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

[sonjay]

You're misreading the M's timeline. They arrived at the school around 2210.

KM, who has difficulty telling the truth, said they arrived at the school around 2210. There is no evidence this is true.

They returned to the school at 2250.

Where did this even come from?

The Audi encounter happened AFTER they left the school the second time.

How can you know this? Just a few posts ago, you were insisiting that the Audi encounter happened after they left the school the first time.

From 2250 until 2320 they left the school the second time, had the Audi encounter, returned home, went back out

How can you know this? There is no evidence for this other than KM's word for it, and she has trouble telling the story correctly.

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.

This sounds like you've decided what happened, and how you're trying to figure out if you can somehow make the facts fit your conclusion.

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

Frankly, that's not why people are giving their opinion that it couldn't have happened. I, for one, am giving my opinion that KM has a great imagination but a difficult time telling the truth. There is no evidence whatsoever supporting any part of her story.

It's clear in the warrant that the Audi "road rage" incident occurred after they returned to the school the second time

No, that's not clear at all in the warrant. Just a couple page back, you were insisting that it was clear in the warrant that the road rage happened after they returned to the school the first time. If the warrant was at all clear on the Buick leaving and returning, it wouldn't be possible to change it from "the first time" to "the second time" without even blinking.

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

I wish there were a detailed timeline in the warrant. Sadly, there's not.

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.

Only if you believe that TM returned home, and that the Meyerses didn't have their gun until after TM returned home. If you believe that they didn't return home, and that they had their gun the whole time, then EN's gun sighting absolutely does NOT prove any such thing.

This is actually quite amusing. This whole thing is speculation on top of theory on top of assumption, each layer being used to prove other layers of a fanciful theory based on nothing but the word of a teenage girl who can't tell a cohesive story the same way twice.

 

[sonjay]

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.

So.... wait a minute. The warrant doesn't prove that the Buick left the school 3 times?

I thought the warrant proved this:

"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."

Honestly, the warrant cannot prove all of the different things that you have said it proves.

It can't simultaneously prove that the Buick left the school twice and that the Buick left the school 3 times.

It can't prove that EN's gun sighting means that EN wasn't in the car because the M's didn't have their gun until after TM returned home and got BM, if it also allows for just one trip by the green car and no trip home to get the gun.

A set of facts cannot simultaneously prove mutually exclusive theories.

A set of facts can allow for mutually exclusive theories without proving them. If it allows for multiple, mutually exclusive theories, then by definition it doesn't prove any of them.

 

[sonjay]

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.

LOL. I've been there all along. I've been saying for page and pages and pages that KM is a liar and her entire story is fabricated. I'm sorry that you're late to that party.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

The "dangerous area"? SRSLY?

If that dangerous Buick is at the school, the school is a dangerous area because the Buick is there, which the longer the Buick is continuously at the school the more dangerous of an area the school is.

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"?

Perhaps I should have used theories plural as there are multiple one-trip theories as well as multiple two-trip theories. A street corner stops being plain and become dangerous when it is occupied by a Buick whose occupants you think are out to get you.

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.

Yes, thank you for pointing to one of the weaknesses to the one-trip theories as you can't access one parking area of the school from another parking area. Unless the Buick was at that same area the whole time, it had to go somewhere as you can't drive around the school to other parts of the school without leaving the school and being on the road. Also another problem with not staying put is why the Buick is driving in and out of parking lots around the school in the first place when EN is known for having a very specific location for dealing at the park and the more you're driving around instead of just stopping and parking, the more opportunities you're giving EN to get away.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I worked out what happened quite some time ago, though so I haven't been posting much lately.

I can understand not posting much after finalizing your opinion. I'll likely feel that way after I finalize mine.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

KM, who has difficulty telling the truth, said they arrived at the school around 2210. There is no evidence this is true.

Per EN hearsay the Buick arrived at the school sometime, which is why he called for the silver car that arrived some indeterminate time later. We don't know one way or the other whether it took the silver car 5 minutes or 50 minutes to arrive after EN called for it. Because we don't know how long it took for ENs ride to get there is amongst the reasons why I haven't settled on any one type of theory and not been willing to exclude that things could have happened differently based upon which way various unknowns went. The issues such as at what time EN called for the silver car and at what time the silver car arrived are not dependent on KM ever having even touched the Buick that night.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Perhaps I should have used theories plural as there are multiple one-trip theories as well as multiple two-trip theories.

Exactly. I haven't settled on a one trip or two trip theory yet. I need to solidify that before I figure out which theory is most appropriate for the one I've chosen. You've already calculated your timeline. I have to do that myself before I can move forward.

Yes, thank you for pointing to one of the weaknesses to the one-trip theories...

LMAO!

 

[Miss Muffet]

Sonja, I think it's best if you and I stop engaging with one another.

 

[sonjay]

If that dangerous Buick is at the school, the school is a dangerous area because the Buick is there, which the longer the Buick is continuously at the school the more dangerous of an area the school is.

