GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #7

[jjenny]

Even though KK and ZA found out from Eric, they didn't so anything until they heard it in the media. I can DA hearing it through the grapevine but not taking action until hearing it in the media. Most people need confirmation before they believe the worst of someone.


You are taking his words out of context and interpreting them literally to only a specific portion of what he said. This helps me see how easy it will be for there to be a hung jury.

Well, DA claims EN didn't tell him anything about the murder. So he couldn't have found out from EN, by his own words.

 

[jjenny]

The key phrase being around the time of the shootings. His claim is that around the time of the shootings that he called and texted only, while picking him up is at some indeterminate time after the shootings that we might or might not find out about if/when the full interview is released.

How long is that "indeterminate" time? Five minutes, 10 minutes, more? I don't believe reporter would have omitted that part from the interview, if DA actually said what that time was.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I think Claus will embarrass the DA.
Please answer this regardless who you think is innocent or guilty!! Why the rush for GJ indictment, reluctant to reveal evidence, rush to trial (i call BS on this one), don't explain the many"road rage"scenarios, or is it pressure to settle and lets not forget the re-election this year! This is considered a high profile case..Yet, I don't understand why we have had no investigators/reporters actually investigating, leaks, anonymous witnesses come forth, LVDA updates?

I can't speak to what extent what Claus says is true and how much of it is just making hay about the DA turning over stuff, but with the trial in two months that's actually a Constitutional requirement based upon caselaw on Speedy Trial that sets 60 days as the default timeframe for criminal trials as something designed for the benefit of the defendants, but those dates can be spread out and Claus can get them extended if Claus waives having a speedy trial. If there is more than the usual goings on between DA/defense with pre-trial discovery, Claus can take action where a judge could penalize the DA for deny EN his Constitutional rights if it's found to be the case.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I think Claus will embarrass the DA.

I'd hope, but his client isn't even talking to him.

Come on my fellow sleuths!! There is a problem with this case and it goes back to Meyer's, I'm convinced!

Few people will disagree with you here.

Also, LVDA needs to do what is right ..... I would respect his honesty. But, don't grasp at innocent people or change the story to get a conviction!!

I think it's a stretch to call EN entirely innocent. He doesn't deserve live in prison or death sentence, but he did shoot TM, and there should be a jury trial to determine if he did so in self defense.

If you find a backstory between EN and the M's, I'm not sure I'll be more convinced of self defense than I already am. The backstory conflict might cause me to think he had a motive and was guilty of premeditation. His being paranoid and afraid is understandable for me based on what's available in the warrant and the transcript.

In other words, based on what we're being told right now, I think EN will get acquitted. If someone comes forth with proof of a drug dealing relationship gone bad, I think he'll more likely be found guilty.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Well, DA claims EN didn't tell him anything about the murder. So he couldn't have found out from EN, by his own words.

Exactly. We're saying he could have heard it through the grapevine, but not acted upon what he heard until after he saw confirmation in the media. That would be SIMILAR to how KK and ZA didn't act upon what EN told them directly until they saw confirmation in the media.

Also, he didn't say EN never told him. He said he had no idea about the shootings when he went to pick up EN.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

How long is that "indeterminate" time? Five minutes, 10 minutes, more? I don't believe reporter would have omitted that part from the interview, if DA actually said what that time was.

If I knew that I wouldn't have used the word indeterminate in the first place as I have no special access to that video than anyone else around here and as I already said we might or might not find out about if/when the full interview is released.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

In other words, based on what we're being told right now, I think EN will get acquitted. If someone comes forth with proof of a drug dealing relationship gone bad, I think he'll more likely be found guilty.

I don't think the most likely thing to happen is that he'll be acquitted, but this crazy story making him out to be an innocent bystander will reduce the odds of getting the max charges/sentence compared to this being part of some drug deal that had gone wrong as part of being in an illicit business.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Exactly. We're saying he could have heard it through the grapevine, but not acted upon what he heard until after he saw confirmation in the media. That would be SIMILAR to how KK and ZA didn't act upon what EN told them directly until they saw confirmation in the media.

Also, he didn't say EN never told him. He said he had no idea about the shootings when he went to pick up EN.

Yes, like with KK and ZA even though he confessed to them directly I don't think they necessarily believed him until they were able to match up to a news article and only upon reading a specific news article then did KK literally run out of work and call CrimeStoppers that seemed to confirm what EN told them. For all we know EN is known for exaggerating and telling tall tales, so even if EN said something people would take it with a grain of salt. If his de facto big sister takes him with a grain salt, I'd expect others less close to him to do that even more.

 

[jjenny]

Exactly. We're saying he could have heard it through the grapevine, but not acted upon what he heard until after he saw confirmation in the media. That would be SIMILAR to how KK and ZA didn't act upon what EN told them directly until they saw confirmation in the media.

