Guilty or Innocent?
- Thread starter ReighnStorm
- Start date
poisondartfrog
Registered Member
According to the following article, the handgun was a .40-caliber Beretta. Any thoughts on that gun and/or any known safety issues?
Lake Norman Times
Lake Norman Times
Ahh, it's a semi-automatic and does NOT have an exposed hammer. It can also be "cocked" all the time if a round is in the chamber. If I'm not mistaken, it has three distinct safety features, all of which must be engaged in order to fire. HOwever, part of the safety is NOT holding it in a firiing grip ...the grip is part of one of the safeties.
With this new info, I find it easily possible that it was purely an accident. If she wasn't fully familiar with the gun, she might well have held it "like a gun", in which case, a fall or trip might well have caused her to squeeze the trigger. BOOM! ...and a .40 caliber round is a pretty potent chunk of lead!
Baron Max
With this new info, I find it easily possible that it was purely an accident. If she wasn't fully familiar with the gun, she might well have held it "like a gun", in which case, a fall or trip might well have caused her to squeeze the trigger. BOOM! ...and a .40 caliber round is a pretty potent chunk of lead!
Baron Max
I'd have to agree with Baron Max on this one. It could quite possibly have been an accident, which shows why you shouldn't have guns just lying around the house.
I'll assume that the woman is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa...
I'll assume that the woman is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa...
You know what they say about assumptions!
:bugeye:mountainhare said:
Her story is obvious bullshit, yet you still side with the bitch?
Listen: guns will not go just off like that. Especially hitting him in the head. It's like the JFK magic bullet thing. Impossible.
Someone has to aim and pull the trigger.
She's guilty. Get it through your head.
Hapsburg said:
No one, anywhere, is saying that she did not pull the trigger, Hap! It's a question of how and why she pulled the trigger. But, hey, I can't really expect you to have read and comprehended any of this topic ...it's too far above your level of understanding.
As to "aim" ....I've seen people who aim and hit something several feet from the target. They "aimed", Hap, but hit something ELSE! So "aim" is also not an issue in this topic. But you wouldn't understand that.
Baron Max
Bullet Hitting Husband's Head = Freak Luck That Has Happened Before
Trigger Being Pulled Due To Tightening Grip While Falling = Easily An Accident
Not Knowing How to Handle a Handgun as the Wife of a LEO = Highly Doubtful
Holding Gun in Gripped Firing Position in the First Place With Barrel Pointed Towards a Person While Handing it to Someone = Guilty of Neglect and Unsafe Handling of a Firearm
Even if she is purely innocent and not accused of murder, at the very least, she should be accused of, and serve minor time for, neglect.
For her husband to ask her to hand him his loaded gun shows that she would at least know how to handle a gun or have the common sense of how to hand someone it.
What makes more sense? That her law enforcement officer husband is a moron to ask his wife to hand him a loaded gun without the knowledge to handle a gun, or the crazy coicidence of her slipping and accidentally shooting him in the back of the head? Even this being an accident doesn't protect her from a crime, it just checks murder off the list.
I can still see how she could have handed him the gun in a safe manner but when slipping, her hand twisting the gun into a firing position with her finger slipping through the trigger guard then having her arm whip back causing the gun to point in his direction as she's falling causing her to tighten her grip which results in a pulled trigger, but it's still a highly doubtful yeah right probability in my book (whew, long sentence, heh). We'll just have to wait and see what forensics have to say about it in regards to the bullet tragectory to see if the gun was shot from a fallen position and if so, let's just hope she didn't decide to lie down and shoot him in the back of the head on purpose to help with her excuse.
- N
Trigger Being Pulled Due To Tightening Grip While Falling = Easily An Accident
Not Knowing How to Handle a Handgun as the Wife of a LEO = Highly Doubtful
Holding Gun in Gripped Firing Position in the First Place With Barrel Pointed Towards a Person While Handing it to Someone = Guilty of Neglect and Unsafe Handling of a Firearm
Even if she is purely innocent and not accused of murder, at the very least, she should be accused of, and serve minor time for, neglect.
For her husband to ask her to hand him his loaded gun shows that she would at least know how to handle a gun or have the common sense of how to hand someone it.
What makes more sense? That her law enforcement officer husband is a moron to ask his wife to hand him a loaded gun without the knowledge to handle a gun, or the crazy coicidence of her slipping and accidentally shooting him in the back of the head? Even this being an accident doesn't protect her from a crime, it just checks murder off the list.
I can still see how she could have handed him the gun in a safe manner but when slipping, her hand twisting the gun into a firing position with her finger slipping through the trigger guard then having her arm whip back causing the gun to point in his direction as she's falling causing her to tighten her grip which results in a pulled trigger, but it's still a highly doubtful yeah right probability in my book (whew, long sentence, heh). We'll just have to wait and see what forensics have to say about it in regards to the bullet tragectory to see if the gun was shot from a fallen position and if so, let's just hope she didn't decide to lie down and shoot him in the back of the head on purpose to help with her excuse.
- N
Neildo, I agree with most of what you posted. However, having several friends who are cops, let me add a little to your post, okay?
Many cops' wives don't like guns and don't like to mess with them at all. Others have a healthy respect for guns, but don't like to mess with them. Some have been "trained", but it was years ago. Others are better with guns than their cop husbands!
I would have to agree with this ...EXCEPT ....it might well be that he never let her handle the gun while it was loaded, so she just "assumed" that it wasn't loaded that time, and so was careless. I've seen this type of behavior with many people who are "at ease" around guns ...perhaps familiarity breeds some carelessness?
I disagree. If it was an accident, then it was an accident. Putting her in prison, while many "real criminals" walk free is the epitome of foolishness and, more to the point, does no good for anyone.
Yeah ...why didn't the lazy bastard get up and get it himself?! Most cops I know would NEVER, EVER ask someone, even another cop, to go get his gun and hand it to him! But again, in defense of the situation, most people don't understand that familiarity is not something to dismiss so easily ...when ye're around guns all your life, many people just "assume" that everyone else can handle guns as well as yourself. And isn't that true of many of your talents? If you can fix computers or cars easily, don't you consider it somewhat elementary and wonder why others can do it, too? Same with guns.
Baron Max
Neildo said:
Many cops' wives don't like guns and don't like to mess with them at all. Others have a healthy respect for guns, but don't like to mess with them. Some have been "trained", but it was years ago. Others are better with guns than their cop husbands!
Neildo said:
I would have to agree with this ...EXCEPT ....it might well be that he never let her handle the gun while it was loaded, so she just "assumed" that it wasn't loaded that time, and so was careless. I've seen this type of behavior with many people who are "at ease" around guns ...perhaps familiarity breeds some carelessness?
Neildo said:
I disagree. If it was an accident, then it was an accident. Putting her in prison, while many "real criminals" walk free is the epitome of foolishness and, more to the point, does no good for anyone.
Neildo said:
Yeah ...why didn't the lazy bastard get up and get it himself?! Most cops I know would NEVER, EVER ask someone, even another cop, to go get his gun and hand it to him! But again, in defense of the situation, most people don't understand that familiarity is not something to dismiss so easily ...when ye're around guns all your life, many people just "assume" that everyone else can handle guns as well as yourself. And isn't that true of many of your talents? If you can fix computers or cars easily, don't you consider it somewhat elementary and wonder why others can do it, too? Same with guns.
Baron Max
poisondartfrog
Registered Member
Quiet simply you cannot send someone to jail if you have reasonable doubt.
Motive?
give us one, make one up, there has to be one either way!
Forensic?
What does the crime scene suggest?, what do gun experts consulted say?
Would the angle and distance of fire that is suggested by evidence match up to the dead body and it's wound?
Witnesses: self explanitory, did anyone see through a window, did the neighbours hear any arguments, consult family and friends, make house calls etc to find a history.
If you have nothing except her word, then all you have is reasonable doubt, she is the only witness, forensic may back up what she has to say and if there is no motive, it'll add up to innocent.
Motive?
give us one, make one up, there has to be one either way!
Forensic?
What does the crime scene suggest?, what do gun experts consulted say?
Would the angle and distance of fire that is suggested by evidence match up to the dead body and it's wound?
Witnesses: self explanitory, did anyone see through a window, did the neighbours hear any arguments, consult family and friends, make house calls etc to find a history.
If you have nothing except her word, then all you have is reasonable doubt, she is the only witness, forensic may back up what she has to say and if there is no motive, it'll add up to innocent.
Well I've a couple friends who are cops too, and they let their wives know how to handle a gun in case something ever happened. This is mainly due to if someone who they've arrested finds out where they live and wants to take retribution for being locked up, then they want everyone to know how to defend themselves. It's the same reason why all the smart cops keep a concealed weapon on them in case they bump into someone they've arrested in a public place. The smaller the town, the more important that is.
But yeah, not everyone is the same so they may not do so. I just assumed most do since I hear about it a lot on the 'net from various gun forums and the friends I know and also especially since most families that are around firearms a lot, teach their whole family, even their children, how to handle guns. Ya know, the lil kids in the south that even have their own customized guns and even daughters with their pink ar-15s and wives with their pink or purple sig sauer, heh. Once you're educated about them, you have a greater respect for em and won't touch the things if you don't like em, but will if the rare situation arises.
That's part of the neglect though. The #1 rule in firearms is to treat every gun as if it were loaded. Even as a little kid who grew up not around guns, when I'd have a toy gun, I was always told not to point that at people. Sure, it's not the same thing as a real gun and I'm sure she didn't point the gun at her hubby, but I would hope she would assume to treat every gun as if it were loaded, especially being the wife of a cop. Even if she wasn't trained the simple ways of handling a firearm by her hubby, he should have at least taught her SOME basics like never touch his gun or always treat it as if it were loaded. And if he asked her to bring him his gun without knowing how to handle it, call it neglect on both their parts. And why'd his duty handgun have a mag in it in the first place (assuming it was an accident and not intentional murder) before leaving the house? Either the hubby is pretty stupid for a LEO or the accident is one helluva strange accident that breaks all the various probable steps that could go wrong. Talk about luck, just too bad it wasn't the lottery she hit.