Perhaps I should have used theories plural as there are multiple one-trip theories as well as multiple two-trip theories. A street corner stops being plain and become dangerous when it is occupied by a Buick whose occupants you think are out to get you.

Yes, thank you for pointing to one of the weaknesses to the one-trip theories as you can't access one parking area of the school from another parking area. Unless the Buick was at that same area the whole time, it had to go somewhere as you can't drive around the school to other parts of the school without leaving the school and being on the road. Also another problem with not staying put is why the Buick is driving in and out of parking lots around the school in the first place when EN is known for having a very specific location for dealing at the park and the more you're driving around instead of just stopping and parking, the more opportunities you're giving EN to get away.

I don't see any weakness in any of the theories with respect to where the Buick was.

If you believe in the driving lesson/road rage theory, KM & TM were driving around the school parking lot, leaving the school and going into residential areas, then back to the school and doing a couple more loops. The Buick was mobile; at no time was it restricted to a single location.

If you don't believe the driving lesson/road rage theory, BM & TM (and possibly KM) were in the Buick looking for EN. They know he hangs out around there, but it's dark and they're not sure exactly where he is. If he does in fact have a specific location for his park business, I would guess he's not there since he's concerned about the Buick, so they're driving around watching for him. Maybe they circle the park, maybe pull into the school lot for a minute to sit and look around, pull out again and circle the school. The Buick was mobile; at no time was it restricted to a single location.

You're not "giving EN opportunities to get away"; you're looking for him!

Further, since there wasn't any one particular spot where the Buick was just sitting, there was no one particular "dangerous area" for EN. He was just staying out of sight of the Buick until his buddy could get there to pick him up.

I'm trying to figure out why you're putting so much emphasis on this "danger area," and I'm just not getting it.

 

[sonjay]

Per EN hearsay the Buick arrived at the school sometime, which is why he called for the silver car that arrived some indeterminate time later. We don't know one way or the other whether it took the silver car 5 minutes or 50 minutes to arrive after EN called for it. Because we don't know how long it took for ENs ride to get there is amongst the reasons why I haven't settled on any one type of theory and not been willing to exclude that things could have happened differently based upon which way various unknowns went. The issues such as at what time EN called for the silver car and at what time the silver car arrived are not dependent on KM ever having even touched the Buick that night.

There might be someone here who thinks there's a specific, detailed timeline in the warrant, but I am not that person.

I completely agree that we don't have a firm timeline. We only have a third-hand estimated time of when EN arrived at the park. We don't know when the Buick arrived in the vicinity, we don't know when the Audi arrived in the vicinity. And once the two cars were in the vicinity, we don't know how long it was until the chase was on.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I wanted to point out what I consider one of what I consider the most ridiculous things said, which it was said by the police about KM:

Steiber said the initial road rage incident happened while Tammy Myers drove slowly home from a school parking lot, where she had been teaching her teenage daughter to drive. The girl didn't have a learner's permit.
Steiber said the daughter told police a car sped up to them from behind and then pulled alongside. The daughter reached over from the passenger seat and honked the car horn at the car as it passed.
"She figured this person was speeding, and right or wrong, they needed to be corrected," Steiber said of the girl, who he said is 15. "She honked the horn."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-twist-in-road-rage-killing-of-las-vegas-woman/
Yeah, some 15 year old kid is going to honk at cars as the self-appointed traffic warden and that kid drives like the re-incarnation of Mr. Skolnick.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I wanted to point out what I consider one of what I consider the most ridiculous things said, which it was said by the police about KM:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-twist-in-road-rage-killing-of-las-vegas-woman/
Yeah, some 15 year old kid is going to honk at cars as the self-appointed traffic warden and that kid drives like the re-incarnation of Mr. Skolnick.

What was most ridiculous about him saying that was the lighthearted tone in his voice and the happy smile on his face!

 

[sonjay]

I wanted to point out what I consider one of what I consider the most ridiculous things said, which it was said by the police about KM:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-twist-in-road-rage-killing-of-las-vegas-woman/
Yeah, some 15 year old kid is going to honk at cars as the self-appointed traffic warden and that kid drives like the re-incarnation of Mr. Skolnick.

I always thought the horn honking story was ridiculous.

Originally, the story didn't have the horn honking. It was either a minor accident or a near-collision, and a verbal exchange.

A couple of days later, the detail was added that the road rage car passed them, then cut in front of them and hit the brakes.

The horn honking detail was added a little later, on the 17th -- the same day it was revealed that the Buick went home to drop off KM and pick up armed BM to go hunting for the road rager.

 

[SeeAlice]

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 have never thought she was "bad." She certainly didn't "deserve" to be shot, much less killed, regardless of anything she did or didn't do, at least as far as I'm aware. I personally don't buy into the story that she went home and asked her son to go with her to play hot rod vigilante. Maybe she did. I don't know.

