GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #5

[Hiandmighty]

Yes, it really is amazing to me. This little love fest for an alleged drug dealer accused of killing a mother of four amazes me to no end.

There is a process here to vent your frustrations with posts and have them checked by a mod.

I *highly* suggest you use this feature rather than be ultra dramatic and use superfluous words that do not accurately reflect what we are doing here.

 

[SStarr33]

Are you honest to goodness still wanting to use that word "adoration".

Is EN not presumed innocent until proven guilty?

He admitted he chased a car and then he slaughtered Tammy. He is not innocent and there is no self defense.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Q. How many people lived in that home along with you and your mother?
A. Four.
Q. Could you tell me the names of the individuals that live there?
A. Susan Meyers, Robert Meyers, Robert Meyers Jr. and me, Kristal Meyers."

Bob Jr. is the most elusive person in this case.

How old is he? Where was he when this happened?

And what about grandma?

 

[Gin]

What's amazing to me is the notion that anyone thinks it was perfectly okay for that mother of four to get her son, tell him to arm up, and go out hunting for someone who wasn't bothering anyone.

By all accounts, EN was at the park, not bothering anybody, and the Meyerses came up in their car, threatened him, and chased him. He fled. That didn't work. He shot, and they fled -- but then when he was trying to go home, he saw their car passing close by his house, and quite logically he continued to feel in danger.

What EN did, he did on the spur of the moment, out of actual fear.

What TM & BM did, they did on purpose with deliberate intent.

Good summation. And it is possible to be victim friendly and also understand that some cases aren't easy peasy, black and white.
I have been pretty clear all along that I am sorry that TM lost her life. I believe in second chances. It is sad she won't get one.
I also believe in fairness and justice. EN deserves to have the full truth of what happened that night looked carefully. If others have some responsibility, then they should be charged as well.
The multiple stores told by the M's indicate there is back story here that we haven't heard yet. Hopefully the truth will come out at trial.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Ad BM admitted TM refused to call 911 and that they instead went "combing" the streets armed with a 9mm baretta to find/confront the car.


There is PLENTY to discuss here. And, yes, i absolutely believe the defense has much to work with and that a hung-jury is absolutely possible, especially if the charges don't fit.

 

[SStarr33]

EN does seem to say that in that he wouldn't even get in the car until after he was sure the green car had left, which I think he probably got in the car on Cherry Creek with the car facing eat and then it looped around to face west on Ducharme when the Buick re-appeared some time later, which I think during this time may be when the Buick went back to get armed though even hearing further testimony it still is fuzzy where the Buick went and what exactly they were doing.

I meant to mention this before. That part of ENs confession could bolster KM's statement that there was only one person in the car.

 

[sonjay]

When you described alleged drug selling as not bothering anybody, I don't have anything else to discuss with you.

Has EN been charged with drug selling? Has he been convicted of drug selling?

Has he been accused of doing anything to anyone in the park on that particular night?

I am sooooo glad we have constitutionally protected rights. We are all (even EN) innocent until presumed guilty. We cannot be sent to prison for murder just because someone has accused us in the media of selling drugs. We have the right to confront our accusers, and to challenge the evidence against us.

The state has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Until the state has done that, we are all legally innocent of anything that anyone might have accused us of. Even EN. This is a given. There is no arguing about it. It's not up for discussion.

 

[Hiandmighty]

When you described alleged drug selling as not bothering anybody, I don't have anything else to discuss with you.

While I agree it is likely/possible that EN was selling drugs at the park that night, so far nothing stated even mentions that he was possibly/probably selling drugs that night at the park.

So as of right now, we only know EN was at the park.

Selling drugs at the park is speculation at this point.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

As I stated, I am going on the evidence we have right now. According to EN, a weapon was not brandished in front of their home and he chased them there with his gun that he had previously admitted to shooting during an encounter that happened just moments prior. You are dreaming if you think that is anything but M1.

