GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #6

[oceanblueeyes]

In the state of Nevada under charges of M1 'deliberate' has a very specific legal meaning and is not for instance synonymous with 'intentionally.' In Nevada this lays out all the elements of M1 and the underling definitions of each element, BBM:

http://law.justia.com/cases/nevada/supreme-court/2000/32207-1.html
Under M1 I'm not sure that there's willfulness - intending specifically to kill - rather than not caring if he killed or wounded (but I could see a jury saying that he did based on the number of rounds he may have fired); nor do I think there was deliberation under the M1 meaning of the word in that given the circumstances I just don't believe anyone short of perhaps a cop or combat soldier would be mentally capable of coolness and reflection in that length of time and this is my biggest sticking point on M1. I'm also not seeing that it was premeditated in the M1 definition with this being part of some plan rather than spontaneous.

All I can say is defense attorneys would love you.

It clearly says that premeditation can be formed in seconds so even the courts recognize that there doesn't have to be a long drawn out period of reflection and EN had way more time than seconds.

There was plenty of time for EN to reflect once the first shooting had stopped. So he reflected, and deliberately, willfully, and with premeditation continued to hunt for the car and when he and his driver hemmed them in he opened fire completing his full intentions of killing those kids. Didn't he say he couldn't let the MFs get away? Even he knows his intent was to murder them.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

The defense is going to poke holes no matter what, which is their job to do. From my point of view and from the evidence I've read from the police report and GJ Testimony, I would convict due to the Audi, and I don't really care how the Audi got on Mt. Shasta even if it was due to wrong turn, I would convict because EN admitted he fired shots at the people in the driveway/car/running. I can not go by EN assuming they went to get more weapons, there is no evidence that the Meyers were getting more weapons.

Some people here believe that EN/DA took Cherry River to get to Mt. Shasta due to the "video" that is out there, and if that proves true, they intentionally went to Mt. Shasta and it wasn't a wrong turn because EN knows how to get in and out of his housing track and Mt. Shasta isn't a way out. If they took the way I think they did, Alta towards Cimarron, passed Carmel Peak, u-turned (short cut) back to Carmel Peak and right on Mt. Shasta, then there "could" be a possible wrong turn by the driver, but IMO I don't believe it. I truly think, and I could be wrong because we all have our own interpretation of the GJ Transcript, that the Audi saw the Buick making a turn on Mt. Shasta while driving Alta towards Cimarron.

From GJ Transcript per Mogg:

he and the other male drove westbound on
Alta towards Cimarron. He said as he was driving
westbound with the other male, he says "No, this can't
be happening, this can't be happening." And he
describes how the car was coming, the green car the
victim was in, was coming down the street. And based on
my knowledge of the scene, the location of the victim's
residence, the location of his residence where he would
have been at approximately the time that the victim was
driving westbound on Cherry River, basically paralleling
him to try to get home, he would have seen that car
coming down from Cherry River onto Carmel Peak probably
prior to or just as it turned into the Mount Shasta
cul-de-sac.

I'm amongst those who talk of the video and I also say that I think he's guilty of a serious crime and I don't necessarily know if you're saying you'd convict him of something rather than acquittal or if you're saying that you'd convict him of M1 specifically, but doing something intentionally doesn't mean you've reached the level of M1.

 

[PaperDoll]

That's fair enough. I'm glad to see that you're willing to wait for more evidence before simply deciding it was first-degree murder. Some people are dead-set on first-degree without even hearing or seeing all of the evidence.

Myself, I can't see first-degree murder. 2nd? Maybe. Or maybe manslaughter. Or maybe even self-defense, depending on what the evidence shows at trial.

I'm pretty sure they won't go for the death penalty. I don't think they can get a conviction on M1 even if the DP isn't on the table; if DP is a possible sentence, I don't see how they could possibly get a conviction.

THANKS sonjay I'm for the death penalty in extreme cases but not this one. I do believe that EN felt like someone was after him, I can see that because if he is a drug dealer blah blah blah he's going to have unhappy people after him, a dangerous "occupation" lol None-the-less................. I sure hope there will be more documents releasing soon and audio

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes, I was just FYIing you about BBM that outside of here it's an insult. Here's what it means outside of here:
http://slang.org/BBM-meaning-definition

Never even heard of that before. BBM here has always meant 'bolded by me.'