JMO, it's the ones still alive who seem to have managed to make such a mess of the "facts" of that night and the shooting, and in the process failed to portray her as anything more than a two-dimensional photo.

JMO, Tammy Meyers - the woman, mother, sister, grandmother, friend, aunt. the livng, breathing, feeling, thinking human being has gotten lost in this whole thing. It's probably not unusual in any homicide case but it seems a shame.

JMO

 

[newone]

most of us as parents want our kids to learn defensive driving aka ''staying alive'' and first rule would be not to ''intentionally'' aggravate another driver.....so the whole ''honking incident'' was a huge red flag to me MOO

 

[sonjay]

I always thought the horn honking story was ridiculous.

Originally, the story didn't have the horn honking. It was either a minor accident or a near-collision, and a verbal exchange.

A couple of days later, the detail was added that the road rage car passed them, then cut in front of them and hit the brakes.

The horn honking detail was added a little later, on the 17th -- the same day it was revealed that the Buick went home to drop off KM and pick up armed BM to go hunting for the road rager.

Quoting myself here to add:

"I'm gonna come back and get you and your daughter" is a detail that was added on Feb. 20 -- the day after EN was arrested and it became public knowledge that the Meyerses knew EN.

 

[SeeAlice]

Did anybody notice the comments on this article http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/mother-four-shot-road-rage-incident-dies
authored by this rather infamous Vegas attorney?
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/17/nation/la-na-oj-simpson-20130518

Pretty interesting, IMO.

ETA - IMPORTANT NOTE - 3 days later he abruptly changed his opinion and was very, very upset at the family.

 

[sonjay]

most of us as parents want our kids to learn defensive driving aka ''staying alive'' and first rule would be not to ''intentionally'' aggravate another driver.....so the whole ''honking incident'' was a huge red flag to me MOO

Well, it's perhaps internally consistent.

If you think that the most appropriate way to handle a road rage incident is to take your armed son out to go hunting for the road rager, a little horn honking would be pretty insignificant, no?

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I don't see any weakness in any of the theories with respect to where the Buick was.
If you believe in the driving lesson/road rage theory, KM & TM were driving around the school parking lot, leaving the school and going into residential areas, then back to the school and doing a couple more loops. The Buick was mobile; at no time was it restricted to a single location.

Seeing how I distinguish how many trips were made to the house as the dividing line, you can figure I don't give much credence to driving lessons in any scenario in addition my having expressly said so repeatedly on here already. That being said, if the Buick actually was engaged in driving lessons or other such things (I'm more inclined to believe that the car was out on some funny business not related to EN), it wouldn't matter to the Buick if EN is at the park where he keeps seeing them and panicking as he's irrelevant to their purpose.

If you don't believe the driving lesson/road rage theory, BM & TM (and possibly KM) were in the Buick looking for EN. They know he hangs out around there, but it's dark and they're not sure exactly where he is. If he does in fact have a specific location for his park business, I would guess he's not there since he's concerned about the Buick, so they're driving around watching for him. Maybe they circle the park, maybe pull into the school lot for a minute to sit and look around, pull out again and circle the school. The Buick was mobile; at no time was it restricted to a single location.

It would be impossible to catch him with him always moving around on foot and EN and the passengers staying in the Buick. If the Meyers were out expressly to get EN at or near the park, you'd for instance have the presumably slow on foot mom driving around in the car scouting around, while you'd have the young and armed BM on foot (like BM start on foot approaching from the Cherry and going NE with the Buick scouting the school or other side of the park) working on opposite sides and coordinating by cell phone to box EN in so that he can't escape from an open park. At least one of them has to be out of the car even if they just know the general area that he's in or else he'll just keep going somewhere else. I don't think anyone would expect EN to be a compliant puppy once they found him and were approaching him on foot, but to expect him to flee at some point once he saw them.

You're not "giving EN opportunities to get away"; you're looking for him!

By looking for him with everyone staying in the car and not coordinating with someone on foot and/or in another car, you're giving him opportunities to get away. If you're out to actually get EN and only stay in the car, you've immobilized yourself from being able to get your target as you take the time to stop and get out of the car, he's long gone by then.

Further, since there wasn't any one particular spot where the Buick was just sitting, there was no one particular "dangerous area" for EN. He was just staying out of sight of the Buick until his buddy could get there to pick him up.
I'm trying to figure out why you're putting so much emphasis on this "danger area," and I'm just not getting it.[/QUOTE]

AFAIK this is the first that has been mentioned that the Buick was scouting different locations in the neighborhood looking for EN, which if that's the case now that raise the possibility of some incident happening on Cimarron.

 

[SStarr33]

I wanted to point out what I consider one of what I consider the most ridiculous things said, which it was said by the police about KM:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-twist-in-road-rage-killing-of-las-vegas-woman/
Yeah, some 15 year old kid is going to honk at cars as the self-appointed traffic warden and that kid drives like the re-incarnation of Mr. Skolnick.

I've known passengers to reach over and honk the horn. All teenagers.