GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #4

[BellaVita]

Only one passenger shot from the car as far as we know. That was EN. I don't think we even know for sure if BM was a driver, passenger, or even in the car at all. Just because a gun may have been brandished from the Buick at the first shooting scene(which the M's neglected to tell police happened), that does not mean as a fact that BM was the only possible culprit among the M family. IMO.

 

[sonjay]

But we do know that EN was the actual shooter who killed TM, and we know that there were at least 22 shots fired on Mt. Shasta and only 3 from BM's gun. Per BM's statement, he said the shooter was leaning out the window taking shots, so I'm assuming that the Audi also drove around the cul-de-sac to leave the street, or they backed up. If they made the complete turn, then the driver side of the Audi would be facing the Meyers home. If BM took the first shots, he would have most likely hit the front of the car as it was coming up the street, that street is VERY SMALL, not much room to "get away"..

If we go with Brandon's statement as described in the arrest affidavit:

"[t]he front passenger leaned partially out of the passenger window and began firing"
"when the passenger began shooting he returned fire with his 9mm pistol firing three times toward the driver of the silver car"

Then, further down:

"Brandon said the silver car backed out of the Cul-de-Sac"

I'm having trouble picturing that sequence of events as described by Brandon.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Nope. At that point, the story was still that TM & KM were out having driving lessons. MM believed (or pretended that he believed) that TM & KM were having driving lessons, that there was a road rage incident, that KM & TM were followed home, and that BM came outside to return fire as KM ran into the house. That was the first story. That was the story as reported in the linked article. That was the story MM was talking about in that article.

The bolded is a good catch! That's why we all need to bounce thoughts off one another!

MM's statements aside, I still think KM's story for being sideswiped for driving the speed limit indicates KM was driving when that "supposedly" happened because I don't believe a competent adult driver would be driving 25 mph at a late hour when there's no traffic.

Again, I'm basing that how a speed limit is considered more of a suggestion in my region. Very few people drive the speed limit here. I live in a region with steep topography---narrow, windy roads on extremely steep hills. Roads in Vegas are flat and straight as can be. Perhaps Paperdoll or anyone who lives in Vegas can share if it's typical for people follow the speed limit there---especially late at night when there's no traffic.

I just don't believe TM was driving or ever in the car. This road rage for driving the speed limit "story" screams KM was driving the car to me.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Per BM's statement, he said the shooter was leaning out the window taking shots, so I'm assuming that the Audi also drove around the cul-de-sac to leave the street, or they backed up.

Per BM the shooter did not drive into the cul-de-sac with the shooter already out the window, but the shooter only came out of the window upon arrival. Per MM's statement upthread they don't know who shoot first. It is plausible that BM was pointing the gun at the car as soon as he saw the Audi arrive on Mt Shasta where EN then put his hand out the window with the gun and the shooting started at that point. Not that I'd necessarily believe it but I can't see a jury convicting when EN is the passenger and there's reasonable doubt whether or not he involuntarily arrived to a situation where a gun is pointed at him. Per the complaint the Audi driver backed up.

This is the actual description from the Complaint of precisely when EN is alleged to have put his hand out the window with his pistol:
"Brandon said as the car was approximately half way down the cul-de-sac when the passenger leaned partially out the window and began firing..."
So even by the Meyers own account EN did not arrive on scene with guns blazing and BM was already outside with a weapon.

 

[sonjay]

The bolded is a good catch! That's why we all need to bounce thoughts off one another!

MM's statements aside, I still think KM's story for being sideswiped for driving the speed limit indicates KM was driving when that "supposedly" happened because I don't believe a competent adult driver would be driving 25 mph at a late hour when there's no traffic.

Again, I'm basing that how a speed limit is considered more of a suggestion in my region. Very few people drive the speed limit here. I live in a region with steep topography---narrow, windy roads on extremely steep hills. Roads in Vegas are flat and straight as can be. Perhaps Paperdoll or anyone who lives in Vegas can share if it's typical for people follow the speed limit there---especially late at night when there's no traffic.

I just don't believe TM was driving or ever in the car. This road rage for driving the speed limit "story" screams KM was driving the car to me.

KM might well have been driving the car.