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I am confused. Are you saying you have never seen a co-conspirator be charged and found guilty of M1 when they were the driver and didn't actually shoot anyone when the passenger in the vehicle did?

Wasn't this dude 26 years old and a big guy? I don't think its going to fly if he tries to say EN (120 pounds) made him do it. He actually was the facilitator in order for this murder to happen and acted in tandem with EN so EN would have the opportunity to shoot the people in the green car.

Unless DAs attorney is lucky enough to get him a plea deal in exchange for his testimony against the shooter he is in a world of trouble legally. I think his lawyer has told him what to expect if he doesn't try to turn state's evidence.

Many co-conspirators (driver) have been found guilty of M1 along with the shooter(s) and some have been given the death penalty even though they weren't the ones who shot the victim or victims.

DA knew EN had a gun. DA knew he planned to use it. DA stopped so EN could fire repeatedly at the green car at the first shooting scene. DA came to the Myers home after then putting the car in a position where EN could fire at the victims from the passenger seat.

imo

I'm saying what is in the actual evidence right now, which is why I said I was referring to the evidence. You are assuming they acted in tandem, which they may well have, but as far as what is on the record so far it does not say that.

 

[SeeAlice]

All I can say is defense attorneys would love you.

It clearly says that premeditation can be formed in seconds so even the courts recognize that there doesn't have to be a long drawn out period of reflection and EN had way more time than seconds.

There was plenty of time for EN to reflect once the first shooting had stopped. So he reflected, and deliberately, willfully, and with premeditation continued to hunt for the car and when he and his driver hemmed them in he opened fire completing his full intentions of killing those kids. Didn't he say he couldn't let the MFs get away? Even he knows his intent was to murder them.

Defense attorneys love analytical people vs those who are swayed by emotion and extraneous details, so you are in esteemed company, SpanishInquisition.

JMO

 

[BellaVita]

~ what led up to that moment is that the other party were retreating and he was chasing and shooting after having time to GO HOME.
~ Was it 1st degree.. I don't know, here is a document LINK we could start with.
http://law.justia.com/codes/nevada/2005/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec020

~ entirely false. As long as there was no threat to him when he fired, he has no defense for firing his (legal?) weapon.

:cow:

He may have PERCEIVED a threat. He stated that he did. He'd already seen a gun waved at him. At some point, that gun became loaded. The person who loaded that gun (BM) was the passenger in a car hunting for someone who'd offended TM. If this had happened to me, I'd perceive a threat:

http://www.mynews3.com/media/lib/166/1/8/3/183997e6-0122-44f7-99b5-c23203a0e717/030515Nowsch.pdf

He said they were
sitting on the side of the street when all of a sudden
the green car came around behind them again, and they
pulled away, he said the green car started chasing them,
described how they went down a street, and then he said
at one point he was waving his pistol out the passenger
window of the car that he was in up in the air and he
couldn't believe that the car that was behind him didn't
see that and stop and just go away.

From earlier in the testimony:
He looked across the park and
saw a green car in the parking lot of the school. And
he told me that every time he would go left, the car
would go left, he'd go right, the car would go right,
and he felt that these were the people that were coming
after him to get him.

From KK's Testimony:
At that point either they had gone into the
school parking lot or just out of it, but at that point
there was some type of meeting or encounter. And he
didn't express that words were shared, but that the
vehicle came after him or he came after the vehicle.
Also shared that there was a gun being waved out of the
car, didn't specify what window. (as told to KK by EN )

Whether the perception of what happened in the school parking lot is accurate or not, a threat WAS perceived.

 

[sonjay]

~ entirely false. As long as there was no threat to him when he fired, he has no defense for firing his (legal?) weapon.

<snipped for focus>

Do we know, for sure, that there was no threat to EN when he fired?

Do we know that BM didn't open fire first?

Do we know that TM didn't have a gun?

Do we know that KM wasn't in the car or if she was, that she didn't have a gun?

Do we know that MM and RMJr weren't in the car and/or didn't have a gun?

For that matter, if EN reasonably perceived a threat at that moment, firing could be justified. Do we know that when TM got out of the car, she wasn't holding something that perhaps looked like a gun to EN?

 

[SpanishInquisition]

All I can say is defense attorneys would love you.

It clearly says that premeditation can be formed in seconds so even the courts recognize that there doesn't have to be a long drawn out period of reflection and EN had way more time than seconds.