Well for neglect, yeah she shouldn't, but she should have to do an ungodly amount of hours for community service. Bake all of us cookies or something. She's already paid for not having her husband around anymore, as well as grief for any children she may have. However, if she's guilty of murder, fry the biatch.
Heh, yeah, but there's at least some sort of common sense involved. I guess common sense ain't so common anymore. I mean c'mon, it's a gun. She shouldn't have touched it period if she doesn't like or doesn't know how to use guns. If her hubby asked her to hand him his gun, she could have refused. Even if he started cussing her out and said "bitch, gimme my damned gun!", she should have put her foot down, heh.
I still find it highly unlikely though that she doesn't have the common sense involved to safely hold a gun. Not only that, but how many years was her hubby a cop and how many years did he have to do a quick lil few step lesson on how to handle a gun could he have said to her? Heck, even an "eww, get this thing away from me" type attitude where she picks the gun up by the tip with only her thumb and index finger and holding it out at arms length as the weight of the gun points the barrel downwards would have been a good enough way to give him the gun. Hopefully for those that don't know how to handle a gun, they all learn from this case or anyone else reading this thread. If you don't know how to handle a gun, don't touch the damn thing and assume all guns are loaded.
- N
Who said that he asked her to hand it to him? Looks like another assumption.
This is a moot point if the wife's story is changing, but no coverage of her original story says that the man asked her to hand him the gun.
Public opinion discussions of these things (encouraged by the media) sucks. I think the world would be a better place if people just let the police do their work, and allowed those with the facts to make the judgements.
Until our opinions actually affect the outcome of a trial, we'll all continue to happily gossip and speculate away about cases. We're not judging her so it's all good. It's more like philosophizing about what could and couldn't happen. If ya don't wanna hear about it, don't read it.
And that's exactly what I mean. I didn't just say he asked her to hand it to him. I've given numerous various examples of what COULD have happened to either show she's guilty of murder, guilty of neglect, or it was an accident. There's various possibilities of what could have happened and that's what we're discussing.
Am I the only one who finds speculation and other types of critical thinking fun? Let's hear the various situations you think could have happened.. without judging her.
- N
devils_reject
Registered Senior Member
guilty as the feeling of preteen masturbation
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!
She is charged with guilt. My gut feeling and all information discussed above about the gun going off by accident, I knew was bullshitt. :bugeye: That's why I posted the thread.
http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=104046
"She intentionally pulled the trigger and shot her husband."
She is charged with guilt. My gut feeling and all information discussed above about the gun going off by accident, I knew was bullshitt. :bugeye: That's why I posted the thread.
http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=104046
"She intentionally pulled the trigger and shot her husband."
You "knew" it! You "knew" it! ???? Don't take much to convince you of things, does it? ..LOL!
Reighn, being charged with a crime is NOT the same as being convicted of that crime! Strangely, I think that's what the courts and attorneys are for ....although I ain't so sure about the blood-suckin', scum-bag attorneys!
We had a similar case here in Texas a few years ago and the woman "confessed" that she wanted to kill her husband ...and did! But since people can't confess to murder, she was actually found not guilty of the crime! Her attorney showed "conclusively" that, even tho she wanted to kill him, the actual event was, or could have been, an accident. She walked out a free woman! ...and with no scum-bag of a husband to bother her any more! ...LOL!
Baron Max
Reighn, being charged with a crime is NOT the same as being convicted of that crime! Strangely, I think that's what the courts and attorneys are for ....although I ain't so sure about the blood-suckin', scum-bag attorneys!
We had a similar case here in Texas a few years ago and the woman "confessed" that she wanted to kill her husband ...and did! But since people can't confess to murder, she was actually found not guilty of the crime! Her attorney showed "conclusively" that, even tho she wanted to kill him, the actual event was, or could have been, an accident. She walked out a free woman! ...and with no scum-bag of a husband to bother her any more! ...LOL!
Baron Max
Being convicted and being guilty aren't the same thing. The guilt is what I know she had from the beginning.
Bells
Staff member
Guns can and do go off "just like that" and in many instances people do die or suffer serious injuries as a result.Hapsburg said:
-----------------------------------------------------------
She has only been charged with his murder. Whether she is found guilty in a court of law is another thing altogether. You might be crying 'guilty guilty guilty', but do you know why she did it? What were her motives for shooting her husband in the back of the head? That's the thing with cases such as these... domestic cases always have reasons behind them that could swing the trial either way. Believe me, I've been involved in many cases involving domestic abuse and sometimes you think it's a definite conviction and the individual is not, and vice versa.ReighnStorm said:
While the article you posted states that there is no documented cases of abuse in the marriage, that could simply be because she never reported it... after all, he was a police officer and if she were to report any abuse, she would be doing so to his co-workers. So she has admitted to pulling the trigger. But is she really guilty? Only time and the trial will tell I guess. She might be guilty of pulling the trigger, but she might be found innocent of any crime due to the circumstances surrounding her pulling said trigger. Remember, this is a domestic case and nothing is ever as it seems in these types of cases...