Yes, he did not state he was going into that cul-de-sac to do a drive-by shooting, but instead what he confessed to was shooting once he saw what was going on where he thought the Buick was in the process of getting even more armed and there was at least two people in the car and one outside that he thought was getting more weapons. You'll see when you re-read it that EN only decided to shoot upon arriving on Mt Shasta per his confession - that is not a confession to M1, but to M2 or Manslaughter. The only way they'd get M1 would be to show that it was EN who earlier allegedly made the death threat because other than that you don't have 'willful, deliberate and premeditated.'

 

[SStarr33]

"Murder" is a legal term, and to date EN has not been convicted of murder. It's inappropriate at this point to refer to it as "murder."

I am sooooo glad we have constitutionally protected rights. We are all entitled to freedom of speech.

This is a given. There is no arguing about it. It's not up for discussion.

 

[sonjay]

When you described alleged drug selling as not bothering anybody, I don't have anything else to discuss with you.

The same person who said EN was selling drugs also said TM was buying drugs from him. Is that okay? Does she get a free pass on the drugs? Was she "not bothering anybody"?

 

[Miss Muffet]

Are you honest to goodness still wanting to use that word "adoration".

Is EN not presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Yep. There's a big difference between sympathy and adoration. I don't see anyone adoring EN.

When you described alleged drug selling as not bothering anybody, I don't have anything else to discuss with you.

I can see past that type of black and white thinking clouded by preconceived bias. EN being a drug dealer does not mean he deserved for someone to set out intending to hunt down in a high speed chase with a handgun. That's like saying a prostitute deserves to be gang raped in the most atrocious manner conceivable or picked up by a serial murderer.

 

[sonjay]

I am sooooo glad we have constitutionally protected rights. We are all entitled to freedom of speech.

This is a given. There is no arguing about it. It's not up for discussion.

We can, however, be subject to libel for calling someone a murderer when they've not been convicted. So we have to be careful with that.

 

[SStarr33]

Yes, he did not state he was going into that cul-de-sac to do a drive-by shooting, but instead what he confessed to was shooting once he saw what was going on where he thought the Buick was in the process of getting even more armed and there was at least two people in the car and one outside that he thought was getting more weapons. You'll see when you re-read it that EN only decided to shoot upon arriving on Mt Shasta per his confession - that is not a confession to M1, but to M2 or Manslaughter. The only way they'd get M1 would be to show that it was EN who earlier allegedly made the death threat because other than that you don't have 'willful, deliberate and premeditated.'

EN did not make that death threat--they will not try to go there. And premeditation can happen seconds before a murder

 

[SStarr33]

We can, however, be subject to libel for calling someone a murderer when they've not been convicted. So we have to be careful with that.

LOL, ok, you go with that.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Yes, it really is amazing to me. This little love fest for an alleged drug dealer accused of killing a mother of four amazes me to no end.

Seeing how the mother of four allegedly went home to get armed and then chased another car, it drastically changes things. Originally the Meyers story was sympathetic to the point of getting national news where the original story left the whole thing out about the chase and instead just said they the car immediately went home and then the some came storming out with a weapon. When that turns out to be a lie, but a lie that hid aggressive acts it causes people to look at things differently. It's hard to give the Meyers the benefit of the doubt when they've been caught lying about how aggressive they were, so for instance it could be a lie where they could have been at the school for reasons other than driving lessons where they could have been trying to intimidate EN.

 

[Gin]

We can, however, be subject to libel for calling someone a murderer when they've not been convicted. So we have to be careful with that.

Thank you for that reminder. And of course, it's possible to discuss and analyze without stepping over that line.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

How can you be acquitted when you chase someone and murder them?

Ask George Zimmerman and Zimmerman was only charged with M2.

 

[SeeAlice]

I guess those of you who were questioning why Brandon and his sister have not talked now understand why they haven't.

Because they're having difficulty keeping up with their father's latest version of the story?

 

[SStarr33]

Because they're having difficulty keeping up with their father's latest version of the story?

Was their dad there?

And I suggest everyone read the grand jury testimony.