Woman shoots son in law over child custody dispute

[LJ_Reloaded]

Richard Daily and Bronzeage, we have another violent woman who needs you to defend her. Be quick about it - she'll probably end up in prison soon, getting raped in her ass by female cellmates.

Pity she's so damned UGLY, or I'd say take pictures!

Yeah yeah, I know, men shoot women, too. We so evillll!!!!


http://gma.yahoo.com/woman-66-shoots-estranged-son-law-over-custody-033204477.html

Woman, 66, Shoots Estranged Son-in-Law Over Custody Dispute, Florida Police Say
By MATT GUTMAN and SUZANNE YEO | Good Morning America – 2 hours 56 minutes ago

A 66-year-old grandmother is under arrest after police say she shot her estranged son-in-law because of an ongoing custody battle he and her daughter were having over the pair's young son.

The victim, Salvatore Miglino of Boca Raton, had his cell phone recording the entire time, and the audio was key to the investigation of the Wednesday shooting in Broward County, Fla.

The incident unfolded when Miglino, 39, went to pick up his 3-year-old son for a scheduled visit. His mother-in-law, Cheryl Hepner, stood outside the home with the toddler's pillow and bag.

"According to him, when he asked for the things, she instead pulled out a handgun and starts firing shots," according to Dani Moschella, a spokeswoman for the Broward County Sheriff's Office.

 

[Disgustipated]

Okay, you're being boring again and it's back to the scrap heap.

 

[CandiCame]

I have a cousin that died all most exactly like that. He had picked up his daughter (who was 2 at the time_ and was carrying her to the truck on his hip when his ex's current bo shot him in the back of the head with a hunting rifle. Yeah, you two were fighting and you wanna shoot the motherfucker- I get that. But her head (the toddler's) was only missed by a little over 2 inches- when you carry a kid like that your heads are pretty close together. There's no reason to shoot someone when they're carrying a child- be it to kill or wound.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I have a cousin that died all most exactly like that. He had picked up his daughter (who was 2 at the time_ and was carrying her to the truck on his hip when his ex's current bo shot him in the back of the head with a hunting rifle. Yeah, you two were fighting and you wanna shoot the motherfucker- I get that. But her head (the toddler's) was only missed by a little over 2 inches- when you carry a kid like that your heads are pretty close together. There's no reason to shoot someone when they're carrying a child- be it to kill or wound.

Even the US Government is known for doing that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

 

[LJ_Repussified]

Maybe she thought he was a dog trying to steal her lemonade?

 

[Dream59]

I have a cousin that died all most exactly like that. He had picked up his daughter (who was 2 at the time_ and was carrying her to the truck on his hip when his ex's current bo shot him in the back of the head with a hunting rifle. Yeah, you two were fighting and you wanna shoot the motherfucker- I get that. But her head (the toddler's) was only missed by a little over 2 inches- when you carry a kid like that your heads are pretty close together. There's no reason to shoot someone when they're carrying a child- be it to kill or wound.

You do NOT shoot someone to wound. But anyway, 2 inches is as good as a mile it still missed.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

You do NOT shoot someone to wound. But anyway, 2 inches is as good as a mile it still missed.

It's not if it's your kid that was missed by 2 inches. A 2 year old is old enough to be traumatized by such a thing. ESPECIALLY when it kills their parent!

And in combat, you do shoot to wound. Because that takes 2 more personnel to tend to the wounded. You can hobble an entire unit by wounding one person. Then you come in for the kill.

 

[Dream59]

It's not if it's your kid that was missed by 2 inches. A 2 year old is old enough to be traumatized by such a thing. ESPECIALLY when it kills their parent!

And in combat, you do shoot to wound. Because that takes 2 more personnel to tend to the wounded. You can hobble an entire unit by wounding one person. Then you come in for the kill.

Actually I was being funny. But you just showed you have never been in combat. I have and I tried to kill every fucker that had a gun. That was a dumbass thing to say. When you are under fire you do not have the time nor the inclination to take aim and wing someone that is trying their best to kill you. Yeah you wound them so they can put a bullet in your head as they wait for a dressing to cover their wound LOL.

