TN - Coy Hundley, 38, shot to death, Alcoa, 7 Oct 2003

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

mysteriew

mysteriew

A diamond in process
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
23,811
Reaction score
841
A woman acquitted of first-degree murder in the shooting of a man she believed raped her daughter is now on trial for second-degree murder.

Both trials stem from Kimberly Cunningham's admitted shooting of 39-year-old Coy Hundley in 2003.

Cunningham has said she shot Hundley after her daughter told her the man had raped her.

According to testimony in the first trial Cunningham confronted Hundley with the rape allegation. But he reportedly laughed at her and asked what she was going to do about it.
http://www.wmcstations.com/Global/story.asp?S=4025114
 
Excuse me, but why is this woman being tried twice? I mean she deserves to be punished for murdering the dude, but this is double jeopardy. :confused:
 
I can't say I wouldn't be tempted to do the same thing, especially if challenged by the scum.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
Excuse me, but why is this woman being tried twice? I mean she deserves to be punished for murdering the dude, but this is double jeopardy. :confused:
Click to expand...

I wondered about that too.
Would the fact that there were different charges be involved? First trial was for 1st degree, and the second was for 2 nd degree. That is the only thing that I could figure out.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
Excuse me, but why is this woman being tried twice? I mean she deserves to be punished for murdering the dude, but this is double jeopardy. :confused:
Click to expand...

That confuses me, too. Was second degree not offered as an option in the first trial?
 
She is not subjected to double jeopardy. She was tried and acquitted of first degree murder(inentional, pre-planned).

But now to avoid double jeopardy, they are trying her for second degree murder, so they are not trying her for the same charge, just the same occurance.

Jeopardy would be attached if she was re-tried on first degree murder charges(which will never happen), because the Prosection would no be allowed to file charges and the defence would utter "double jeopardy is attached".

Hope this helps.........
 
CyberLaw said:
She is not subjected to double jeopardy. She was tried and acquitted of first degree murder(inentional, pre-planned).

But now to avoid double jeopardy, they are trying her for second degree murder, so they are not trying her for the same charge, just the same occurance.

Jeopardy would be attached if she was re-tried on first degree murder charges(which will never happen), because the Prosection would no be allowed to file charges and the defence would utter "double jeopardy is attached".

Hope this helps.........
Click to expand...


Wouldn't it save everyone a whole lot of time, trouble, expense, etc., if they had just allowed 2nd degree as an option???
 
Jeana (DP) said:
Wouldn't it save everyone a whole lot of time, trouble, expense, etc., if they had just allowed 2nd degree as an option???
Click to expand...

They probably thought they had a slam dunk on the first degree. Filing on the second degree was probably only thought of when she was aquitted of 1st degree. Wonder if it is too late for me to establish residence there and get on the jury? I know the correct way to vote in this situation.
 
I think it's a shame to go after this woman twice. It seems the prosecution should be spending their time on other cases. I'd probably do the same thing she did. The justice systems sometime seems so screwed up to me. In one case they want to send a mother to prison for protecting her child. Whether shooting the guy after the rape and not during the rape doesn't make a difference to me. JMO. In other cases they go after the mother for NOT protecting her children, as in the case on another thread where she got 110 well deserved years in prison.
 
After going to trial once, they should just offer her deal to a lesser charge, instead of making her go through another trial. I am sure her and her family have been through enough. Prayers for her and her daughter.
 
SadieMae said:
I think it's a shame to go after this woman twice. It seems the prosecution should be spending their time on other cases. I'd probably do the same thing she did. The justice systems sometime seems so screwed up to me. In one case they want to send a mother to prison for protecting her child. Whether shooting the guy after the rape and not during the rape doesn't make a difference to me. JMO. In other cases they go after the mother for NOT protecting her children, as in the case on another thread where she got 110 well deserved years in prison.
Click to expand...
She murdered an innocent man! :doh:
 
mysteriew said:
An innocent man? Innocent of what?
Click to expand...
Lord have mercy - I just reread the article. I, obviously, misread it the first time. For some reason, I had it in my head that she thought he raped her daughter but, he didn't. Don't know where the heck I got that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bang:
 
jannuncutt said:
Lord have mercy - I just reread the article. I, obviously, misread it the first time. For some reason, I had it in my head that she thought he raped her daughter but, he didn't. Don't know where the heck I got that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bang:
Click to expand...
I went back and read the article again too after your post to me about him being and innocent man. Put my glasses to read this time :D . I thought that *I* misread it also.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
My favorite part is that she unloaded the gun and reloaded and shot four more times. Anything worth doing is worth doing right. :cool: :cool:
Click to expand...

See it wasn't premediatated. If it had been premediatated, she would have had enough bullets in the gun the first time.
 
Well, this answers the question about the double jeapordy issue:

Kimberly Cunningham will stand trial again. While a jury last month found her not guilty of first degree murder, it could not reach a verdict on the charge of second degree murder.


I'd never be picked to sit on the jury and if I were picked, I'd have to tell them straight out I don't think I could convict. Maybe another jury will be unable to reach a decision and then another jury will be unable to reach a decision. Then, the jury's conscience is clean and the prosecutor will have to get to a point here she/he just gives up???? Hoping.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 337 (members: 110, guests: 227)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
227
Total visitors
337
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,996
Messages
18,248,334
Members
234,523
Latest member
MN-Girl
Back
Top