking for it, or not? No one knows.

I can't explain LE's behavior in this case. I'm starting to think there's someone involved who's in the witness protection program or something.

But with that said, both Brandon's story and EN's story as related by his friends sure seem to point to EN as the shooter. I would think they had good reason to pick up EN as soon as they knew who he was, so they put what they had in the affidavit and ran with it.

 

[sonjay]

How does anyone know if the supposed original version of what Meyers kids told police isn't the version in the affidavit?

Because I read the affidavit. I know what the police wrote in it.

How was it "revised?"

Please go re-read what I wrote above. I detailed how it was revised.

Did you miss the reporting in the early days of this case? The first few days after the shooting? The original Meyers version of what happened never had Brandon in the car. He was home sleeping, and came out of the house with his gun to return fire at the silver car as it sped away.

 

[sorrell skye]

I have no problem with scrutiny and bringing facts to the light of day. I probably prefer civil discourse, exchange of ideas and thoughtful discussion to snarky challenges and debates.
Just my personal opinion on the subject--We (and I mean everyone, not just you and me) don't have to agree to learn from one another. It's just a matter of being a bit civil as we share ideas and thoughts.

And obviously folks can choose whatever style they prefer. Personally, after awhile I tend to scroll past the snark.

BBM

I agree with the bolded bit above. Snark does nothing to promote a healthy discussion. Sometimes, though, I think snark is in the eye of the beholder.

IOW: What some folks interpret as snark may be over-sensitivity to someone not agreeing with their opinion. I think sometimes folks may interpret a blunt comment as snark, when it wasn't intended that way. In the end, the mods have the last say about whether or not a post is snarky.

I'm glad you have no problem with scrutiny and bringing facts to the light of day. I have no doubt that most of us here share your sentiment.

I think many of us can agree that there is a dearth of facts regarding this case. My concern is that when we're discussing facts, rumors get thrown into the mix and discussed as if they are facts, when they're not.

Any solid theory or solid scenario must be based on verified facts, otherwise it's nothing more than baseless conjecture and rumor-mongering.

'Somebody-said-that-somebody-said-they-heard-from-someone-else' is not a reliable foundation upon which to base a solid scenario.

Even Conrad Claus, when asked by a reporter in a recent interview about rumors that were circulating, told the reporter that he wants to investigate those rumors to determine if they have any foundation in fact. He refused to comment on the rumors. He refused to take those rumors and run with them.

Why? Because they might not pan out as factual or truthful and he wants the truth - not egg on his face.

 

[sonjay]

How does anyone know if the supposed original version of what Meyers kids told police isn't the version in the affidavit?
How was it "revised?"

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/0...5F02612X-declaration-&-complaint_Redacted.pdf

 

[sonjay]

Sonjay, I think you are correct that the kids revised version kind of throws Mom under the bus. BM says he told her " No Mom, let's just call 911, but she made him go with her because otherwise she was going alone ..." ....SERIOUSLY?

That revised version made BM out to be the hero and Mom the one making bad choices. I am just not buying it.

Yep, the two Meyers kids threw mom under the bus in their story as cited by police in the arrest affidavit.

I'm not buying it either. We can see in BM's FB posts that he's quite the hothead. IMO, he's far more likely to take his gun and go hunting for EN on his own initiative, than to be told to do so by mom.

 

[SStarr33]

LE has been behaving very mysteriously, IMO. The whole thing with the sketch -- no, it's not the shooter, no, no one needs to keep looking for the guy in the sketch, it will all become clear eventually. That's weird. LE seemed (IMO) reluctant to admit that the Meyerses hadn't told them they knew EN. That's weird. The car -- are they still looking for it, or not? No one knows.

I can't explain LE's behavior in this case. I'm starting to think there's someone involved who's in the witness protection program or something.

But with that said, both Brandon's story and EN's story as related by his friends sure seem to point to EN as the shooter. I would think they had good reason to pick up EN as soon as they knew who he was, so they put what they had in the affidavit and ran with it.

But that wasn't my question. Do you think that LE would put easily provable lies in a warrant?