 

[lustatopia]

Another thread about killing people from a fucking moron who walks around his trailer park packing a load weapon even with children around and is proud to have killed his neighbour's dog during a "business deal" with a "client" then beat the shit out of the guy when he came over to get his dead dog's body.

Reloaded, you got to be the sleaziest mutherfucker on the whole god damn GB, man. That's probably the biggest achievement of your life, ain't it?

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Actually I was being funny. But you just showed you have never been in combat. I have and I tried to kill every fucker that had a gun. That was a dumbass thing to say. When you are under fire you do not have the time nor the inclination to take aim and wing someone that is trying their best to kill you. Yeah you wound them so they can put a bullet in your head as they wait for a dressing to cover their wound LOL.

Uh, have you REALLY been in combat or are you just a CoD mastuh?

http://www.eyemarkersystems.com/downloads/wired_article.pdf

And you might want to check this, while you're at it.
http://books.google.com/books?id=LV...er is more beneficial than a dead one&f=false

Hopefully Google Books will take you right to the text in question.

 

[badbabysitter]

I just read a more thorough report of this here

http://abcnews.go.com/US/granny-allegedly-son-law-sought-restraining-order/story?id=15142741

I dont know what the fuck she was thinking, but she deservedly needs the book thrown at her... the article tries to justify her shooting with mentions of previous attempts at restraining orders.. but that still doesnt change that he was within his legal rights


oh, and nice blanket condemnation of all women to start

 

[Dream59]

Uh, have you REALLY been in combat or are you just a CoD mastuh?

http://www.eyemarkersystems.com/downloads/wired_article.pdf

And you might want to check this, while you're at it.
http://books.google.com/books?id=LV...er is more beneficial than a dead one&f=false

Hopefully Google Books will take you right to the text in question.

I have no desire to read your links as I do not give a fuck about theory, I am talking about real world. When people are trying to blow your head off you are not trying to do a Roy Rogers on them. You are trying to live and that means killing and not wounding. Btw as for your theory did you know that under the Geneva Convention that you must render aid that may be available to a wounded enemy, and that takes up as many people on your side as theirs. So shove your dumbass theory and leave talk of combat to the people that have been there, or better yet, go serve in combat and shoot to wound, come back and tell me how that worked out for you.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I have no desire to read your links as I do not give a fuck about theory,

Those links describe more than just THEORY, they describe reality. But yeah, it takes work to read that stuff, so I'd say you should stay away. They contain some pretty big and intimidating words.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I just read a more thorough report of this here

http://abcnews.go.com/US/granny-allegedly-son-law-sought-restraining-order/story?id=15142741

I dont know what the fuck she was thinking, but she deservedly needs the book thrown at her... the article tries to justify her shooting with mentions of previous attempts at restraining orders.. but that still doesnt change that he was within his legal rights


oh, and nice blanket condemnation of all women to start

If it had been a man who did the shooting he'd have gotten THE CHAIR!!!

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Woman scalds her son to death, only gets 11 years, due to mitigating circumstances

I'm sure Firenzi can explain to us what these mitigating circumstances were.

http://*******.com/6stk44l

Mother given 11 years for 'excruciating' scalding death of toddler

By Tamsin McMahon, Postmedia News December 7, 2011

TORONTO — A young Toronto mother who scalded her toddler in hot water, wrapped him in gauze and then left for a two-hour shopping trip while he lay dying was sentenced to 11 years in prison for what a judge called her "shocking" indifference to a "literally horrific" crime.

"It is difficult to comprehend how any human being could fail to get help for that poor child," Ontario Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy wrote in a scathing 23-page decision on Melissa Alexander, 26, who was convicted of manslaughter in the death of her 19-month old son, Miguel Fernandes.

"It is impossible to fathom the depths of self-interest that would permit a mother to betray her own tiny, vulnerable and utterly dependent child in this matter."

Miguel died in September 2007 after, the court heard, his mother had likely immersed him in scalding hot water for as long as 10 seconds. He suffered serious burns to 40 per cent of his body from his toes to his shoulders, injuries a burn expert testified would have left the child in "excruciating pain" for hours. Instead of taking him to a hospital, or to the walk-in clinic across the street from her home, Alexander applied ointment, wrapped his wounds and dressed him in a one-piece sleeper. She then left Miguel and his 29-month-old brother, Shawn, alone while she bought a pair of gloves, some CDs and food.