There was plenty of time for EN to reflect once the first shooting had stopped. So he reflected, and deliberately, willfully, and with premeditation continued to hunt for the car and when he and his driver hemmed them in he opened fire completing his full intentions of killing those kids. Didn't he say he couldn't let the MFs get away? Even he knows his intent was to murder them.

BBM;

And I've never disagreed with that it can be formed then and I went out of my way underlining that phrase as well as the rest of the discussion on that word where they went into further elaboration, just in what I think a jury will think as it is up to the jury's discretion as you'll also note in there the jury is to look at the circumstances with perceived gun threat and the undisputed chase that happened seconds prior.

 

[sonjay]

He may have PERCEIVED a threat. He stated that he did. He'd already seen a gun waved at him. At some point, that gun became loaded. The person who loaded that gun (BM) was the passenger in a car hunting for someone who'd offended TM. If this had happened to me, I'd perceive a threat:

<snipped for focus>

I'm pretty sure I'd perceive a threat if someone pulled up behind me in a car and pointed a gun at me, and then chased me, and only backed off when I fired my own gun at them.

Yes, there was a threat earlier — if not an actual threat, one that was certainly reasonable by the "reasonable person" standard.

Then the question becomes, why was EN in the cul de sac, and what did he perceive when he got there?

So far, we have very very little information about that, and what little we have is filtered through Mogg.

EN may well not testify. DA may not either. We may never get satisfactory clarification on those points.

 

[BellaVita]

BBM
~ Legally? in what sense?
~ "when you turn the corner" You have made -
~ a deliberate decision to follow those people .

:cow:

When you turn the corner solely as a function of getting where you want to go next, it is not a deliberate decision to follow someone.

http://www.mynews3.com/media/lib/166/1/8/3/183997e6-0122-44f7-99b5-c23203a0e717/030515Nowsch.pdf

So they turned around and they came
back and he said "I know a left turn, a shortcut to get
to my house," something to that effect. They come back
into the cul-de-sac on Mount Shasta where the victim was
shot. He says as they pull into the cul-de-sac, again
he's sitting in the passenger seat of the vehicle, their
vehicle kind of turns sideways is how he draws it, he
sees the victim's vehicle at the end of the cul-de-sac

The Audi was already in the process of turning around and leaving when the Buick was spotted. IMO.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

He may have PERCEIVED a threat. He stated that he did.

However, amongst the problems of what EN did on Mt Shasta his stated perceived threat was not an immediate threat, but rather a bare threat. Even if a jury concluded a reasonable person could perceive it as a threat, it was not an immediate. If there was an earth-shattering reveal that more than TM/BM had been in the car that may change things, but other that I'm not seeing how EN's actions based on the perceived threat where a jury would see that as meriting acquittal.

 

[BellaVita]

However, amongst the problems of what EN did on Mt Shasta his stated perceived threat was not an immediate threat, but rather a bare threat. Even if a jury concluded a reasonable person could perceive it as a threat, it was not an immediate. If there was an earth-shattering reveal that more than TM/BM had been in the car that may change things, but other that I'm not seeing how EN's actions based on the perceived threat would merit acquittal.

I do not advocate full acquittal unless I see more more.

 

[SeeAlice]

So, do tell, you who seem to have so many of the answers,

Where is the silver Audi?

They have the suspected shooter, the suspected "getaway driver, and both of their cellphone records, so where is this legendary silver sedan - with or without tinted windows?

For that matter, it would be helpful if LE bothered to locate road rager #1 (or road rager #2 or higher if we are to go by Brandon's story) so that he could testify as to Tammy's demeanor and actions. I doubt he would be charged with any crime. It was national news for the 1st week or so. Surely he realized that was the same car and woman and daughter who honked at him and all.

Wait. Who was the one who said "I'm going to kill you & your daughter?" The 1st silver car or the 2nd silver car? I thought that info came from KM originally. Said the driver knew KM was TM's daughter because she was screaming "Mommy! Mommy! Mommy!" the whole time they had their face-to-face encounter with Road Rage Dude.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I do not advocate full acquittal unless I see more more.

