GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #7

[PaperDoll]

I personally can not go by the CCTV of the car because it's hard to make out, it could be a car that has nothing to do with this event. We have no license plate number, no visual of who's in the car, hard to make out what make of car, etc... The time stamp on the video could be off a hour, so I have a feeling this video will not be allowed in court. JMO!

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I personally can not go by the CCTV of the car because it's hard to make out, it could be a car that has nothing to do with this event. We have no license plate number, no visual of who's in the car, hard to make out what make of car, etc... The time stamp on the video could be off a hour, so I have a feeling this video will not be allowed in court. JMO!

That would be exactly why it would be used by the defense as that car has been IDed by LE as the car that did the shooting and if it isn't that would be evidence that the police bungled their investigation. If this video wasn't part of the LE investigation, but just a random video posted by someone on the internet that would be one thing, but since this is part of the police investigation it is subject to cross-examination as to how the police conducted their investigation of the night of the events. Mogg is going to have to explain what he did or did not find out about it, like if he didn't attempt to verify if there was someone driving by EN's house and neighborhood shining a spotlight there an hour before this happened. If LE after concluding that was the car then changed their mind, that too would come out, but as of now officially that video identifies the shooter per LE and that egg can't just be uncooked.

 

[sonjay]

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/ktnv/ne...pects-in-Tammy-Meyers-shooting-298383601.html

"The defense attorneys also argued the victim, Tammy Meyers, played a role in her own death by leaving her home with her armed son the night of the shooting to seek out the man prosecutors say she had a road rage altercation with earlier in the night.


They said Nowsch and Andrews both had traumatic childhoods as well, potentially creating mental issues, since each lost their father to suicide at a young age and Nowsch also has a documented history of being abused as a child.


They also made an argument for state of mind, saying Nowsch, the accused trigger man, had been receiving threats before the shooting."

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/ktnv/ne...death-penalty-hearing-decision-298414471.html

"As a mother of four who served as a parent for many of the neighborhood children, Tammy Meyers was adamantly opposed to the death penalty, so it is the belief of the Meyers family that opting not to pursue the death penalty in this case honors Tammy's memory. Therefore, we support the prosecution's decision at this stage of the case."

Meyers family attorney released a public statement but is not identified by name. Weird.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/ktnv/ne...pects-in-Tammy-Meyers-shooting-298383601.html

"The defense attorneys also argued the victim, Tammy Meyers, played a role in her own death by leaving her home with her armed son the night of the shooting to seek out the man prosecutors say she had a road rage altercation with earlier in the night.


They said Nowsch and Andrews both had traumatic childhoods as well, potentially creating mental issues, since each lost their father to suicide at a young age and Nowsch also has a documented history of being abused as a child.


They also made an argument for state of mind, saying Nowsch, the accused trigger man, had been receiving threats before the shooting."

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/ktnv/ne...death-penalty-hearing-decision-298414471.html

"As a mother of four who served as a parent for many of the neighborhood children, Tammy Meyers was adamantly opposed to the death penalty, so it is the belief of the Meyers family that opting not to pursue the death penalty in this case honors Tammy's memory. Therefore, we support the prosecution's decision at this stage of the case."

Meyers family attorney released a public statement but is not identified by name. Weird.

This is something new about Andrews: "They said Nowsch and Andrews both had traumatic childhoods as well, potentially creating mental issues, since each lost their father to suicide at a young age and Nowsch also has a documented history of being abused as a child."

 

[SStarr33]

This is something new about Andrews: "They said Nowsch and Andrews both had traumatic childhoods as well, potentially creating mental issues, since each lost their father to suicide at a young age and Nowsch also has a documented history of being abused as a child."

Fine. Lock them up for life in the funny farm.

 

[Deleted member 50844]

Fine. Lock them up for life in the funny farm.

Someone close to me had a traumatic childhood, followed by combat duty in the war. He doesn't need to be locked up in the 'funny farm' but I can pretty much guarantee that if two people were hunting him down and chasing him around with a gun, things wouldn't end well. He does fine going about his daily business and even in stressful situations but being chased on the road with a gun would push him over the edge, as it may well do with people without a history of abuse and trauma.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Fine. Lock them up for life in the funny farm.

I don't see how an insanity defense would work here for either of them or that it is even being attempted, but I just found it interesting that both their dads committed suicide when they were kids, like if that had anything to do with them being friends. We know he was at least called if not the actual driver, so that makes me wonder why. Andrews doesn't exactly scream out mob life or that he's even a poser gangster, so I'm curious as to why EN would contact him the first place and if having a similar childhood is why Andrews was on EN's short list.

 

[SeeAlice]

I have screenshots saved of the car after the accident from one of the earlier videos. I circled where the very small section of moulding is missing.

