GUILTY NV - Tammy Meyers, 44, fatally shot at her Las Vegas home, 12 Feb 2015 - #5

[al66pine]

Rarely reply by quoting post I agree w, but SpanInq's post bears repeating.

....where the DA could have washed their hands of this by saying that they don't condone the actions of anyone that night, but there wouldn't be enough evidence to get a conviction (which may well be true). The Meyers and the Audi passengers basically mirrored one another in their actions, which greatly complicates prosecution. Until there's more and better evidence against EN or the charges against EN are switched to something less than 1st degree murder, all I'm seeing is a needless huge waste of money or the main charge dismissed.

sbm bbm

Classic case of he said- she said and some inconclusive or contradictory physical evd.,
very little (or virtually no) incontrovertible physical evd supporting one version or the other,
aside from the fact of TM's death. Or supporting the various multiple versions, other than ^.
Unless LE has collected or will collect much more than most of us suspect ATM, imo, jmo, moo, it's doomed.

ETA: But I'll keep ketchup handy, in case down the road, I need to eat my hat.

 

[Gin]

Do you mean the M family accepting EN getting a plea deal? I don't believe they have a say in a criminal matter.

Civil court is entirely different, but I can't imagine M's ever pursing a civil lawsuit because they wouldn't want to air their dirty laundry. This is one murder case that wouldn't have a chance in civil court anyway because the M's participated in events.

JMO-Do the M's have a say in encouraging a deal? Maybe...It wouldn't surprise me if one or more make it clear that they may take the 5th. I'm not convinced any of them would fare particularly well on the witness stand.
I also think that LV residents would sort of get this is an unusual case if it goes that way. That is a town where they've seen a lot of folks have social issues/struggles of some sort or another. It's possible a number of folks involved with this case may have complicating "issues", IDK.

And I agree on your take about civil. If they sue, they have to testify and be cross examined.....

 

[Miss Muffet]

Consider the insanity of this. Usually weak murder cases stand a better chance in civil court. This one stands a better chance in criminal court but wouldn't stand a chance in civil court. That alone is an indication the likelihood of a criminal conviction is extremely low in this case. Maybe there's more evidence than we know, but so far this is one crazy case.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I don't think the Meyers would sue as EN doesn't really have any money AFAIK, but if the Meyers sued after a conviction or plea, the Meyers would win by default as long as they're suing over the exact thing that's been criminally adjudicated:
https://erbelaw.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/effects-of-criminal-conviction-on-later-civil-action/

 

[PaperDoll]

bbm

Yes, Audi - the car - followed Buick.
Prosecutor faces challenge: Showing intent of who to follow?
What evd does prosecutor put on, to show intent to follow.
Will anyone in Audi speak or be a witness for the state?
Driver? Other passenger(s)? All? None ?
Will driver or passenger be a witness for state? IDK, doubtful, imo,
ETA: UNLESS they are located and want to arrange quid pro quo,
i.e., testifying against EN in exchange for leniency on some other criminal charges
already pending, or perhaps something they do between shooting and time of interview and trial.

Does def team argue -- EN did not want to follow Buick, but driver did so independently? IDK
ETA: Does def argue -- EN did not want to follow Buick, but another passenger persuaded driver? IDK
I think, to do either of above, that def team must put on the driver or other passenger.
Will driver or passenger(s) be a witness for defense? IDK, doubt it.

Well one thing the prosecutor has is the 1st shooting scene, there were bullets found there that didn't match BM's gun, and the bullets that were found at the actual crime scene were also found that match the 1st shooting, then BM fired 3 or 4 shots at from his home. So, to me that shows that EN was the first to shoot. Buick fled the scene and Audi pursued. EN said no bullets were fired at him so that is a strike IMO...

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Another area challenging the A and K hearsay is the much-publicized 22 rounds he supposedly fired at Mt Shasta, which is highly suspect. The largest sized clip you'd tend to find on a 45 is 13 rounds, which perhaps not coincidentally is the exact number of 45 rounds that were found at the two crime scenes and there's no ear-witness that I'm aware of who has said they heard dozens of rounds fired. Given how EN is alleged to have fired with his hand/body out the window where even if he used a gangster grip only a few rounds would land inside the Audi rather than on the street. If the DA insists that A and K heard and remembered everything correctly so what they testify to must be considered credible, EN's defense would say that must mean that the crime scene had been compromised before CSI got there (a whole can of worms there) while still also being able to challenge the credibility of A and K. The most likely scenario I believe is that EN used half a clip the first time when the Audi was chased and finished the clip at Mt Shasta, which also more closely matches with the ear-witness.

My WAG on what actually happened there based on the three round burst followed by the longer burst was that BM fired first when the Audi was first arriving then EN started shooting and BM retreated, which who fired first in truth might not make a difference as far as what is actually argued and accepted in court and even if BM did fire first that can very well have been reasonable self-defense.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Instead of doubting the credibility of A & K regarding the 22 rounds, I think the jurors would view it as EN bragging and exaggerating when he was telling his story to his friends. Much of his story sounds like bragging, not remorse, that first night when talking to A & K.