Also, he didn't say EN never told him. He said he had no idea about the shootings when he went to pick up EN.

No. He says EN never talked about the murder.

"Andrews says Nowsch never talked about a murder."

http://www.mynews3.com/mostpopular/...he-had-no-part-in/u0BP0hNHOkyL4mqEZdznxQ.cspx

 

[jjenny]

Yes, like with KK and ZA even though he confessed to them directly I don't think they necessarily believed him until they were able to match up to a news article and only upon reading a specific news article then did KK literally run out of work and call CrimeStoppers that seemed to confirm what EN told them. For all we know EN is known for exaggerating and telling tall tales, so even if EN said something people would take it with a grain of salt. If his de facto big sister takes him with a grain salt, I'd expect others less close to him to do that even more.

DA claims EN told him nothing and he found what happened from the media. So, again, how could he have figured out EN was involved in what was described a "road rage" murder, considering EN doesn't even own a car? He claims all he did is pick him up. And EN shows no resemblance to the tall, muscular spikey haired dude whose sketch was circulated. So how exactly did DA figure it out?

 

[SpanishInquisition]

No. He says EN never talked about the murder.

"Andrews says Nowsch never talked about a murder."

http://www.mynews3.com/mostpopular/...he-had-no-part-in/u0BP0hNHOkyL4mqEZdznxQ.cspx

Yes, you're right

 

[Miss Muffet]

I don't think the most likely thing to happen is that he'll be acquitted, but this crazy story making him out to be an innocent bystander will reduce the odds of getting the max charges/sentence compared to this being part of some drug deal that had gone wrong as part of being in an illicit business.

Exactly. My point is solving the mystery of the Meyerses isn't in EN's best interest.

I'll admit I was drawn to this case because of the mystery. I like solving puzzles. The more I've learned about the case, the more I realize it's selfish of me to want to solve the mystery. Believing EN was defending himself doesn't jive with finding details of the mystery. The only way solving the mystery works is if someone wants to get to the bottom of what happened without any regard to the fate of EN. Proving the M's are shady, heavily involved in illegal activity, and had a major conflict with EN days prior to the shooting will NOT help EN. I'm convinced it will only help of our curiosity at EN's expense.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

DA claims EN told him nothing and he found what happened from the media. So, again, how could he have figured out EN was involved in what was described a "road rage" murder, considering EN doesn't even own a car? He claims all he did is pick him up. And EN shows no resemblance to the tall, muscular spikey haired dude whose sketch was circulated. So how exactly did DA figure it out?

He could for instance have been Car #2, he could have found out the same way the Meyers said they did and then confirmed it upon reading news articles, he may have had some non-public information that was sufficient to piece things together, 'murder' is a very specific term where EN could have talked until he was blue in the face about how he killed someone without every saying he murdered them so the answer could have been literally true (given what he said to KK/ZA, it doesn't sound like he said he murdered anyone but rather that he might have killed someone)...keep in mind that immediately after the shooting and for days later Tammy Meyers was alive and she could still be 'alive' today (not that I'm saying the Meyers shouldn't have pulled the plug, just demonstrating that TM didn't actually die until days after the event and per KK EN didn't leave the event actually knowing that he killed anyone just that he may have).

 

[SStarr33]

Except he claims he found out from the media.

LOL, oops.

DA is toast. hahahahaha

 

[SStarr33]

I think Claus will embarrass the DA.
Please answer this regardless who you think is innocent or guilty!! Why the rush for GJ indictment, reluctant to reveal evidence, rush to trial (i call BS on this one), don't explain the many"road rage"scenarios, or is it pressure to settle and lets not forget the re-election this year! This is considered a high profile case..Yet, I don't understand why we have had no investigators/reporters actually investigating, leaks, anonymous witnesses come forth, LVDA updates?


Come on my fellow sleuths!! There is a problem with this case and it goes back to Meyer's, I'm convinced!
Also, LVDA needs to do what is right ..... I would respect his honesty. But, don't grasp at innocent people or change the story to get a conviction!!


Not buying it!!

This kind of stuff is very typical. Stick around and you will see.

 

[Snoods]

I don't think the most likely thing to happen is that he'll be acquitted, but this crazy story making him out to be an innocent bystander will reduce the odds of getting the max charges/sentence compared to this being part of some drug deal that had gone wrong as part of being in an illicit business.

I agree. SI, when we found out LE believes there were two separate road rage incidents, I was shaking my head like Scooby Doo. That is even more damning for the Meyers IMO. So (if we believe this version)we have EN minding his own business when here comes unknown assailants like bats out of hell, waving a gun around and intent on teaching this (innocent) person a lesson.

And then when I heard that TM was involved in chasing down someone else in a DIFFERENT road rage incident, I just couldn't believe it. That is not normal behavior IMO. Every time I think it can't get any more bizarre...