LE should have been able to find the missing moulding somewhere along Cimarron if it happened as KM said it did IMO. But it would have had to have been some fancy driving to knock off a tiny section of moulding while dangerously sideswiping a car and not leave any other marks elsewhere. Again, IMO.

(I did wonder briefly if someone would claim EN shot the dang piece off. Would make a little more sense.)

 

[PaperDoll]

That would be exactly why it would be used by the defense as that car has been IDed by LE as the car that did the shooting and if it isn't that would be evidence that the police bungled their investigation. If this video wasn't part of the LE investigation, but just a random video posted by someone on the internet that would be one thing, but since this is part of the police investigation it is subject to cross-examination as to how the police conducted their investigation of the night of the events. Mogg is going to have to explain what he did or did not find out about it, like if he didn't attempt to verify if there was someone driving by EN's house and neighborhood shining a spotlight there an hour before this happened. If LE after concluding that was the car then changed their mind, that too would come out, but as of now officially that video identifies the shooter per LE and that egg can't just be uncooked.

Where does it say the car is ID by LE? I can see where they would investigate the video though but it would be hard, IMO, to claim as a fact that is the car that was involved in the shooting whether it be the Audi or Buick... :crazy:

 

[SeeAlice]

That would be exactly why it would be used by the defense as that car has been IDed by LE as the car that did the shooting and if it isn't that would be evidence that the police bungled their investigation. If this video wasn't part of the LE investigation, but just a random video posted by someone on the internet that would be one thing, but since this is part of the police investigation it is subject to cross-examination as to how the police conducted their investigation of the night of the events. Mogg is going to have to explain what he did or did not find out about it, like if he didn't attempt to verify if there was someone driving by EN's house and neighborhood shining a spotlight there an hour before this happened. If LE after concluding that was the car then changed their mind, that too would come out, but as of now officially that video identifies the shooter per LE and that egg can't just be uncooked.

I never could put that video into context from the very 1st day it was released.

 

[SeeAlice]

Where does it say the car is ID by LE? I can see where they would investigate the video though but it would be hard, IMO, to claim as a fact that is the car that was involved in the shooting whether it be the Audi or Buick... :crazy:

I, too, wondered if it was something RM turned up and handed over to media. For some reason, I got the impression later that it was LVMPD who released it as part of the investigation. (But media has been known to publish things that they haven't fact-checked, esp if it comes from a victim's family member or a supposedly "reliable source.")

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Where does it say the car is ID by LE? I can see where they would investigate the video though but it would be hard, IMO, to claim as a fact that is the car that was involved in the shooting whether it be the Audi or Buick... :crazy:

This is about the police releasing the footage where LE themselves tie the footage they released to the car involved in the shooting:
http://ktla.com/2015/02/16/mother-of-4-fatally-shot-in-follow-home-road-rage-incident-in-las-vegas/
Now that the police have tied that video that they released to the shooter, they're stuck with it either way...and if they're wrong on the footage and it's an hour off showing someone else totally unrelated to this, that would be devastating to the credibility of the LE investigation into the case. Either way it has to be explained since the video is part of the official documentation into the case - if they continue to own it, they have to explain it with how it ties into everyone's movements that night and if they disown it then that would be a whole big can of worms with other people shinning a spotlight around EN's home prior to him being chased.

 

[sonjay]

Where does it say the car is ID by LE? I can see where they would investigate the video though but it would be hard, IMO, to claim as a fact that is the car that was involved in the shooting whether it be the Audi or Buick... :crazy:

http://www.lvmpd.com/Portals/0/news/2015/021415ReleasePO036a.pdf

On the website, they didn't actually include the video, but I believe they would have attached the video when sending out the release to the local media.

Next to last paragraph:

"A composite sketch of the individual described above, and a video clip of the vehicle driving through a residential area are attached to this updated release."

They didn't even hedge and say "a video clip of a vehicle that is believed to be the one involved in the shooting," or something like that. They said it straight up: "a video clip of the vehicle driving through a residential area."

 

[SeeAlice]

Think the DA is just going through the motions here?

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I never could put that video into context from the very 1st day it was released.

The CCTV footage was shot by the intersection of Cherry River and Carmel Peak meaning at some point - 11:22 PM per the time listed - the car that EN is alleged to have been in was going eastbound on Cherry River and turning south on Carmel Peak after having driven by his house. If they wanted to go after the Buick this was the long way of going instead of just doing a U-turn on Alta and going north on Carmel Peak, but that route isn't possible unless the time stamp is wrong and someone was searching around EN's home at 10:22 PM and not the one LE fingered as the shooter.