 

[jayme1133]

Do you mean the M family accepting EN getting a plea deal? I don't believe they have a say in a criminal matter.

No, I meant criminally - I don't think they will make the final decision but they will have an input, no??

I'll have to catch up after dinner...see all soon!

 

[Miss Muffet]

No, I meant criminally - I don't think they will make the final decision but they will have an input, no??

Victims' families have no say in plea deals for accused in criminal cases. Prosecutors don't even need to consult them. Plea deals can be made without families finding out until after the deal is done. Of course, many DA's will at least notify the families a deal has been made before publicly announcing it, but there's no requirement to even extend that courtesy. The DA isn't the attorney for the victim's family. The DA is the attorney for the state and makes decisions on what's best for the state's case. As a result, input and opinions from victims' families are not sought by DA's regarding plea deals.

 

[sonjay]

I agree that the DA will probably not charge BM with anything. But I do think BM's actions might affect the court case and giver EN some 'reasonable doubt' issues , potentially.

I agree. I don't see the DA charging BM with anything.

And I think EN has lots of reasonable doubt issues as well lots of self defense issues. Assuming they entertain a plea bargain on the charges against EN, I think the Claus brothers will be negotiating from a position of strength.

 

[blue22]

Victims' families have no say in plea deals for accused in criminal cases. Prosecutors don't even need to consult them. Plea deals can be made without families finding out until after the deal is done. Of course, many DA's will at least notify the families a deal has been made before publicly announcing it, but there's no requirement to even extend that courtesy. The DA isn't the attorney for the victim's family. The DA is the attorney for the state and makes decisions on what's best for the state's case. As a result, input and opinions from victims' families are not sought by DA's regarding plea deals.

That's not true, at all. DA's can and do seek input from families. This is not an unusual thing! With that said, I think it's more often in very gruesome cases or cases involving children. There have been several cases here involving a murdered child or teenager and the DA sought input from the family on whether to seek the death penalty or plea to life without parole.

 

[Miss Muffet]

That's not true, at all. DA's can and do seek input from families. This is not an unusual thing! With that said, I think it's more often in very gruesome cases or cases involving children. There have been several cases here involving a murdered child or teenager and the DA sought input from the family on whether to seek the death penalty or plea to life without parole.

True. Those DA's are simply making a consideration by choice and compassion. The families have no rights to a DA doing so. I'm simply conveying that---it's not a right and can't be expected.

In this particular case, I think it's very unlikely the DA would consult the family considering the family is the very reason this case is difficult to prosecute. This family's actions and constant changing stories are one of the main reasons the DA may be put in a position of having to consider offering a plea deal to the defendant.

 

[SStarr33]

That's one of the things Claus is asking for:"Clause said he wants to remove obstacles to getting information such as the 911 recordings and the toxicology report on Tammy Meyers, whom Nowsch is accused of shooting."
http://www.mynews3.com/mostpopular/...as-shooting-court/_jV9b32rDEClYg3j6KyFYA.cspx

Defense attorneys always complain about getting info. This has happened in every single case I have ever seen

 

[sonjay]

Classic case of he said- she said

I've got some he said-she said for you.

I have to go back for a moment to the one-trip/two-trip theory, and whether there were any driving lessons or road rage.

Something struck me today: KM described essentially the same trip as BM. All of the key events in the narratives of BM & EN correspond to a matching key event in KM's narrative.

KM	BM
Green car went to school for driving lesson — EN saw Buick at school	Green car went to school to look for EN — EN saw Buick at school
Near collision, green car honked at silver car — this set off the chase and shooting	Green car brandished or pointed gun at silver car — this set off the chase and shooting
Silver car chased green car	Green car chased silver car
Silver car stopped diagonally in front of green car and blocked its path	Silver car stopped diagonally in front of green car and blocked its path
Silver car driver got out and threatened green car	Silver car passenger shot at green car
Green car fled back to cul de sac	Green car fled back to cul de sac
Silver car followed followed and began shooting	Silver car followed and began shooting
BM came out of house & returned fire	BM got out of car returned fire
Silver car left	Silver car left

More than ever, I'm convinced there were no driving lessons and there was no road rage that night. That story was completely made up to cover up what BM did.

This also convinced me that both KM and BM were in the car for that fateful trip. When they saw their mother lying there shot and knew the police were going to be there any minute, they quick-quick put their heads together and morphed the entire trip into a driving lesson followed by road rage, with Brandon at home except for returning fire at the very end. But the only way these two stories could or would match so closely would be if KM actually experienced the same trip BM did.

In retrospect, KM did an admirable job of morphing all of the key events into something that made the Meyers appear to be innocent victims. But she couldn't pull herself totally away from the truth; her description of the driving lesson/road rage had something happening at each of the key points in BM's narrative.

