Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | Home RSS
 
 
 

Deaths ruled murder-suicide

September 9, 2013

SALEM — A shooting in the employee parking lot at the Salem Walmart early Sunday morning has been ruled a murder-suicide....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(99)

PattiHannah

Sep-13-13 5:11 AM

NS

:)

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-13-13 5:03 AM

This won’t sit well with you but you are only correct about it being irrelevant at this point and time. It could change and become relevant but those facts and evidence have to be in that incident report in case it does.

I know that mention of that permit in this tragic case upset some folks on that release. But unfortunately, we are going to start seeing this more and more in the newspapers. As more and more permits are issued. Those statistics are going to go higher. There are cases right now where a CCW permit holder has been a shooting with another CCW permit holder. In some of those cases it will be very relevant when it comes to charges.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-13-13 5:02 AM

I want you to understand that I wrote those comments against my own better judgement. My only goal was to try to ease the heated arguments that followed. I do not know if I am correct on this and that can not do anything for my credibility in this issue. I don't know what transpired in this investigation. I am guessing and I could be way off base on this. The only thing that I can safely point out is that Incident report. I know how vital those reports are and how detailed they have to be and what has to be in them That report can make or break a case. The general public does not realize how much time is spent just putting together that report. That paperwork is miserable.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-13-13 5:00 AM

"And look what happened, all because no one would explain themselves as you did Patti."

Mr. Mingus, please do not misunderstand this comment, I promise I am not trying to start anything with you nor be disrespectful, so please keep an open mind as you read this.

I didn't write those comments because of you pressuring people to explain themselves. I wrote those comments on behalf of the Police Department, J.D. and the Salem News. You were very harsh with your judgement call. That J.D. had done this intentionally as attack on our second amendment rights to discredit CCW permit holders. He did not deserve that when you called him out on it. When Det. Talbert released the information to J.D. That was what they were investigating at that point and time.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-13-13 3:19 AM

concerned, I am very sorry that you felt I was arguing, I promise, that was not what I was trying to do here.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

concerned

Sep-12-13 9:41 AM

Stop arguing. You are both right. Grant is right that whether he had a CCW or not it is not going to change what happened. He had a gun legally or illegally is not important. He shot it someone died. It is Important to the investigation in that if we are going to be a nation of laws which we are then if the guy had protection order against him and if the law states you lose your CCW permit and he did not lose it then someone fell down on the job and we have a break down somewhere. But will that investigation change the outcome of this tragedy. NO in the least.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-12-13 9:15 AM

And look what happened, all because no one would explain themselves as you did Patti.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-12-13 6:10 AM

"That is all I am trying to say. We can't assume notSocialist was wrong or right. "

Please, Patti, don't wear your fingers out. Just call me NS :)

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-12-13 6:07 AM

"If it's relevant to the investigation, explain to me how it will change any part of the investigation. "

It's a fact of the investigation. I don't think anyone said it would change anything.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-12-13 6:06 AM

"Oh, I'm sorry. I was under the impression that the one universal fact here was that he did murder her... "

That doesn't mean he went there with that intent.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Justin84

Sep-12-13 5:04 AM

Wow, thats all you needed to be happy with? I dont ever remember arguing its relevance to any particular one thing, just in general. This just blew my mind.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 11:28 PM

We never said you were wrong. You said it was irrelevant, we said it relevant. Why don't we just say this...we were all right.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 11:26 PM

"But it's pretty much a moot point because you just admitted that the conceal permit isn't relevant to the murder."

I never said it was. concerned never said it was. Watchdog never said it was. We kept saying it was relevant to the investigation. You and few others were arguing that connection to the murder with CCW. You most all were upset with it being in the newspaper and mentioned. You were seeing it one way and we were seeing the other way.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-11-13 11:15 PM

Crystal clear, that was my point the entire time, that it wasn't relevant to the murder.

I understand there are unknowns here, but you have to assume a lot to say that I'm wrong as well. And one thing we don't have to assume is that he murdered someone. But it's pretty much a moot point because you just admitted that the conceal permit isn't relevant to the murder.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 11:06 PM

It wasn't relevant to the murder. It was relevant to the investigation and that report. I hope that is clearer.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 10:53 PM

If it's relevant to the investigation, explain to me how it will change any part of the investigation."

Honestly Grant, I don't understand what you mean by that statement. Because it isn't about the murder. It is about the facts and the evidence and that ever dreaded "report".

You would have to understand what a police officer has to include in those police reports. They just don't ignore that information. If I have to assume, this is not because I know this case, this is just an assumption because I have investigated cases before.

At some point during that investigation. A witness, or family member passed that information to them about the protection order and his CCW permit. Somebody made that statement. Even though in this case he was dead it still has to be investigated and that information put into that report as a statement made by a wittness or family member. That is the point.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 10:39 PM

You are assuming he didn't care about the transportation laws. We don't know that.

We don't know if he went with intent to murder her. You are forgetting the argument in the parking lot.

You don't want to assume he was psycho with a gun? Correct? So notSocialist could possibly be right. We don't know what happened from the time he arrived, what the content of the argument was about before he pulled that firearm and discharged it. He could have been an honest law abiding CCW permit holder for all we know up until that argument.

There is a lot of information we don't know about. We are not privy to a lot of the facts and evidence. What were the odds that he would pull in right after the car she was in arrived? Statements were made that they were not dating, therefore they had to be still in communication.

That is all I am trying to say. We can't assume notSocialist was wrong or right.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-11-13 10:08 PM

If it's relevant to the investigation, explain to me how it will change any part of the investigation.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 9:50 PM

"Its relationship to the questionable protection order makes it relevant."

Exactly Justin. It was very relevant in this investigation.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-11-13 9:43 PM

Oh, I'm sorry. I was under the impression that the one universal fact here was that he did murder her...

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PattiHannah

Sep-11-13 9:41 PM

The same way you are assuming he went there to murder her.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-11-13 7:16 PM

He would have had to load it?! HA! He came there and murdered her, why would you assume he cared about the transportation laws?

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-11-13 7:03 PM

I'm certainly getting tired of this weeing match.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-11-13 7:02 PM

"notSocialist, as I'm sure you know, the vast majority of firearm buyers purchase their guns completely legally without possessing a concealed carry permit. "

I do know. But if you don't have CCW, you are not allowed to have it in your car with its ammunition. So he would have had to load it, giving her time to run away.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Sep-11-13 7:00 PM

"Notsocialist, please explain why you think i disgraced everyone who carries? "

I didn't. I said HE did. As I was quoting your post, if my beef was with you, I would have said YOU.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 99 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web