 

[sonjay]

The CCTV footage was shot by the intersection of Cherry River and Carmel Peak meaning at some point - 11:22 PM per the time listed - the car that EN is alleged to have been in was going eastbound on Cherry River and turning south on Carmel Peak after having driven by his house. If they wanted to go after the Buick this was the long way of going instead of just doing a U-turn on Alta and going north on Carmel Peak, but that route isn't possible unless the time stamp is wrong and someone was searching around EN's home at 10:22 PM and not the one LE fingered as the shooter.

I gave up trying to figure out the car footage. Based on BM's testimony as well as Mogg's testimony about what EN said, it sure seems like the Audi should have gone north on Carmel Peak from Alta, then turned onto Mt. Shasta. If the Audi did anything other than that, then the Buick should have arrived home in plenty of time for BM & TM to get inside the house before the silver car arrived on Mt. Shasta. The timestamp of 11:22 just doesn't work for that car to be the car.

If it wasn't the car, or if it was the car but the timestamp is off (either by an hour, or by some random amount), then what's it doing driving by EN's house shining a spotlight or flashlight into front yards as it passes by?

Maybe that car was the spiky-haired dude, still driving around looking for TM & KM! Or was there yet a third silver car in the vicinity that night?

 

[SeeAlice]

I gave up trying to figure out the car footage. Based on BM's testimony as well as Mogg's testimony about what EN said, it sure seems like the Audi should have gone north on Carmel Peak from Alta, then turned onto Mt. Shasta. If the Audi did anything other than that, then the Buick should have arrived home in plenty of time for BM & TM to get inside the house before the silver car arrived on Mt. Shasta. The timestamp of 11:22 just doesn't work for that car to be the car.

If it wasn't the car, or if it was the car but the timestamp is off (either by an hour, or by some random amount), then what's it doing driving by EN's house shining a spotlight or flashlight into front yards as it passes by?

Maybe that car was the spiky-haired dude, still driving around looking for TM & KM! Or was there yet a third silver car in the vicinity that night?

Silver cars shall henceforth be these to me:

:ufo: :ufo: :ufo:

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I gave up trying to figure out the car footage. Based on BM's testimony as well as Mogg's testimony about what EN said, it sure seems like the Audi should have gone north on Carmel Peak from Alta, then turned onto Mt. Shasta. If the Audi did anything other than that, then the Buick should have arrived home in plenty of time for BM & TM to get inside the house before the silver car arrived on Mt. Shasta. The timestamp of 11:22 just doesn't work for that car to be the car.

If it wasn't the car, or if it was the car but the timestamp is off (either by an hour, or by some random amount), then what's it doing driving by EN's house shining a spotlight or flashlight into front yards as it passes by?

Maybe that car was the spiky-haired dude, still driving around looking for TM & KM! Or was there yet a third silver car in the vicinity that night?

EN's confession rather than Mogg's interpretation of what EN meant makes sense. Mogg testified that EN gave directions for how to get home, but then Mogg just seems to ignore what EN allegedly said. If Andrews did a U-turn on Alta somewhere past Cimarron and then went north on Cimarron (that would be the left turn shortcut EN referred to) and then went eastbound Cherry River he'd drive by his house and that explains the spotlight search around his house that his primary concern was his home rather than going after the Buick. This also to me raises serious questions as to what the Meyers were doing as there's considerable time difference between the Meyers going straight home from Cherry River and the Audi doing a U-turn, going up Cimarron, turning right on Cherry River, turning right on Carmel Peak and then finally arriving on Mt Shasta. With 20 seconds they both should have been inside with the door locked and the cops on their way unless TM was actually doing what she did 10-20 minutes before in going home to arm up rather than retreat. I've timed myself with 20 seconds from a closed driver's door inside my garage and I literally ran out of space to run before the time ran out. I'd encourage people to test for themselves how much time they think the Meyers had and how much distance could be covered in that time.

Alternatively if it was 10:22 PM, then who the heck was shining a spotlight around EN's home that drove down towards the Meyers? Unless the timeline is way off, it couldn't have been the alleged road rager that KM saw drive by on Carmel Peak as that didn't supposedly happen until at least a half hour later. At 10:22 PM the Buick was supposed to be somewhere around the school with EN in the park at this time.

 

[PaperDoll]

I personally believe, and I'm sounding like a broken record here, the Audi made the U-turn on Alta, then went on Carmel Peak to Mt. Shasta. I believe they saw the Buick turning on Mt. Shasta and they went after it. When the Buick was being shot at at the 1st shooting, they backed up and headed home taking Cherry River to Carmel Peak then to Mt. Shasta, there wasn't much time, IMO, to get out of the car and head inside. I do not believe that the Meyers dilly dallied around after they were shot at, I believe they headed straight home and fast. I also believe the Audi drove fast as well. JMO!

 

[SeeAlice]

Dadgummit. Don't make me go look at a map! I will surely lose my mind.

:loveyou: