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

[SeeAlice]

Can we find testimony from another Vegas murder trial or a law enforcement procedures handbook to determine if GSR testing is routinely done on every ER patient who presents with a GSW?

Seems like that would be SOP in ERs but I'm just going by what seems like common sense to me.

As far as the kids & GSR tests, I truly don't know. It's possible they were completely honest in answering detectives' questions fully when asked initially, the night of the shooting, and they told their father and Matt a different story. Or it's possible they exercised their constitutionally guaranteed right to remain silent until they consulted their father or a lawyer. If it's the latter, would LE have to get a judge to sign a search warrant ordering them to submit to swabbing for GSR?


Adding link to story quoting Matt

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/0...he-life-of-the-mother-gunned-down-111521.html

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I would say it's an assumption -- speculation -- that he walked there to get in the silver car. He could have been picked up curbside at the park, could he not?

That's what I just said that you quoted in bold, so I don't understand why you are asking me this. Under the one-trip scenario whether he walked to the silver car or got picked up elsewhere, he was heading towards the dangerous area with the Buick.

I don't think we can use that assumption as proof of anything.

EN being away from the park and instead by the main school parking lot in the silver car is a pre-requisite necessity for EN to have been in the car during the first shooting and he had to get there one way or the other from the park.

 

[SeeAlice]

I have wondered a few times if Matt or RobertJr were at the house that night. Does anyone know?

Daily Mail interview of MM's girlfriend was vague as to whether he was with her when she received the phone call about the shooting.

 

[al66pine]

...law enforcement procedures handbook to determine if GSR testing is routinely done on every ER patient who presents with a GSW?Seems like that would be SOP in ERs but I'm just going by what seems like common sense to me....

bbm sbm

SeeAlice - good question.
Paraphrasing - is GSR particle collection part of -
-- LE protocol at crime scene or
-- ER/med protocol for GSW, then reported to and/or provided to LE, for injuries, or ME, for deaths?
--or both.
Started thinking about this.
At scene, I'd think LE would sometimes not be able to tell (w lots of blood) if GSW, knife, ax, MVA, etc.
At ER/med center, maybe same, can't always tell until in the thick of it? Collect samples as default SOP.

ETA:
Collection process for GSR particles: LE, ER, or Med Ex

Tech. article: http://swggsr.org/documents.html (Scientific Working Group for Gunshot Residue org.)
Click on 'The Current Status of GSR Examinations' for 9 page pdf,
pub. May 2011, in FBI/Law Enforcement Bulletin. P.3 online, p26 print version.

The page re GSR Samples uses terms 'investigators' using special kits containing adhesive lifters or dabs or stubs, gloves, information forms instructions, carbon and tape for sealing kit to send to lab.
The 'submitting officer' completes the information form, giving data about how, when collected, type of gun & ammo, etc. condition of subjects' hands, etc. Refers to 'submitting officer.'
Discusses how LE personnel collect samples from subject ASAP, to prevent contamination
in squad vehicles, interrogation rooms, etc.
IIUC, labs may be private labs. They use scanning electron microscopes (SEM) for expensive tests.
If article discusses ER, med care ppl, collecting samples, I missed it. Ditto Med. Examiner personnel.
I can't tell for sure, from re-skimming article whether its LE or ER protocol to collect.

Maybe someone else fill find other info on this.

SeeAlice, Thx again.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Exactly so. And it's not valid to take a creative interpretation of two disparate statements in the affidavit and use them as proof that the Buick made two trips to the school.

The most that can be argued with respect to those differing statements in the affidavit about where EN was when he spotted the Buick is that they allow for such an interpretation. (Somewhat, if one really wants to believe there were two separate trips by the Buick.)

When we have the statements in full instead of selective bits and pieces of them, I'll agree with you that whatever is in those statements is what A and K are providing is second-hand hearsay of a conversation about an event they did not see. With only partial statements from hearsay witnesses, there's a lot of room to fill in the blanks, draw different interpretations from what they're saying, etc. When we have full police statements of direct eyewitnesses/parties to this, that will be a whole different ballgame.

They are certainly not proof that the Buick made two separate trips to the school. Nor are they proof that EN walked to the intersection of Ducharme and Sam Jonas. Nor are they proof that road rage happened, or that there were driving lessons.

But I'm seeing posts here that take creative interpretation of those statements and use them as proof that all of those things happened.

I for one am not saying it's proof, but of possibilities. You're missing how I for instance provided two different methods EN could have ended up in the silver car on Ducharme by the school in the one-trip scenario, which you then criticized my first method by using my own other method when that was what I said all along. What I was pointing out was an explanation was needed why he was there under either method, not that being picked and looping around was the explanation to what I was getting at.

If you're saying with the one-trip scenario EN got picked up on Cherry River with silver car going eastbound to Buffalo, going north to Ducharme and spotting each other shortly after making that turn, there has to be a good reason why that was done knowing that the Buick was in the parking lot right by where the silver car would drive by it and be seen as that has scared EN heading right into the area he knows where the threat is.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Yes, the M's do state that the car left and then came back to the school. For more driving lessons. If you believe that. EN states that he was riding in the Audi and saw the Buick in the parking lot. If it is true that they returned to the school the second time for more lesson, again if you can believe anything they say, then I am VERY CERTAIN there had been no road rage at that point. Because they would have been scared and on their way home to get BM and the gun.

You're misreading the M's timeline. They arrived at the school around 2210. They returned to the school at 2250. The Audi encounter happened AFTER they left the school the second time. From 2250 until 2320 they left the school the second time, had the Audi encounter, returned home, went back out, had high speed car chase, shooting at first scene, returned home, mom shot in the head. All that happened in 30 to 40 minutes from 2250 to 2320-2330.

The question myself and RI are trying to figure out is if there was enough time for that to happen in that time period after 2250. That's why SpanishInquisition calculated the driving times for the routes they took after 2250. I plan to do my own calculations when there's time. If SI and/or I determine there was enough time, others will have to provide solid calculations to prove otherwise for me to concede.

I'm not going to simply disregard it happened without someone showing me how it couldn't have happened. Right now, all I'm hearing are people giving their opinion it couldn't have happened based on their not understanding the timeframe in the warrant---like you just stated that you seem to misunderstand the warrant and think the Audi "road rage" incident occurred before they returned to the school the second time. It's clear in the warrant that the Audi "road rage" incident occurred after they returned to the school the second time and KM and TM switched seats.

Yet, EN says in one account that he believed he saw a gun pointed at that time. EN was already in the car when the Audi first encountered the Buick. Therefore, no solo meeting between Audi and Buick before EN was picked up. The road rage would had to have happened with EN in the car. Not that I think it happened because the Buick was driving slowly. IMO>

Not according to the detailed timeline within the warrant. You can't just throw the timeline out the window.

If you use EN's gun sighting and compare it to the timeline, that actually proves EN wasn't in the car. The M's didn't have their gun until after TM returned home and got BM. The Audi "road rage" incident happened before there was a gun in the car.

If you throw the entire timeline out the window---when LE probably has significant evidence proving the timeline via video of these two cars throughout the neighborhood streets over the hour and a half---you're just creating a fantasy based on inconsistencies.

 

[BellaVita]

EN's account wouldn't mention an Audi altercation elsewhere before he was picked up because he wouldn't be present at the time it happened. BM's statement isn't proof the Audi altercation didn't happen prior to finding the Audi on Ducharme because BM wasn't present when it occurred. And the BM does include the conflict near the school because the first shooting scene is right near the school.

It makes no sense that the Buick would return to the school parking lot for a 2nd driving lesson after having been involved with a solo Audi driver. EN states that he saw the Buick IN THE PARKING LOT as he was riding in the Audi. Not in a street near the parking lot but in the parking light. IMO.

 

[Miss Muffet]

It makes no sense that the Buick would return to the school parking lot for a 2nd driving lesson after having been involved with a solo Audi driver. EN states that he saw the Buick IN THE PARKING LOT as he was riding in the Audi. Not in a street near the parking lot but in the parking light. IMO.

That's a good point. It could either mean two things.

1) The handgun sighting is the third time the buick was near the school after KM and TM go home and get BM.

OR

2) TM and KM had a handgun in the car with them all along. Back to my theory titled, "KM is the biggest liar of them all." That theory is everything that happened in the buick from start to finish had TM and KM as passengers, and BM's first story about coming out of the house with his 9mm when TM and KM arrived is true. The subsequent stories of the buick coming back home to get BM are to protect KM. (Your posting about the gun and Sonja posting about KM being a liar made this click again for me.) Refer to the actual theory I posted for more details if you want to consider it.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Right. No one else's statement has anything about the alleged driving lessons or road rage, because KM is the only source of that story.

KM, who kept changing her story. There was a crash. No, it was a sideswipe. No, it was a near-collision. No, it was just a dude who got mad because her mom was driving the speed limit.

KM, who first was unable to give a description of the driver to police, but who later described a 6' spiky-haired dude with hazel eyes -- and this dude doesn't seem to be a person of interest to police.

KM, who originally said the silver car followed her and her mother home.

KM, who apparently has difficulty telling the story correctly.

Now you're getting somewhere! Finally!

My recent "KM is a liar theory" believes most everything in the warrant happened (because there would be surveillance video showing the buick around all these streets over the 1-1/2 hour period), except the pit stop home to get BM, and that's the big M's family lie created to protect KM from being present/involved when the shootings occurred.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I have wondered a few times if Matt or RobertJr were at the house that night. Does anyone know?

Daily Mail interview of MM's girlfriend was vague as to whether he was with her when she received the phone call about the shooting.

I'd like to know that also. I also wonder if the birthday party was at the M's home or elsewhere.

 

[fjlee]

I just don't understand why everyone thinks so badly of the murdered victim. Yes things said are not right and should keep mouth shut, but this kid or really young man shot and killed someone. I signed up just to state this. It bothers me that people are blaming the victim and debating events, but she was killed in her own yard at a dead end. This made the decision to turn down that road to kill and could have killed innocent people standing around. To me its case closed except for what degree he goes away for. thank and have spent many many hours reading yalls comments and has brought me much needed distractions Thank you all

 

[Miss Muffet]

I just don't understand why everyone thinks so badly of the murdered victim. Yes things said are not right and should keep mouth shut, but this kid or really young man shot and killed someone. I signed up just to state this. It bothers me that people are blaming the victim and debating events, but she was killed in her own yard at a dead end. This made the decision to turn down that road to kill and could have killed innocent people standing around. To me its case closed except for what degree he goes away for. thank and have spent many many hours reading yalls comments and has brought me much needed distractions Thank you all

I wish you wouldn't keep your mouth shut. I'd love to hear what you know or believe or think.

We're not blaming the victim. We fully understand EN shot and killed her. We're trying to figure out the motive, the reason it all happened. We're also entertaining possible defense strategies. We're just trying to figure out if the DA has a strong case and what the defense might do to prevent a jury from finding EN guilty. That doesn't mean we hope EN gets away with murder.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Some forensic labs accept only GSR samples collected within 5 hrs of shooting.
Others accept samples taken >5 hrs post-shooting. (Page 4 online, p 27 print version).

Per link, GSR particles are often mostly or entirely worn away (putting hands in pockets, lifting/carrying items, wiping hands, washing hands, etc.) in a matter of several hours.
TM did not wash her hands after being shot, but if hand samples were not collected at scene,
then likely GSR was all worn or washed away after some hours in the hospital, imo.

Most or all GSR particles on clothing may also be washed away in laundry process.
I wonder if TM's clothing was tested for GSR.

Also wonder about any GSR tests on other M fam members there.
______________________________________________________________________
See http://swggsr.org/documents.html (Scientific Working Group for Gunshot Residue org.)
Click on 'The Current Status of GSR Examinations' for 9 page pdf,
pub. May 2011, in FBI/Law Enforcement Bulletin. Pages 2, 3, 4 online, pp 25, 26, 27 print version.

Sample collection from hands, body, clothing, etc.
Samples can be inadvertently contaminated, at the scene, by the collector tech/LE, etc.
Washing hands can wash away GSR.
Different private labs set diff criteria for accepting samples (GSR, fingerprints, drugs, hair, etc).
(Then tech stuff testing procedures.(other pp))
Pages 6, 7, 8 on line (pp 29, 30, 31 print version).
Reporting
Testimony by GSR expert.

It sure doesn't last long, does it?

I wonder if they did GSR tests on other M's family members too!

 

[Gin]

I wish you wouldn't keep your mouth shut. I'd love to hear what you know or believe or think.

We're not blaming the victim. We fully understand EN shot and killed her. We're trying to figure out the motive, the reason it all happened. We're also entertaining possible defense strategies. We're just trying to figure out if the DA has a strong case and what the defense might do to prevent a jury from finding EN guilty. That doesn't mean we hope EN gets away with murder.

And I would add we believe in justice. That means justice for the victim, of course. But it also means a careful look at all the evidence. It's important to know whether it's only one, or if it may be more that are responsible for her untimely death. Everyone responsible needs to be held accountable.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

It makes no sense that the Buick would return to the school parking lot for a 2nd driving lesson after having been involved with a solo Audi driver. EN states that he saw the Buick IN THE PARKING LOT as he was riding in the Audi. Not in a street near the parking lot but in the parking light. IMO.

This is one of the problem areas under any of the scenarios. An EN hearsay witness conveyed they believed that's what he said about the Buick being parked, but BM - an eyewitness - says the it was actually the silver car that was stopped where there's a role reversal, but what is consistent between EN hearsay and BM is that they were by the school parking lot facing a westerly direction on Ducharme.

Not that it would be definitive either way, but I think it matters who was stopped and who was driving. If the Buick was parked at the school and the silver car drove by it, that could give some evidence more towards a one-trip scenario, while if the silver car was parked and the Buick drove up behind it on Ducharme that would give some evidence towards a two-trip scenario, but neither negates the other scenario.