But I think the whole "road rage" thing was made up. I think the speed limit thing was made up. I think the sideswiping was made up. I think the driving lesson was made up. I think the Audi driver getting out of the car and threatening anyone was made up.

So for me, those things don't support the idea that KM was driving, because made-up things can't support anything.

But I don't disagree that KM was at the wheel. I think she and BM were out hunting for EN. KM was driving, BM in the passenger seat with his gun at the ready.

I could be wrong. I freely admit that. But that's the theory I favor at the moment.

 

[Miss Muffet]

We need to figure out why KM would hide she was driving and say TM was driving.

If KM was with BM, she had no reason to lie and put TM in the car because BM has a license. Maybe that's the assumption. Perhaps BM's license is suspended.

But that doesn't explain KM saying she switched seats with TM prior to the "road rage" incident. It wouldn't have mattered that KM was driving during the "road rage" incident because TM has a license.

There's no reasonable explanation for KM to say that TM was driving before the "road rage" incident. That's why I think KM was in the car alone or BM was in the car with her and BM doesn't have a license. We have no way of knowing which because we don't know if BM has a license or not.

 

[BellaVita]

KM might well have been driving the car.

But I think the whole "road rage" thing was made up. I think the speed limit thing was made up. I think the sideswiping was made up. I think the driving lesson was made up. I think the Audi driver getting out of the car and threatening anyone was made up.

So for me, those things don't support the idea that KM was driving, because made-up things can't support anything.

But I don't disagree that KM was at the wheel. I think she and BM were out hunting for EN. KM was driving, BM in the passenger seat with his gun at the ready.

I could be wrong. I freely admit that. But that's the theory I favor at the moment.

One thing that leans me away from believing KM was driving is this: Only .45 bullets were found at the first shooting scene. I think that if Brandon was in the passenger side, he would have returned fire toward the Audi. I think he may have handed the gun to KM who brandished it but perhaps did not know how to use it or did not want to use it. This does not eliminate the possibility that TM was in the back seat.

 

[Miss Muffet]

KM might well have been driving the car.

But I think the whole "road rage" thing was made up. I think the speed limit thing was made up. I think the sideswiping was made up. I think the driving lesson was made up. I think the Audi driver getting out of the car and threatening anyone was made up.

So for me, those things don't support the idea that KM was driving, because made-up things can't support anything.

But I don't disagree that KM was at the wheel. I think she and BM were out hunting for EN. KM was driving, BM in the passenger seat with his gun at the ready.

I could be wrong. I freely admit that. But that's the theory I favor at the moment.

I need more than selective parts of the statement are made up without a reasonable explanation for why each were made up.

Why did KM make up the story about road rage?

Why did KM make up the speed limit thing?

Why did KM make up the sideswipe thing?

Etc.

There is evidence something happened to the car. I posted a link to an article dated February 18th stating LE now say there was "no accident." Can we find earlier reports that specify exactly what LE meant? Did LE simply say there was "no accident" or did LE say there was no accident between vehicles? Even if LE only said "no accident," that's no proof of anything because it's too vague and could mean anything.

Keep in mind, there was no time for KM and BM to come up with a story. KM's story is probably the closest to the truth there is since no shootings occurred while she was supposedly in the car.

I think SOMETHING happened. EN can still be fearing for himself and defending himself even if something happened to cause the Meyerses to become aggressive.

The only thing in the story that warrants BM brandishing a gun is a guy getting out of his car and verbally threatening to kill people, but they claim BM wasn't in the car at the time that would justify BM brandishing a gun. It makes BM look worse that he brandished a gun much later after the Buick pursued the car at high speeds.

That's why it makes sense for the car to go home to either get BM or for BM to get his gun. If he was in the car with his gun at the time of the altercation, he was justified by law to brandish his firearm at that time, but they claim he wasn't even in the car then. Either he wasn't in the car and KM was alone, or he was in the car and didn't have his gun and needed to go home to get it.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

But I don't disagree that KM was at the wheel. I think she and BM were out hunting for EN. KM was driving, BM in the passenger seat with his gun at the ready.

I could be wrong. I freely admit that. But that's the theory I favor at the moment.

