In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Gun expert testifies in Thomas shooting
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Gun expert testifies in Thomas shooting
By Michael Ko
Seattle Times Eastside bureau
E-mail this article
Print this article
Search web archive
After removing a gun from Robert Thomas Sr.'s right hand, police investigators say they found a bullet in the chamber. The question is: When did it get there?
The answer is crucial to what happened April 7 when off-duty King County sheriff's deputy Melvin Miller confronted Thomas in the Renton area and fatally shot him.
At the inquest yesterday into the shooting, now starting its third week, testimony from a firearms expert either supports Miller's claim that he had to shoot in self-defense - or blows the claim apart.
Here's why: Miller testified earlier in the inquest that he saw Thomas pull out a gun, aim it and squeeze the trigger. Miller claimed Thomas' gun never fired, and that gave Miller just enough time to pull out his own gun and kill Thomas.
Miller further testified that, before dying, Thomas managed to pull the slide on his gun at least once.
That's important because pulling the slide would have sent a bullet from the clip into the chamber, said Richard Wyant, who tests guns at the State Patrol crime lab in Marysville.
But if Thomas' gun already had a bullet in the chamber, Wyant said there's no way the gun would have malfunctioned - and that would contradict Miller's testimony.
Once testimony concludes, the jury will answer questions about the facts of the case and those answers will be given to prosecutors to determine whether any charges will be filed. Thomas had parked his truck in front of a private road leading to Miller's house. After a neighbor called that morning, Miller went to investigate.
Also yesterday:
Two sheriff's detectives testified that it's difficult to lift usable fingerprints from hard surfaces, such as the handle of a gun. Richard Gies, lead detective on the case, said usable fingerprints have been recovered in only 10 to 15 percent of cases he's seen in 30 years in law enforcement.
A detective testified last week that there were no usable fingerprints on the gun found in Thomas' hand after the shooting, prompting questions from Thomas family attorneys about whether evidence was tainted.
Detective Denny Gulla said Gina Marie Munnell, a passenger in the car during the shooting, repeatedly nodded off while he interviewed her after the shooting. He testified she admitted using some kind of intoxicant throughout the night before the shooting.
Clark scheduled a contempt of court hearing for Oct. 30 to discuss whether Miller violated a gag order when he called a Seattle Times columnist last week to complain about her column.
Michael Ko: 206-515-5653 or mko@seattletimes.com.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/134532492_inquest10e.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By Michael Ko
Seattle Times Eastside bureau
E-mail this article
Print this article
Search web archive
After removing a gun from Robert Thomas Sr.'s right hand, police investigators say they found a bullet in the chamber. The question is: When did it get there?
The answer is crucial to what happened April 7 when off-duty King County sheriff's deputy Melvin Miller confronted Thomas in the Renton area and fatally shot him.
At the inquest yesterday into the shooting, now starting its third week, testimony from a firearms expert either supports Miller's claim that he had to shoot in self-defense - or blows the claim apart.
Here's why: Miller testified earlier in the inquest that he saw Thomas pull out a gun, aim it and squeeze the trigger. Miller claimed Thomas' gun never fired, and that gave Miller just enough time to pull out his own gun and kill Thomas.
Miller further testified that, before dying, Thomas managed to pull the slide on his gun at least once.
That's important because pulling the slide would have sent a bullet from the clip into the chamber, said Richard Wyant, who tests guns at the State Patrol crime lab in Marysville.
But if Thomas' gun already had a bullet in the chamber, Wyant said there's no way the gun would have malfunctioned - and that would contradict Miller's testimony.
Once testimony concludes, the jury will answer questions about the facts of the case and those answers will be given to prosecutors to determine whether any charges will be filed. Thomas had parked his truck in front of a private road leading to Miller's house. After a neighbor called that morning, Miller went to investigate.
Also yesterday:
Two sheriff's detectives testified that it's difficult to lift usable fingerprints from hard surfaces, such as the handle of a gun. Richard Gies, lead detective on the case, said usable fingerprints have been recovered in only 10 to 15 percent of cases he's seen in 30 years in law enforcement.
A detective testified last week that there were no usable fingerprints on the gun found in Thomas' hand after the shooting, prompting questions from Thomas family attorneys about whether evidence was tainted.
Detective Denny Gulla said Gina Marie Munnell, a passenger in the car during the shooting, repeatedly nodded off while he interviewed her after the shooting. He testified she admitted using some kind of intoxicant throughout the night before the shooting.
Clark scheduled a contempt of court hearing for Oct. 30 to discuss whether Miller violated a gag order when he called a Seattle Times columnist last week to complain about her column.
Michael Ko: 206-515-5653 or mko@seattletimes.com.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/134532492_inquest10e.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878