I'm not saying that TM deserved to die nor am I saying that EN deserves to get off scot free (yet), but I understand why he has so much public support and why many think he will be acquitted.

 

[jayme1133]

This kind of stuff is very typical. Stick around and you will see.

Yes! I agree with you, it is very typical in corrupt police departments. And, we have seen our fair share of these the last few years. The problem is they always get caught..... It's just a matter of time!
It will all depend on Claus and how much he wants to invest in this case and getting to the truth.

Time will tell!

 

[SStarr33]

Yes! I agree with you, it is very typical in corrupt police departments. And, we have seen our fair share of these the last few years. The problem is they always get caught..... It's just a matter of time!
It will all depend on Claus and how much he wants to invest in this case and getting to the truth.

Time will tell!

Really? You are accusing Mogg, Wolfson etc... of being corrupt?

 

[BellaVita]

Exactly. My point is solving the mystery of the Meyerses isn't in EN's best interest.

I'll admit I was drawn to this case because of the mystery. I like solving puzzles. The more I've learned about the case, the more I realize it's selfish of me to want to solve the mystery. Believing EN was defending himself doesn't jive with finding details of the mystery. The only way solving the mystery works is if someone wants to get to the bottom of what happened without any regard to the fate of EN. Proving the M's are shady, heavily involved in illegal activity, and had a major conflict with EN days prior to the shooting will NOT help EN. I'm convinced it will only help of our curiosity at EN's expense.

Not sure about that. My general impression is that when both sides are considered to be involved in bad stuff, the victim becomes less sympathetic. Often resulting in less time for the perp. IMO.

 

[sonjay]

Exactly. My point is solving the mystery of the Meyerses isn't in EN's best interest.

I'll admit I was drawn to this case because of the mystery. I like solving puzzles. The more I've learned about the case, the more I realize it's selfish of me to want to solve the mystery. Believing EN was defending himself doesn't jive with finding details of the mystery. The only way solving the mystery works is if someone wants to get to the bottom of what happened without any regard to the fate of EN. Proving the M's are shady, heavily involved in illegal activity, and had a major conflict with EN days prior to the shooting will NOT help EN. I'm convinced it will only help of our curiosity at EN's expense.

Not sure about that. My general impression is that when both sides are considered to be involved in bad stuff, the victim becomes less sympathetic. Often resulting in less time for the perp. IMO.

I agree with both of you if we're comparing these two situations to one in which EN was in fact the original aggressor and in which he chased and shot TM for no apparent reason.

In order, EN's level of blame in various scenarios:

1. If EN road raged TM & KM, followed them home and shot TM, he would be 100% villain with no mitigating circumstances.

2. If there was some conflict between the Meyerses and EN, and the Meyerses went looking for EN, chased him, then got chased by him, and then he shot TM, he would be somewhat villainous -- maybe 30% to 50%. In this scenario, probably nothing would have happened if the Meyerses had left him alone. The Meyerses would be much more to blame here than in the first scenario.

3. If there was no conflict between the Meyerses and EN, and the Meyerses went looking for some stranger road rager, and they happened upon EN minding his own business and chased him, then he shot TM, he would be hardly villainous at all -- maybe 5%-10% villain for overreacting and shooting TM when he didn't strictly have to, but it happened out of fear and panic in the heat of the moment, after being chased by armed people who targeted him for no reason whatsoever.

We started with scenario #1. We didn't know the shooter was EN, but we knew that the road rager was 100% the villain in that event. That scenario was discarded on Feb. 17, when we learned that after the alleged road rage, TM & BM armed up and went looking for the road rager. So we moved off of scenario #1 even before we knew EN's identity.

Then we went to scenario #2. We've been stuck on that scenario for quite some time. In this scenario, EN certainly bears a portion of the responsibility for what happened, but it's likely that if the Meyerses hadn't gone looking for him that night, TM would still be alive. I think most of us still believe scenario #2 is what happened. We don't know the nature of the conflict, and we disagree on how much EN is to blame for TM's death, but we think there was something going on between the Meyerses and EN that led to the chase and the shootings.

Now, the prosecution wants us to believe scenario #3. In this scenario, EN is almost completely blameless. The Meyerses decided to play vigilante, but they got the wrong car and went all vigilante on an innocent guy who was sitting there in the park minding his own business.

If I'm on that jury, and the prosecution presents me with scenario #3, I'm not convicting EN of anything more serious than loitering. Call it jury nullification if you want, call it whatever you want. But I'm not convicting EN in TM's death if they went vigilante on the wrong guy. If they go with scenario #3, and if the jury has even a single person with that same attitude, EN will not be convicted of first-degree murder or any other murder or manslaughter.

Edited to clarify that last sentence.