Okay that’s your version and if true that will be shown at trial.
As for me my experience in law tells me to believe no one especially if certain elements vary in the telling, or there is motive, or logic demands examination of those presented facts. And THAT is what we are discussing.
I would never wish injury upon anyone but the fact that you were so traumatized and injured doesn’t negate my right to discuss the case in a forum designed for that very thing.
Hahah. Ok, that’s all I needed to know! If anyone is going by YOUR “experience in law,” I’ll quote Sheriff Rottingham from “Men in Tights.”
“You’re in an awful lot of trouble!”
Yes I admit my experience with the law is vastly different from yours.
I don’t know if the dog is relevant or irrelevant, but there’s a fair chance this is the dog, images of which LK posted on her Insta and one of which is tagged with “barisonedressage”, so I’m guessing that means it was on the property with her whilst she was training there. It seems to be a german shepherd, doberman, dachshund mix from the owner’s descriptions.
I don’t see the “dachshund” part.
Well, this thread will be closed shortly. Great job guys. The same few posters come in and get it done! Bravo.
I have no idea why people come in here just to be petty, insulting, profane (as in swearing), and belligerent.
There was a discussion earlier in the thread and none of the questions have been answered, still. While it doesn’t relate to this particular case featured in the OP, it does relate to the events that transpired; I still don’t understand the gun jamming statement, number of bullets, or how the police officer did or didn’t secure and address the crime scene upon arrival…or what he was supposed to do (I’m not super familiar with LEO procedures in relation to this). These are purely questions about details, nothing personal, and I’d have the same questions regardless of names involved.
Perhaps those matters are too boring to discuss, and absurd insults (I don’t know, it really gets odd sometimes) is where it’s at?
At this point, I don’t care what the dog is, or really, about the dog, but that is a cute mix.
I love Gerry Spence. I have not seen him “punditing” on TV for quite a while, but he is in his 90’s and semi-retired per an article I just found. He was famous for getting a $10,500,000 verdict in the Karen Silkwood case (remember the movie “Silkwood” with Meryl Streep, Cher and Kurt Russell?) fighting on behalf of her children against Kerr-McGee. I will definitely try one of his books.
@Equkelly, just a FYI, the moderation staff here does not read threads unless they are flagged or tagged in them. So if no one asks moderation to read the thread then moderation will not have to read the thread.
@La-LaPopRider, your dog is freaking adorable!
No clue how the police officer considered that a small dog, but it sure is adorable no matter what size it was described as.
In the top photo. Notice the dog is on a ground leash and standing on the stairs that appear to be the location of the crime scene.
https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/forensics/Crime-Scene-Investigation.pdf
Section A
4. Secure and Control Persons at the Scene
Principle: Controlling, identifying and removing persons at the crime scene, and limiting the number of persons who enter the crime
www.nfstc.org
A. Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/Prioritization of Efforts | 3
www.nfstc.org
A. Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/Prioritization of Efforts | 4
CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION
A Guide for Law Enforcement
scene and the movement of such persons is an important function of the initial responding officer(s) in protecting the crime scene.
Policy: The initial responding officer(s) shall identify persons at the crime scene and control their movement.
Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:
a. Control all individuals at the scene—prevent individuals from altering/destroying physical evidence by restricting movement, location and activity while ensuring and maintaining safety at the scene.
b. Identify all individuals at the scene, such as:
• Suspects: Secure and separate.
• Witnesses: Secure and separate.
• Bystanders: Determine whether witness, if so treat as
above; if not, remove from the scene.
• Victims/family/friends: Control while showing
compassion.
• Law Enforcement, Medical and other assisting personnel.
c. Exclude unauthorized and nonessential personnel from the scene (e.g., law enforcement officials not working the case, politicians, media).
Summary: Controlling the movement of persons at the crime scene and limiting the number of persons who enter the crime scene is essential to maintaining scene integrity, safeguarding evidence and minimizing contamination.
Oh, it can be hiding there in the mix. Plus people often forget that standard dachshunds weigh between 16 - 32 pounds and stand around 9 inches at the shoulder. They’re versatile hunting dogs as well as rulers of the couch and under the end tables.
The gun jamming statements are one of the myriad subtle deviations from the general narrative. It has never been mentioned here by LK in her narrative that the gun jammed. It was presented as a “here’s what happened” narrative in another SM platform. But a jammed gun is interesting because you usually can’t fire the weapon until it is cleared. That takes time, which is a struggle in a fist fight, especially if you aren’t familiar with how to do it.
In the general narrative, the first two bullets go into LK. And immediately following them the 3rd is supposed to go in the vicinity of the RG’s head. If the gun jammed, and needed time to be cleared….then RG would have been able to tackle/approach/chase MB at this point if he was present and that would interrupt the narrative that he was on the porch when LK was shot and dove through the door when the bullet went toward his head. Much of the prevailing narrative declares he was on the porch and witnessed the shooting. This narrative also makes the unexpected escape of the dog problematic, furthermore, in the original narrative on COTH the appearance of the dog feels just kind of thrown in there as an afterthought.
However, one of the original narratives attributed to police sources as reported in the media was that he was upstairs at the time of the shooting. This could fit with the idea of a jammed gun as giving RG the time to get downstairs and confront MB and would make the sudden appearance of the dog reasonable if you consider RG throwing open the doors as he ran down the stairs and onto the porch. But under that narrative RG would not be a witness to LK’s shooting. It might also explain the voluntary offering of the video as evidence that subsequently winds up not being there.
Another point…how did RG pick up a 50-60 lb dog with a broken hand?
I told my friend who is a lawyer that she needs to start wearing cowboy hats and fringed leather jackets in court.
Summary: It is important for the initial responding officer(s) to be observant when approaching, entering, and exiting a crime scene.
If a crime occurred outside and a person entered a building, I would think that would extend the crime scene to that area too. If crime scene techs didn’t include that area in their investigation it would seem that would significantly impact the case. I can’t imagine a defense attorney not exploiting that at trial.
It seems like the police in this situation did many things that the defense can use in their favor. Which is sad for the victims of this crime.
I mean, how does one believe the testimony of someone who calls that a small dog?
RG going into the house may be problematic, but we still don’t know the the extent of the situation. Did he just throw those the dog inside, or did he go down a hall us some stairs like stated only in here. Also someone stated if he went into that area it might become part of the crime scene.
There is a rumor that RG and father went past some police tape. Although from what I can tell, it looks like one poster may have started that rumor. So hopefully we can track down its authenticity. Still, it sound like the house would be part of the investigation. So I don’t think its useful or helpful to add imagination into things we do know. Aka down the hall and up the stairs! Where does this come from?
That dog does look big. In the one photo it looks bigger than the deer!
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