For me I would not be shocked if more than TM/BM had been in the car. It sounds like that is what EN said as relayed by Mogg, but Mogg giving hearsay may have said things wrong or the transcriptionist could have typed it wrong. If that was what happened where there was three or four people in the Buick and the Meyers had been lying about that, that could cause permanent fatal errors to the case, but I'm not operating on the assumption that it did happen that way.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

So, do tell, you who seem to have so many of the answers,

Where is the silver Audi?

They have the suspected shooter, the suspected "getaway driver, and both of their cellphone records, so where is this legendary silver sedan - with or without tinted windows?

For that matter, it would be helpful if LE bothered to locate road rager #1 (or road rager #2 or higher if we are to go by Brandon's story) so that he could testify as to Tammy's demeanor and actions. I doubt he would be charged with any crime. It was national news for the 1st week or so. Surely he realized that was the same car and woman and daughter who honked at him and all.

Wait. Who was the one who said "I'm going to kill you & your daughter?" The 1st silver car or the 2nd silver car? I thought that info came from KM originally. Said the driver knew KM was TM's daughter because she was screaming "Mommy! Mommy! Mommy!" the whole time they had their face-to-face encounter with Road Rage Dude.

This is why I wouldn't be surprised of major future revelations and have taken part in speculating on what they could be. If this is to be believed, to paraphrase from OJ Simpson "the real death threater" is still out there on the loose with the Meyers currently in mortal danger from that person.

 

[sonjay]

I do not advocate full acquittal unless I see more more.

I have too much cognitive dissonance about this case.

I too have trouble supporting full acquittal. EN pulled the trigger; he fired the shot that killed TM.

But at the same time, I see the Meyerses as bearing more of the responsibility for what happened than EN does. The Meyerses went out looking for trouble that night; EN took steps to avoid trouble. EN did nothing wrong except as a response to what the Meyerses started.

The jury can't convict EN of 30% of the blame and BM et al for 70%. It doesn't work that way. (Even if BM et al were charged, which they're not.) I get that; I know it doesn't work that way. But I have a lot of trouble with sending EN to prison and letting BM et al off scot free for something that was more their fault than his.

I have a couple of dogs that didn't get along at first. One of them would snap at the other; the other one would ignore it as long as she could, but finally she would defend herself against the first one. She's bigger than the first one, and she could do a lot of damage. She wouldn't start it, but when she was no longer willing to take it, she was ready, willing and able to finish it.

Thing is, I never blamed the second one for being ready to finish it. The first one, the one that started it, was to blame.

The Meyerses are the first dog here. EN is the second. He didn't start it, but he was the one that finished it.

 

[jennapuppy]

<snipped for focus>

Do we know, for sure, that there was no threat to EN when he fired?

Do we know that BM didn't open fire first?

Do we know that TM didn't have a gun?

Do we know that KM wasn't in the car or if she was, that she didn't have a gun?

Do we know that MM and RMJr weren't in the car and/or didn't have a gun?

For that matter, if EN reasonably perceived a threat at that moment, firing could be justified. Do we know that when TM got out of the car, she wasn't holding something that perhaps looked like a gun to EN?

Do we know anything about the trajectory of the bullet that hit TM? Do we know exactly where BM was and what he was doing when the fatal shot was fired? I haven't pored over the documents as thoroughly as others have, but is there definitive proof that EN was aiming directly for the back of TM's head as she fled? Or is it possible that EN was aiming at someone who had a gun pointed at him, and the bullet ricocheted and hit TM?

I am usually a very pro-LE, pro-prosecution type person, but I find it very troubling that the Meyers were the initial aggressors.
JMO

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Do we know anything about the trajectory of the bullet that hit TM? Do we know exactly where BM was and what he was doing when the fatal shot was fired? I haven't pored over the documents as thoroughly as others have, but is there definitive proof that EN was aiming directly for the back of TM's head as she fled? Or is it possible that EN was aiming at someone who had a gun pointed at him, and the bullet ricocheted and hit TM?

We know that it was a perforating wound to the head with a 45 is I believe the extent of what is currently on record.

I am usually a very pro-LE, pro-prosecution type person, but I find it very troubling that the Meyers were the initial aggressors.
JMO

Me too and I'm someone who used to work for LE, my dad is an ex-cop and my mom worked for the DA. This case in particular caught my attention compared to any variety of other cases.

 

[Meddlesome Kid]

Similar here. I used to work in Court also. My sister and cousin also work in the Judicial system. This is a unique case for sure.