Something here seems really fishy. Allow me to drive up in the Mystery Machine with my talking dog and explain. Here's the facts as we know them:
1.) Twenty-year-old hears "suspicious" noise.
2.) Twenty-year-old gets gun from dresser drawer.
3.) Twenty-year-old calls seven-year-old's mother, who orders him to unload weapon.
4.) Weapon discharges, causing grievous injury to seven-year-old.
While this turn of events is rather tragic, and seems rather innocent, it does raise several questions:
1.) Why wasn't the weapon secured in the first place.
2.) How did the twenty-year-old know where to find the weapon on such short notice.
3.) Why was the weapon pointed directly at the face of the seven-year-old when it discharged?
Now, I am certainly not a detective by any measure, but things seem strange. Which story seems more plausible, the story we have already been presented with, or this:
Twenty-year-old is babysitting for seven-year-old. He decides to go through home owners stuff while she is gone, possible hoping to find something to sell for crack money. He finds the gun and decides that he will apply the old five fingered discount to it. The seven-year-old gets on his nerves while begging for chocolate milk. He loses his temper, and shoots seven-year-old squarely in the face. He realizes that he will probably swing for what he has done, and tries to cover things up with the "suspicious sound" story. He calls the boy's mother, who tells him to unload the pistol, but he later says that the pistol "misfired". Since the twenty-year-old is a friend of the family, foul play is never officially investigated.
I know which story seems more plausible to me.
1.) Twenty-year-old hears "suspicious" noise.
2.) Twenty-year-old gets gun from dresser drawer.
3.) Twenty-year-old calls seven-year-old's mother, who orders him to unload weapon.
4.) Weapon discharges, causing grievous injury to seven-year-old.
While this turn of events is rather tragic, and seems rather innocent, it does raise several questions:
1.) Why wasn't the weapon secured in the first place.
2.) How did the twenty-year-old know where to find the weapon on such short notice.
3.) Why was the weapon pointed directly at the face of the seven-year-old when it discharged?
Now, I am certainly not a detective by any measure, but things seem strange. Which story seems more plausible, the story we have already been presented with, or this:
Twenty-year-old is babysitting for seven-year-old. He decides to go through home owners stuff while she is gone, possible hoping to find something to sell for crack money. He finds the gun and decides that he will apply the old five fingered discount to it. The seven-year-old gets on his nerves while begging for chocolate milk. He loses his temper, and shoots seven-year-old squarely in the face. He realizes that he will probably swing for what he has done, and tries to cover things up with the "suspicious sound" story. He calls the boy's mother, who tells him to unload the pistol, but he later says that the pistol "misfired". Since the twenty-year-old is a friend of the family, foul play is never officially investigated.
I know which story seems more plausible to me.