 

[PaperDoll]

Thanks! That's hilarious about not pressing the record button. I can imagine myself doing that too!

It doesn't sound like a dangerous neighborhood, does it? Nighttime at the park can be different, but I got the impression that resident in the news was saying he didn't trust the park even during the day since he won't let his children go there. Obviously many people are comfortable going there during the day since you've seen people there.

I was just out running errands and passed the state store (where alcohol is sold in my state). Reading your "Vegas baby martini" before leaving almost inspired me to stop and make a purchase.

I love martinis Their neighborhood isn't that bad really, and I would walk it. Where they live I wouldn't really consider it dangerous, but once you get past maybe a few miles heading towards the Strip, it gets a bit "iffy" . I really don't know what it's like in the evenings there so I can't really judge it that way, but I do drive around that area in the day time and I'm ok with driving it. I don't feel threatened in any way.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I just don't understand why everyone thinks so badly of the murdered victim. Yes things said are not right and should keep mouth shut, but this kid or really young man shot and killed someone. I signed up just to state this. It bothers me that people are blaming the victim and debating events, but she was killed in her own yard at a dead end. This made the decision to turn down that road to kill and could have killed innocent people standing around. To me its case closed except for what degree he goes away for. thank and have spent many many hours reading yalls comments and has brought me much needed distractions Thank you all

Part of it is that we don't necessarily know what to think of the victim and also because it is relevant to case in trying to figure out what happened and how that impacts the final legal outcome. I for instance think that with what we currently know that going after EN for Voluntary Manslaughter would be the level most likely to result in a conviction, but I also entertain the idea that this was related to a busted drug deal, which could also be relevant as other members of the family could be charged with Felony Murder notwithstanding EN being convicted for Voluntary Manslaughter, which would actually make other family members even more responsible for the death of TM in the eyes of the law. Also her family's own admissions have been pretty negative of their mom, like the son said his mother had him get his gun to go after the silver car despite him saying for her to call 911 and after that her son says his mother searched for and chased the silver car with the gun in the car - this is from the family themselves and has been part of the reason people are questioning it with there being some doubt if the claimed actions of the deceased really happened.

 

[sonjay]

That's what I just said that you quoted in bold, so I don't understand why you are asking me this. Under the one-trip scenario whether he walked to the silver car or got picked up elsewhere, he was heading towards the dangerous area with the Buick.

The "dangerous area"? SRSLY?

According to the "two trip theory," the Buick was going off having driving lessons in residential areas, then coming back to the school parking lot, then heading off again to get in road rages and chases way over at Durango & Westcliff. Why would a plain old street corner be such a "dangerous area"?

Under no theory is the Buick sitting the whole time on Ducharme & Sam Jones, like a haunted 1958 Plymouth Fury, just waiting for EN to leave the safety of his park bench.

 

[sonjay]

EN's witness statements don't exist in a vacuum in that warrant. You are purposely disregarding the M's statements. That resulted in you being convinced EN's "those kids" statement eliminated TM from being in the car even though the M's stated she was in the car. And your disregard for viewing the warrant statements as a whole is resulting in you believing the buick went to the school and stayed there for almost an hour.

I'm sure there is some sort of lie hiding something, but I don't think the lie eliminates the portions of the warrant regarding people's movements since information about people's movements compiles the majority of the warrant. I'm sure it can be easily verified that the buick was on various streets and not sitting at the school the entire time via security cameras located throughout the area. I believe the movements occurred and the lie is something else---perhaps to justify the movements or perhaps to protect who was truly present during the movements.

BBM. Yes I am, and I am unapologetic about it. The Meyerses have proven themselves to have a difficult time telling the story correctly. Nobody can even keep track of how many different versions of this story have been floated.

My standard for anything stated by any of the Ms is that it has to be supported by physical evidence or by statements from at least one credible source who is not a Meyers. Given the number of lies, omissions and deceptions we've seen from the Meyerses, I don't think that's an unreasonable standard.

Anyone who wishes to can take every word ever uttered by a Meyers as gospel truth. I can't.

P.S. I have some valuable land for sale in south Florida. It's only underwater a few weeks out of the year.

 

[SStarr33]

I just don't understand why everyone thinks so badly of the murdered victim. Yes things said are not right and should keep mouth shut, but this kid or really young man shot and killed someone. I signed up just to state this. It bothers me that people are blaming the victim and debating events, but she was killed in her own yard at a dead end. This made the decision to turn down that road to kill and could have killed innocent people standing around. To me its case closed except for what degree he goes away for. thank and have spent many many hours reading yalls comments and has brought me much needed distractions Thank you all

I don't think badly of the murdered victim or the family who I also think are victims. I worked out what happened quite some time ago, though so I haven't been posting much lately.