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

[SeeAlice]

"I'm gonna get your mother and your sister" could have come from Bob, Brandon, BobJr, or Matt, IMO.

 

[EllenWickenburg]

I always felt the kids were lying to the Dad to hide their involvement in attracting EN to the home and/or provoking the attack. I think Dad is a blowhard and I don't like him personally, but I think the kids are more to blame for all the misinformation rather than the Dad.

 

[sonjay]

I just watched this video from shortly after the shooting. (I'm not sure of the date, but TM was still alive at this point.)
http://www.fox5vegas.com/video?clipId=11137651

In this video, a neighbor is interviewed. The neighbor says his son heard 3 loud pops followed by a squealing of tires followed by a couple more pops. Who really did fire first there at the cul de sac? I'm not so sure it was EN.


Also in this video, RM says that the silver car followed his wife home and his son came out of the house and returned fire.

Son in the car with mom hunting for the silver car vs. silver car follows mom home and son comes out of house and returns fire. That's a major difference. That's not inadvertently getting a minor detail wrong, like the car was 2-door or 4-door, or it was 11:10 vs. 11:20. That's a significant enough difference that it can only be a lie.

Either the son deliberately lied to his dad immediately after the shooting, or the son told dad the truth and dad deliberately lied right after the shooting. One or the other.

Why would RM or BM lie about BM being in the car with mom? They did feel compelled later on to admit that Brandon was in the car, but what exactly were they trying to cover up here?

 

[newone]

"I'm gonna get your mother and your sister" could have come from Bob, Brandon, BobJr, or Matt, IMO.

or any unknown '''' in the park MOO -- even a random text from a stranger or second hand gossip could set off an insecure nervous person

 

[sonjay]

"I'm gonna get your mother and your sister" could have come from Bob, Brandon, BobJr, or Matt, IMO.

Since the Meyers family story is that only the daughter was in the car with mom when that was said, the original source of that would have to be the daughter. That is, if one believes the Meyers that only the daughter was in the car with mom at the time.

 

[SeeAlice]

If you don't know the whole story, or even any of the facts, I strongly recommend you not call media to make your wife's shooting "go viral." That kind of thing will bite you in the butt 9 times out of 10.

JMO

 

[jjenny]

I always felt the kids were lying to the Dad to hide their involvement in attracting EN to the home and/or provoking the attack. I think Dad is a blowhard and I don't like him personally, but I think the kids are more to blame for all the misinformation rather than the Dad.

Father shouldn't be talking to the press about details of the case. He wasn't there and didn't witness anything. His stories are changing all the time, and it doesn't do anyone any good (except the suspect).

 

[newone]

I always felt the kids were lying to the Dad to hide their involvement in attracting EN to the home and/or provoking the attack. I think Dad is a blowhard and I don't like him personally, but I think the kids are more to blame for all the misinformation rather than the Dad.

Maybe kids are more afraid of Dad than LE? -- that does happen ...... MOO

 

[EllenWickenburg]

I am toying with the idea that the daughter was never in the car. The only reason she would be in the car would be to support the driving practice story which I think is false.

 

[EllenWickenburg]

:facepalm:

 

[sonjay]

I always felt the kids were lying to the Dad to hide their involvement in attracting EN to the home and/or provoking the attack. I think Dad is a blowhard and I don't like him personally, but I think the kids are more to blame for all the misinformation rather than the Dad.

Maybe it's possible that dad's biggest mistake is simply believing everything his kids say. But IMO dad is knowingly involved in the coverup, and possibly directing it completely. He knew that his wife knew EN. He knew that his kids knew EN. He knew EN's name and address. If mom was in fact buying pills from EN, dad probably knew that too. He reportedly called the media even before he got home -- probably thinking that if he got the family's story out in public first, people would be more inclined to believe it. And he was right -- it seems that some people still believe it was a road rage and that the Meyers have been telling the story correctly. I personally don't understand how anyone can still believe that, but apparently some people do.

 

[EllenWickenburg]

Maybe kids are more afraid of Dad than LE? -- that does happen ...... MOO

:laughing:

 

[lilacstarz]

The only factor that is missing that makes sense, is the use and/or selling of drugs. Of course, neither party would want to admit to selling or using drugs.

I think the defense attorney still thinks they can get away with a self defense argument (although it would be tenuous) so they are trying to avoid any mention of drugs. Also, the prosecution may not bring it up because it would make the victim look unsympathetic to a jury.

And for right or wrong (mostly wrong though), this kid's appearance will play a big factor to a Clark County jury. There will be an uphill battle to convict him because he is a small framed, tiny, wide eyed, young looking white man. The jury will have sympathy for him.