One thing that I throw out there as a possibility was that KM driving and as a rookie illegal driver and accidentally damaged the Audi that resulted in damage to the Buick as well. KM technically could have been a hit-and-run driver and that's what caused the Audi driver to be so upset. KM being an illegal hit-and-run driver also would be a reason why KM would lie about those events and no one in the family would know she was the instigator as she wouldn't want to say she hit-and-ran to either her parents or the police. I know the police have said the Buick wasn't in a 'crash,' but veering into someone else's car and causing damage would still seem like you could be charged with hit-and-run. KM would be a minor, but even so she wouldn't want to face multiple misdemeanor charges of hit-and-run and driving without a license. I'm not saying this is the explanation, but this scenario provides a motive.

 

[JaimeInLA]

Ok, I'm trying on a new theory:

KM leaves home and walks down the street to meet EN at the park.
Back at the Meyers home, TM says to BM, "Your sister snuck out to go meet EN again. That's not ok! He is 20 and she is 15! Go pick her up!"
BM drives to the park in the Buick, finds KM and EN snuggling on a picnic table and says, "Get in the car right now"
KM resists so BM goes back home, gets his gun, returns to the park and says "I'm not screwing around - get in the car or I will shoot him!"
KM gets in the Buick and BM takes her home.
As soon as the Buick leaves the park, EN calls his friend and says, "Man, this is BS. I'm not taking that. Come pick me up. We're going back to get her."
Meanwhile, at the Meyers house, KM is pissed and hops in the Buick to go look for her man.
The Audi encounters the Buick and EN assumes BM is still driving it. Shots are fired.
KM returns home, terrified.
EN, still not realizing it was KM in the Buick (tinted windows) continues his quest to go rescue his woman, and goes towards the Meyers house.
Brother and sister are fighting on the lawn. BM says, "I told you not to screw with that kid!" He still has his gun on him and is furious when the Audi turns down their street, towards the house.
Brandon fires at the Audi.
Tammy comes running outside to see what all the noise is about.
EN fires from the Audi and hits TM.

EN doesn't tell the real story because he could be charged with statutory rape. He thinks he can get off on self defense so why risk a statutory rape sentence?

KM begs BM not to incriminate her boyfriend and/or ruin her reputation, so they conceal his identity for nearly a week. BM agrees because he feels horrible that his macho gunplay got his mom shot.

Thoughts? Go ahead… poke holes in it!!

 

[Miss Muffet]

One thing that leans me away from believing KM was driving is this: Only .45 bullets were found at the first shooting scene. I think that if Brandon was in the passenger side, he would have returned fire toward the Audi. I think he may have handed the gun to KM who brandished it but perhaps did not know how to use it or did not want to use it. This does not eliminate the possibility that TM was in the back seat.

I agree that BM would have returned fire if he was in the passenger seat. KM's fingerprints would have been on BM's handgun if he had given it to her though. I think merely being the driver hindered his ability to shoot. That's why I think KM was driving for the first part. Either she went home and got BM, and he started driving. Or she and BM went home together, and BM took over driving after getting his gun.

 

[BellaVita]

Okay. Personally, I do not think KM had anything going on with EN. EN told one of the witnesses "I got those kids". It is a believable statement to me and negates the possibility of any relationship. IMO.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Thoughts? Go ahead… poke holes in it!!

EN's alleged statements that have been presented in the Complaint were voluntary to his friends, not under police questioning. EN didn't have to make up a story because EN didn't have to give a story at all, but instead he wanted to say what had happened to him. I think what EN's friends remember EN saying aren't necessary correct or consistent as they could have misremembered certain things or not both been part of the whole conversation of EN describing what happened to him, but I don't think EN was telling them anything he did not believe himself. I believe EN genuinely felt threatened just by seeing the Buick, but with that being said it wouldn't be a contradiction of EN's alleged statements if KM had been a former love interest of EN's.

 

[JaimeInLA]

EN's alleged statements that have been presented in the Complaint were voluntary to his friends, not under police questioning. EN didn't have to make up a story because EN didn't have to give a story at all, but instead he wanted to say what had happened to him. I think what EN's friends remember EN saying aren't necessary correct or consistent as they could have misremembered certain things or not both been part of the whole conversation of EN describing what happened to him, but I don't think EN was telling them anything he did not believe himself. I believe EN genuinely felt threatened just by seeing the Buick, but with that being said it wouldn't be a contradiction of EN's alleged statements if KM had been a former love interest of EN's.

Sigh. I guess you are right. I was just trying to think of SOMETHING different that we hadn't tossed around yet. And to me, this still doesn't feel right. What is the reason for the anger? There's something we are missing. If not a romantic relationship, then it has to be someone owed someone money, or maybe, as just mentioned above -- someone scratched someone else's prized Audi and they got really mad. I think we are close to what really happened. But I still want to know WHY. Ugh.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Ok, I'm trying on a new theory:

KM leaves home and walks down the street to meet EN at the park.
Back at the Meyers home, TM says to BM, "Your sister snuck out to go meet EN again. That's not ok! He is 20 and she is 15! Go pick her up!"
BM drives to the park in the Buick, finds KM and EN snuggling on a picnic table and says, "Get in the car right now"
KM resists so BM goes back home, gets his gun, returns to the park and says "I'm not screwing around - get in the car or I will shoot him!"
KM gets in the Buick and BM takes her home.
As soon as the Buick leaves the park, EN calls his friend and says, "Man, this is BS. I'm not taking that. Come pick me up. We're going back to get her."
Meanwhile, at the Meyers house, KM is pissed and hops in the Buick to go look for her man.
The Audi encounters the Buick and EN assumes BM is still driving it. Shots are fired.
KM returns home, terrified.
EN, still not realizing it was KM in the Buick (tinted windows) continues his quest to go rescue his woman, and goes towards the Meyers house.
Brother and sister are fighting on the lawn. BM says, "I told you not to screw with that kid!" He still has his gun on him and is furious when the Audi turns down their street, towards the house.
Brandon fires at the Audi.
Tammy comes running outside to see what all the noise is about.
EN fires from the Audi and hits TM.

EN doesn't tell the real story because he could be charged with statutory rape. He thinks he can get off on self defense so why risk a statutory rape sentence?

KM begs BM not to incriminate her boyfriend and/or ruin her reputation, so they conceal his identity for nearly a week. BM agrees because he feels horrible that his macho gunplay got his mom shot.

Thoughts? Go ahead… poke holes in it!!

You get many points for creativity!

I wouldn't get in the car if my brother was brandishing a handgun threatening to shoot my boyfriend. I surely wouldn't back him up if he shot at my boyfriend and caused my mother to get killed. I also think EN's story via his friends would have included that detail.

KM being EN's girlfriend has crossed my mind previously, but I think it's unlikely.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I was just trying to think of SOMETHING different that we hadn't tossed around yet. And to me, this still doesn't feel right. What is the reason for the anger? There's something we are missing. If not a romantic relationship, then it has to be someone owed someone money, or maybe, as just mentioned above -- someone scratched someone else's prized Audi and they got really mad. I think we are close to what really happened. But I still want to know WHY. Ugh.

I loved your scenario because we do need to think outside the box and consider everything.

The why is the most important question I have, not just for motive's of everyone involved, but for all aspects of the story too.

 

[sonjay]

We need to figure out why KM would hide she was driving and say TM was driving.

If KM was with BM, she had no reason to lie and put TM in the car because BM has a license. Maybe that's the assumption. Perhaps BM's license is suspended.

But that doesn't explain KM saying she switched seats with TM prior to the "road rage" incident. It wouldn't have mattered that KM was driving during the "road rage" incident because TM has a license.

There's no reasonable explanation for KM to say that TM was driving before the "road rage" incident. That's why I think KM was in the car alone or BM was in the car with her and BM doesn't have a license. We have no way of knowing which because we don't know if BM has a license or not.

If you buy my theory -- that KM and BM with his gun were out hunting for EN -- then when the evening ended with their mom shot, they panicked. They knew exactly how bad it would look if they told police "We were out looking for EN. BM had his gun with him. We were planning to shoot him, but he shot mom." Or maybe "We weren't planning to shoot him, just to scare him with BM's gun." Either way, that would make them look very very bad, and very culpable in mom's death.

If that's how it went down, they had good reason to panic. They needed, real super-quick-like, some cover story that did not have BM in the car with his gun hunting for EN. They needed some innocent cover story. The driving lesson and road rage thing was what they happened to think of. They didn't have much time, so they would have gone with the first reasonably plausible cover story they could come up with before cops started arriving at the cul de sac.

I think that if they were worried they would be considered culpable in mom's death because BM had his gun in the car hunting for EN, that would be plenty of cause for panic, and plenty of cause for lying to police.

I think that if they were worried that KM was driving without a license, that's much less cause for panic and much less cause to lie to police. 15-year-olds get caught all the time driving without a license. It's what they do. It's not something you go to jail over, and it's not a reason to lie to police in an investigation into your mom's homicide.

I recognize that people do lie over stupid little things. I don't think that's the case here.

 

[sonjay]

I need more than selective parts of the statement are made up without a reasonable explanation for why each were made up.

Why did KM make up the story about road rage?

I covered this in my previous post.

Why did KM make up the speed limit thing?

Why did KM make up the sideswipe thing?

These lies would be a result of the initial lie about the road rage. Once KM lied and told police she was having a driving lesson and the road rage happened, they would, of course, press her for details. At first, they probably went easy on her; the poor girl had just seen her mother shot. They let her get by with a vague story about road rage at first.

But in subsequent interviews, they did press for more details. What were you and your mom doing just prior to the road rage? Exactly where did this driving lesson happen? While you were driving, did you leave the school parking lot at all? Who was driving when the other guy got mad at you? What caused the other driver to get mad? And then what happened? And what did your mom do then? Who was driving at the time? When did your mom switch seats with you and take over driving again? How fast were you going when this happened? And so on.

KM had to answer; she couldn't claim she didn't know. She was there! That's a big problem with lying to police: They want details. So you have to provide details. When your story is a lie, that means you have to make up details. I'm sure KM would have preferred to just say "This other guy in the grey car got mad at us and followed us home and shot my mom" and leave it at that, but the police wanted all the details.

The only thing in the story that warrants BM brandishing a gun is a guy getting out of his car and verbally threatening to kill people, but they claim BM wasn't in the car at the time that would justify BM brandishing a gun. It makes BM look worse that he brandished a gun much later after the Buick pursued the car at high speeds.

If you buy my theory -- that BM & KM had some sort of beef with EN and were out hunting for him -- it's plausible that BM would brandish his gun at the Audi. IMO.

That's why it makes sense for the car to go home to either get BM or for BM to get his gun. If he was in the car with his gun at the time of the altercation, he was justified by law to brandish his firearm at that time, but they claim he wasn't even in the car then. Either he wasn't in the car and KM was alone, or he was in the car and didn't have his gun and needed to go home to get it.

Not if he was the aggressor. If he was the aggressor, he wasn't justified in brandishing his weapon or pointing it at EN or chasing EN. IMO, he did all of those things, and it ended with his mom shot dead, and that's why he and KM were desperate to conceal the fact that Brandon was even in the car.

 

[sonjay]

Me too!! I hope EN does not plea and this goes to trial! Prosecution will NOT want to go to trial from what I see. Hopefully EN's attorney's don't cater to the prosecution.
I would love to watch this case too.

For now, I would like to hear from some independent witnesses. The Meyers and EN versions are all full of holes. Where are all the witnesses, driver of "audi", neighbors, others at the park, b-day party goers etc.??

Yeah, me too. Journalism -- real journalism -- has had its budget cut to the bone, and many daily papers and television stations just parrot canned news releases and re-print stuff sent out over the wire. They hardly do any real journalism anymore.

But for the life of me, I can't understand why at least the Nat'l Enquirer or the Daily Mail hasn't been tracking down and interviewing neighbors, friends, and relatives of the various people involved. The tabloids still have budgets for first-hand investigation, and they often do a lot better job of it than the "real" news reporters.

 

[jayme1133]

KM leaves home and walks down the street to meet EN at the park.
Back at the Meyers home, TM says to BM, "Your sister snuck out to go meet EN again. That's not ok! He is 20 and she is 15! Go pick her up!"
BM drives to the park in the Buick, finds KM and EN snuggling on a picnic table and says, "Get in the car right now"
KM resists so BM goes back home, gets his gun, returns to the park and says "I'm not screwing around - get in the car or I will shoot him!"

This has crossed my mind too...Either KM/EN or TM/EN had some sort of relationship, hmmm??
Also, I think the birthday party had something to do with the events that took place that night!

Hope we can see phone records eventually, no way around text messages of the evening even if they were deleted. So this should be the "key" to what really happened!