 

[Dream59]

Those links describe more than just THEORY, they describe reality. But yeah, it takes work to read that stuff, so I'd say you should stay away. They contain some pretty big and intimidating words.

You prove there is no fixing stupid.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

You prove there is no fixing stupid.

Those big words hurt your brain, didn't they?

 

[badbabysitter]

If it had been a man who did the shooting he'd have gotten THE CHAIR!!!

see what I mean about you constantly having to wear gender blinders?

you just couldn't help but throw in another jab at women as a whole

 

[badbabysitter]

Uh, have you REALLY been in combat or are you just a CoD mastuh?

http://www.eyemarkersystems.com/downloads/wired_article.pdf

And you might want to check this, while you're at it.
http://books.google.com/books?id=LV...er is more beneficial than a dead one&f=false

Hopefully Google Books will take you right to the text in question.

I don't know about the military... but police are trained to shoot to incapcitate.. center of mass.. bring them down

this " shooting to wing" is a complete fabrication of television and film

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I don't know about the military... but police are trained to shoot to incapcitate.. center of mass.. bring them down

this " shooting to wing" is a complete fabrication of television and film

Define the difference between shooting to incapacitate and shooting to wing? And, for that matter, shoot to kill?

 

[badbabysitter]

Define the difference between shooting to incapacitate and shooting to wing? And, for that matter, shoot to kill?

shooting to wound or shooting to wing simply doesnt work


shoot someone in the arm.. good chance they'll hit an artery, person could easily be dead before they hit the ground... plus the arm is a much smaller target then the center of mass, and when someones rushing at you with a weapon.... the last thing you want is just to inconvience them

and there is no real difference between shooting to kill or to incapacitate.. byt the time guns are drawn its usually a given that a peaceful ending is moot.. ..which of course might go to explain the many reports of tasers being used, sometimes fatally..as more police are reaching for those instead

 

[Dream59]

I don't know about the military... but police are trained to shoot to incapcitate.. center of mass.. bring them down

this " shooting to wing" is a complete fabrication of television and film

As an ex police officer I have to tell you that you are mistaken. Yes we are trained to shoot center mass, but that is because that is where all the vital organs are, thus more likely to kill. Granted it is more likely to stop and if they do not die then it is a bonus.

 

[badbabysitter]

As an ex police officer I have to tell you that you are mistaken. Yes we are trained to shoot center mass, but that is because that is where all the vital organs are, thus more likely to kill. Granted it is more likely to stop and if they do not die then it is a bonus.

that's kinda what I went onto explain..........

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

shooting to wound or shooting to wing simply doesnt work


shoot someone in the arm.. good chance they'll hit an artery, person could easily be dead before they hit the ground... plus the arm is a much smaller target then the center of mass, and when someones rushing at you with a weapon.... the last thing you want is just to inconvience them

and there is no real difference between shooting to kill or to incapacitate.. byt the time guns are drawn its usually a given that a peaceful ending is moot.. ..which of course might go to explain the many reports of tasers being used, sometimes fatally..as more police are reaching for those instead

Those aren't just reports, I've watched cops using tasers. And cops shoot unarmed people, too, including those who just pull out wallets, so if their aim is to shoot to kill as Dream keeps ranting, then basically this means lots of cops pull guns out with the express INTENT to kill UNARMED PEOPLE.

Oh and Dream59.. first you were a soldier, then a cop? Seriously?

 

[badbabysitter]

Those aren't just reports, I've watched cops using tasers. And cops shoot unarmed people, too, including those who just pull out wallets, so if their aim is to shoot to kill as Dream keeps ranting, then basically this means lots of cops pull guns out with the express INTENT to kill UNARMED PEOPLE.

Oh and Dream59.. first you were a soldier, then a cop? Seriously?

I'm certain lots of cops do pull weapons with the intent to kill..even on the unarmed

and often times.. police commands are often unheeded... so if a person goes for something in their pocket despite being told not to.. an officer isnt going to wait untill the guy shoots him to check and see if the gun is real or not