 

[sonjay]

If you don't know the whole story, or even any of the facts, I strongly recommend you not call media to make your wife's shooting "go viral." That kind of thing will bite you in the butt 9 times out of 10.

JMO

That's very good advice. I will be sure to heed it if a family member is ever shot. :laughing:

 

[TupeloMz]

I am toying with the idea that the daughter was never in the car. The only reason she would be in the car would be to support the driving practice story which I think is false.

I am toying with the idea that Mom was never in the car myself...but we may never know. [emoji19]

 

[EllenWickenburg]

Maybe it's possible that dad's biggest mistake is simply believing everything his kids say. But IMO dad is knowingly involved in the coverup, and possibly directing it completely. He knew that his wife knew EN. He knew that his kids knew EN. He knew EN's name and address. If mom was in fact buying pills from EN, dad probably knew that too. He reportedly called the media even before he got home -- probably thinking that if he got the family's story out in public first, people would be more inclined to believe it. And he was right -- it seems that some people still believe it was a road rage and that the Meyers have been telling the story correctly. I personally don't understand how anyone can still believe that, but apparently some people do.

Yes it is true that Dad is now covering up interaction between TM and EN. I think at some point after the fact, the kids "came clean" about TM/EN relationship. At that point RM went over to EN's house to harass him. I'm not sure if RM knew about the nature of the relationship before the shooting event.

 

[newone]

Maybe it's possible that dad's biggest mistake is simply believing everything his kids say. But IMO dad is knowingly involved in the coverup, and possibly directing it completely. He knew that his wife knew EN. He knew that his kids knew EN. He knew EN's name and address. If mom was in fact buying pills from EN, dad probably knew that too. He reportedly called the media even before he got home -- probably thinking that if he got the family's story out in public first, people would be more inclined to believe it. And he was right -- it seems that some people still believe it was a road rage and that the Meyers have been telling the story correctly. I personally don't understand how anyone can still believe that, but apparently some people do.

bbm: yes....totally agree.....What parent has not been scammed by their kid....albeit this is a lot more serious than who took the last oreo....Many parents are sometimes guilty of loving too much and trusting too much.....giving some slack here....MOO

 

[EllenWickenburg]

I am toying with the idea that Mom was never in the car myself...but we may never know. [emoji19]

Yes I thought for awhile that Mom might not have been in the car, but EN's statement to police says he shot at the person coming out of the car. So I think Mom was in the car.

 

[SurfieTX]

I just watched this video from shortly after the shooting. (I'm not sure of the date, but TM was still alive at this point.)
http://www.fox5vegas.com/video?clipId=11137651

In this video, a neighbor is interviewed. The neighbor says his son heard 3 loud pops followed by a squealing of tires followed by a couple more pops. Who really did fire first there at the cul de sac? I'm not so sure it was EN.


Also in this video, RM says that the silver car followed his wife home and his son came out of the house and returned fire.

Son in the car with mom hunting for the silver car vs. silver car follows mom home and son comes out of house and returns fire. That's a major difference. That's not inadvertently getting a minor detail wrong, like the car was 2-door or 4-door, or it was 11:10 vs. 11:20. That's a significant enough difference that it can only be a lie.

Either the son deliberately lied to his dad immediately after the shooting, or the son told dad the truth and dad deliberately lied right after the shooting. One or the other.

Why would RM or BM lie about BM being in the car with mom? They did feel compelled later on to admit that Brandon was in the car, but what exactly were they trying to cover up here?

BBM: Because they knew that it would come out that mom was in the school parking lot near the park earlier in the evening and EN was in the park too. They needed a reason for that, hence the "driving lesson."

 

[sonjay]

The only factor that is missing that makes sense, is the use and/or selling of drugs. Of course, neither party would want to admit to selling or using drugs.

I think the defense attorney still thinks they can get away with a self defense argument (although it would be tenuous) so they are trying to avoid any mention of drugs. Also, the prosecution may not bring it up because it would make the victim look unsympathetic to a jury.

And for right or wrong (mostly wrong though), this kid's appearance will play a big factor to a Clark County jury. There will be an uphill battle to convict him because he is a small framed, tiny, wide eyed, young looking white man. The jury will have sympathy for him.

He's a drug dealer with a juvie record who has been accused by neighbors of going after their children with knives and guns and generally being bad news.

I don't think juries have trouble convicting young looking white men. I think juries have trouble convicting defendants when there's very little physical evidence and the witnesses are not credible.

IMO, if EN is not convicted, it will be largely because of the complete lack of credibility of the Meyers family. Not because he claims self-defense, or because he's white and young.

I hope there's more physical evidence than we're aware of, and that there are more witnesses than we're aware of, who have more credibility than the Meyerses do.