GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #6

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unfortunately there is no way of knowing how impaired EN was at the time of the event either. I really wonder if there is some impairment -- in his recall -- we won't know. Was he buzzed or was he ''faced'' ((nasty term))....supposedly someone dropped him off at a casino...hopefully that person is DA and he can shed some light on the events -- here's hoping.
 
We have the whole transcript of what Mogg said, we also have K (twice) and A as well as public statements by LE, DA the Meyers and now their attorney. The closest anyone of them get to EN giving any direction was to go to his house while at the same time DA/LE and even the Meyers themselves as recently as yesterday had said EN wasn't on Mt Shasta to go to the Meyers but instead thought the ones involved were in some gang. If both the DA who it is his job to prove the elements of the crimes that he charges as well as Mogg whose job has been to work on 130 homicide cases had statements from EN that he directed Andrews beyond his house that would have been the time to introduce them...it's not like what was said in them would be any big secret to EN/DA's defense. So far even with the GJ testimony, the closest that has been rumored to any conspiracy was the way Andrews drove into Mt Shasta and that they deleted records afterwards - nothing about any discussions about going to Mt Shasta while at the same time there's an outright denial that either of them intended to go to the Meyers.

All I saw from yesterday was their attorney misquoting something from the GJ report.
 
Unfortunately there is no way of knowing how impaired EN was at the time of the event either. I really wonder if there is some impairment -- in his recall -- we won't know. Was he buzzed or was he ''faced'' ((nasty term))....supposedly someone dropped him off at a casino...hopefully that person is DA and he can shed some light on the events -- here's hoping.

The DA has already pre-empted that by as early as the complaint putting it on record that EN was 'coherent' a few hours after the event when he arrived at K and A's. I don't think a defense of Voluntary Impairment would get him very far as even if it was believed, it would only eliminate M1 and Conspiracy (intent crimes), but would still leave open M2 and I'd expect the judge at sentencing would make it a hard M2. I guess I could see doing that where you don't make it a formal part of the defense, but instead only use it to the extent that his confession to A and K weren't accurate in what he said, rather than using it as a justification for his actions.
 
Unfortunately there is no way of knowing how impaired EN was at the time of the event either. I really wonder if there is some impairment -- in his recall -- we won't know. Was he buzzed or was he ''faced'' ((nasty term))....supposedly someone dropped him off at a casino...hopefully that person is DA and he can shed some light on the events -- here's hoping.

what is "faced"? sorry! I don't know that term or slang word.
 
.......why was BM running to the door??? Could it be he was (a) going to use the phone or (b) get another gun?

he did say that he was opening door to help TM out and noticed car returning. He closed the door and pushed her back in. Now the light would have come on when door was opened. Anyone would be able to see the driver at that point.
So why was BM running to the house?? or have I got this wrong -- correct me please

So then EN or someone starts firing at the car ((no bullet holes in car - right??)) and BM then runs behind white truck to fire back.

It has been testified to that BM had a cell phone on him during the chase.

EN told the detective that as the guy with the beard was running toward the house, EN saw HEADS in the plural still in the car.
 
There's no way to tell. It could have been inadvertently left behind months before the shooting.

An unfired cartridge found in a family members car that matches a family members gun caliber doesn't tell us much. JMO.

How old is that grandbaby? I sure hope they will get some gun locks and childproofing done before he/she starts toddling around. Kids can and will find the darnedest things. And then usually put them in their mouth.
 
Well since that one gang banger apologized to his mom for the road rage, maybe he thought the car was coming back so they could apologize for shooting at them.

Apologize AND bring her a bouquet of red roses.
 
There's no way to tell. It could have been inadvertently left behind months before the shooting.

An unfired cartridge found in a family members car that matches a family members gun caliber doesn't tell us much. JMO.

From GJ document: Mogg testifying:
He told me that at the time that the shots were fired
toward his vehicle from the suspect's vehicle down at
Alta and Villa Monterey that he at that point attempted
to load his firearm by racking the slide and he said
that he was ducking down, he was very scared, and he may
have racked it more than once which would mean a live
cartridge would be ejected from the gun.

Also, a couple days ago there was a lot of discussion here about why the prosecutor was purposely leading BM'stestimony. The detective said BM used the term "ducked down". BM in his testimony also used that term. LVDA corrected BM, putting words in his mouth. All on his own, the DA told the GJ that TM and BM had LEANED BACK in their seats. We all wondered why that was necessary for the DA as it seemed such a small point but was important to HIM. I think it may have something to do with finding the shell casing in the front seat and explaining that in the best light possible. IMO.
 
And why would DA want to charge one of the main witnesses anyway? DAs have a wide discretion on whether to charge someone or not. And in this particular case, evidence suggests that BM didn't shoot at the first scene, and tried to run away at the second scene. EN admits he was shooting at someone running away because he didn't want that person to get away. So given these circumstances, it would make no sense to charge BM.

BM couldn't shoot at the first scene because he couldn't manage his gun efficiently.
 
Two facts continue to create cognitive dissonance for me in this case:

1. BM & TM went looking for a confrontation that night.

2. EN & DA tried to flee from a confrontation that night.
 
Neighbors of the guy arrested as "getaway driver" (another misnomer, IMO) say they have only seen him in 2 sedans since 2013, neither one silver, neither one an Audi. Not charged with grand theft auto. So what gives?

Also, may I please have the link to full GJ transcript again? Thank you.
 
Quote Originally Posted by BellaVita

BM couldn't shoot at the first scene because he couldn't manage his gun efficiently.

Posted by Sstarr33
Very smart of him considering that he was being fired at and the car was two blocks away.

How can doing something inefficiently ever be smart? To be inefficient is by definition the same thing as being incompetent. I've never regarded incompetency as being a good thing. YMMV.
 
How can doing something inefficiently ever be smart? To be inefficient is by definition the same thing as being incompetent. I've never regarded incompetency as being a good thing. YMMV.

Taking your gun and going out with your mom to instigate a confrontation with someone, and ending up with your mom dead...... Well, that's not exactly the most competent act in the world.
 
How can doing something inefficiently ever be smart? To be inefficient is by definition the same thing as being incompetent. I've never regarded incompetency as being a good thing. YMMV.

Um, I never said he was being inefficient. I said what he did was smart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
84
Guests online
1,566
Total visitors
1,650

Forum statistics

Threads
606,719
Messages
18,209,397
Members
233,943
Latest member
FindIreneFlemingWAState
Back
Top