The Spencer Newcomer Case now on ProArms Podcast

Just listened to The Spencer Newcomer Case on the ProArms Podcast this morning – if you have the time, you might want to download the MP3 audio file and listen at your leisure – it’s about an hour in length.

It makes for some interesting (and informative) listening for all that are interested in self defense.
Spencer Newcomer speaks before a group (probably one of Massad Ayoob’s gatherings / classes) and tells what he went through after being found not guilty of 1st degree murder, 3rd degree murder, and I can’t remember the 3rd offense (also found not guilty).

Even though he’s now a free man, he lost everything, and spent 9 months in solitary confinement.

Marty Hayes (of the Armed Citizen’s Legal Defense Network) was an expert witness for the defense.

Gunfight Survivors
087 The Spencer Newcomer Case
http://proarmspodcast.com/
On June 10, 2012 Spencer Newcomer shot and killed his next door neighbor in self defense. On this episode of the ProArms Podcast we listen in as Spencer recounts his experiences on that day and during his subsequent incarceration and eventual acquittal of a First-Degree Murder charge.

Friend of the ProArms Podcast and founder of the Armed Citizen’s Legal Defense Network, Marty Hayes, was an expert witness for Spencer’s defense.

Just a couple of snippets I recall from the Podcast:
1. This was a case of “furtive movement” (and if you don’t know about that, time to do some homework)!
2. Spencer Newcomer was a student of Massad Ayoob’s writings over the years.
3. He knew about the Tueller Drill (he shot the deceased at a distance of 3 ft) – you Justified fans may recall numerous references to the “21-ft Rule” (also known as the Tueller Drill) from the just completed season 5.
4. His defense lawyer told him to never raise his voice, no matter what kind of rise the prosecutor tried to get out of him – if he did so one time, he’d probably spend the rest of his life in prison.
5. His lawyer told him to never be the “smartest person in the room”. When the prosecutor’s gun expert could not get the weapon to function in court, the defendant leaned over to his lawyer and told him he doesn’t know it won’t work without a magazine in it. His lawyer informed him “neither do you”!
6. He covered numerous dirty tricks and lies used by the prosecuting attorney.
7. The defendant screwed up and moved his truck so the ambulance could get to the man on the ground he had just shot – he thought he was doing the right thing by making room for the ambulance, but in doing so, it could not be proved that the deceased was shot and fell next to his truck.
8. They found 188 text messages between the deceased and a neighbor in which they discussed assassinating the defendant after luring him out, etc – the text messages were not allowed as evidence – neither were numerous Facebook postings by the deceased, most of which were deleted (but friends of the defendant had printed them out).
9. The D.A. was up for re-election.
10. The prosecutor screwed up the 1st degree murder charge by trying to get the defendant to admit (and paint it that way) that the defendant “snapped” (if he “snapped”, that removes premeditation, and the 1st degree murder charge).

 

This one gets interesting. IMO: Newcomer could have just as easily been found guilty of manslaughter or murder.

http://triblive.com/state/pennsylvania/3673858-74/newcomer-wintermyer-ferro#axzz2ygpveFgG

 

Now that we know how the case turned out, it's interesting reading some of the comments from folks at the original news stories online (links to those stories at the ProArms Podcast link in the OP).

From what was covered on the podcast, it sounds like the deceased had / has a number of friends that have been very vocal / supportive of the deceased, and are spreading it around the 'Net (true or not, who knows).

If the report of 188 text messages between the deceased and a neighbor discussing how to lure the defendant out and assassinate him are true, you have to wonder about the deceased and his friends?

Many commenters have chosen sides, but I did notice one stated the deceased was a bully, and the defendant was the only person in the neighborhood that would stand up to him.

 

Why did he get 9 months in solitary? For his own protection? Was he a violent prisoner?