No criminal charges over British woman shot in US during holiday
No criminal charges over British woman shot in US during holiday
Lucy Harrison was visiting her father during a holiday in Texas when she was fatally wounded.
The exact circumstances of how Ms Harrison was shot have not been publicly revealed. A heavily redacted police report previously said a suspect had been identified by officers, along with five witnesses, at her father's property.
Has she been murdered by the police?
My thought as well, though this is in texas so why would they be bothering to cover it up? It's not like they'd be convicted anyways.
Maybe in this case it's was blatant? Maybe it's because it's a pretty blond woman, which traditionally are rallying points for outrage?
why would they be bothering to cover it up?
Possibly due to international implications? Guessing now.
The only situation I could imagine in which this decision could possibly be justified is if a small child got hold of a gun (because Texas) and shot her in play, and they're trying not to ruin the kid's life.
Stop going to the usa on holiday. Its not worth it.
She was visiting her father, who lives in the Stand your Ground Deregulated Texas Oblast.
I pay for my parents to visit me instead.
In that case, it was totally worth it.
It's extremely strange that no details have been released in this case. I kinda doubt it's actual full-bore corruption, that's still fairly rare here, but man for a case involving a foreign citizen it's sure suspicious they're so quiet about it. And even in texas there's so few situations where a fatal shooting doesn't merit charges. It seems a little far fetched for her to have, say, been mugging someone who then shot her in self-defense. Was she shot by some kind of trained combat armadillo? A senile centenarian who passed away during the investigation? A very small child? (actually those last two are feasible, though in both cases the owner of the firearm they got ahold of would probably have been charged, though it's texas so that isn't 100%). Those are the only sort of examples where this might be justified, but lets be honest it was probably the cops.
Just fucking weird. Her poor family.
And it happened January 10th. It's been months and there were 5 witnesses who haven't spoken to reporters. The most likely outcomes are all really sad.
Yeah, all of my real guesses are too bleak for me to want to type them up. This is just awful.
My best guess is the shooter is either her father or a kid, you know dad goes native and answers the door with a gun now and whoops finger slipped. Or maybe the toddler next door got a hold of daddies pistol and pointed it at the woman in the neighbors lawn.
It seems like if it were the cops they'd just invoke qualified immunity, put the shooter on paid administrative leave and have the states budget pay off the coming lawsuit.
I note there is no information or statement from her father. Which is unusual, because it's his house where she was shot.
My guess is that someone completely screwed up some kind of gun safety step and the shooting was unintentional. Although that should result in some kind of negligence charges, I can see Texas giving a moron with a gun a free pass as long as 'they didn't mean too' or something other bullshit.
Highly unlikely. Even in bumpus old corners of Texas, the state is absolutely obsessed with doing anything to take away any citizen's gun rights and will do so by nailing them with some kind of felony, and a negligent discharge scenario that results in somebody getting killed in normal circumstances would definitely qualify.
People in Texas may love their guns, but the cops in Texas are the same as cops everywhere and if they had their way nobody would have the guns except them.
This points to me that someone involved in law enforcement, someone involved with the government, or someone with very high level connections and/or a lot of money was the one responsible for this and that's why it was swept under the carpet. If it were just a regular Joe there's no way.
Remember that there are a lot of circumstances that could makenit 'unavoidable' or shift part of the blame to the victim. A misfire and ricochet would still be called a shooting. If she was somewhere down range and a bullet missed a backstop to hit her it would still be a shooting. Maybe a child was shooting the gun in either scenario.
There are plenty of situations where a grand jury would see something as an 'unavoidable accident' or not want to punish whoever had control of the weapon.
Until we know more, there is always the possibility the grand jury doesn't want to follow through based on some misguided emotional criteria instead of holding someone accountable for negligence.
Did Elon Musk shoot her while on a K binge?
asdf