 

[newone]

okay so far there's an indictment for EN but when is next court date - do we know that yet?

 

[sonjay]

okay so far there's an indictment for EN but when is next court date - do we know that yet?

Arraignment March 12.

 

[al66pine]

Well one thing the prosecutor has is the 1st shooting scene, there were bullets found there that didn't match BM's gun, and the bullets that were found at the actual crime scene were also found that match the 1st shooting, then BM fired 3 or 4 shots at from his home. So, to me that shows that EN was the first to shoot. Buick fled the scene and Audi pursued. EN said no bullets were fired at him so that is a strike IMO...

If def team would be successful in preventing prosecutor from intro'ing EN's interviews/interrogations
(remember kerfluffle about EN asking & purportedly getting high before surrendering to LE?),
seems like prosecutor's arsenal of evd for trial would be seriously depleted.

Combine w series of evolving stmts from M fam who were there that night.

Stir in (potential?) def witnesses who materialize to confirm EN was at late-shift choir practice that night
after an evening volunteering w Boy Scouts on KP duty before, during, and after dinner at the local soup kitchen.

If Audi driver and/or other passenger(s) are not located or refuse to testify,
what does prosecutor have besides a death, handful of shell casings, & M fam's v.1, v.2, v.3, etc?

Has EN's gun been located, taken into LE possession? Could that be suppressed?

Perhaps LE & prosecutor have much more in hand than I can imagine, and my cynicism may be ill founded. IDK. Quite early in the proceedings.

 

[sonjay]

If def team would be successful in preventing prosecutor from intro'ing EN's interviews/interrogations
(remember kerfluffle about EN asking & purportedly getting high before surrendering to LE?),
seems like prosecutor's arsenal of evd for trial would be seriously depleted.

Combine w series of evolving stmts from M fam who were there that night.

Stir in (potential?) def witnesses who materialize to confirm EN was at late-shift choir practice that night
after an evening volunteering w Boy Scouts on KP duty before, during, and after dinner at the local soup kitchen.

If Audi driver and/or other passenger(s) are not located or refuse to testify,
what does prosecutor have besides a death, handful of shell casings, & M fam's v.1, v.2, v.3, etc?

Has EN's gun been located, taken into LE possession? Could that be suppressed?

Perhaps LE & prosecutor have much more in hand than I can imagine, and my cynicism may be ill founded. IDK. Quite early in the proceedings.

I would guess the Meyerses will be pretty close to worthless as witnesses. Defense attorneys will eat them alive. Their stories will completely break down under cross.

I would also guess the police have a lot more evidence than what we're aware of.

- Surveillance video from school and possibly from other homes in the area showing the cars in question, their locations, direction of travel, timestamps, who was chasing who
- GSR tests (hopefully, on all of them)
- EN's gun, along with ballistics
- BM's gun, along with ballistics
- any other guns at the scene, in the cars, in the home, along with ballistics
- Exact locations of where everything was found
- Earwitnesses who heard gunshots, tires screeching, etc.
- Eyewitnesses - dog walkers, trash putter-outers, nosey neighbors, other motorists
- What else might they have??

Whatever evidence they have, it might or might not prove anything beyond the fact that EN shot the bullet that killed Mrs. M.

I have trouble seeing this end in anything more than some form of manslaughter, and I think EN does have a good case for self-defense. He had already tried to flee; BM's statement in the arrest affidavit shows that, and if BM tries to say differently in court, that statement will be used to impeach his credibility. If you're attacked by people who live about a minute's walking distance from you, and you've already tried to flee, you just might be committing self-defense when you turn the tables and counter-attack.

 

[sonjay]

And oh heck..... What if EN claims that he was actually attempting to go home after the green car turned and fled, but he and his Audi-driving buddy were simply checking out the immediate neighborhood to see if the green car was truly gone before EN went home? And that when they turned into the cul de sac as part of that checking, BM immediately opened fire on him? And oh heck, what if that's true?

 

[KaaBoom]

That's not true, at all. DA's can and do seek input from families. This is not an unusual thing! With that said, I think it's more often in very gruesome cases or cases involving children. There have been several cases here involving a murdered child or teenager and the DA sought input from the family on whether to seek the death penalty or plea to life without parole.

The question was do the victim's family have input into the DA's decision to make a plea agreement? The answer is absolutely, positively, no. The victim or their family do not have a say in that decision. The decision is 100% up to the DA, and the DA alone. The DA doesn't even have an obligation to tell the victims family about his decision. Should he consult with the family? Yeah probably, because if he doesn't, the family might complain to the news media. Which could make him look like a weak prosecutor, and would not be good for his career, but it's still his decision.

As for the cases you mention above, I think you would find way more cases where the victim's family is not happy with the DA's decision to accept a plea-bargan. But they don't have a say in that.