What is wrong with this picture?

Question

You and hubby have a huge fight. You take a walk for an hour to cool off. Upon arriving home, you find your front door ajar and hubby lying face up in the foyer, a bullet through the forehead. A gun is lying several feet away pointed toward the door. You call the police and they survey the scene. They find the gun is yours, wiped of prints. Nothing is amiss, nothing has been stolen and B&E are ruled out. You are arrested, charged and later convicted of murder. You are innocent.

Don't scoff, this happened.

I guess law isn't all it's supposed to be, huh.

True, I should have posed this elsewhere. Maybe you can pray for the accused, though.

There are no powder burns, and no one say you walking during the time the murder occurred. Other suspects were ruled out almost from the start.

The gun was owned jointy by husband and wife.

Both parties had engaged in the past in extramarital affairs, but long before the murder occurred. Both parties were beneificiaries of the other upon death, but again these policies were signed and dated years before the murder. Witnesses were produced to provide evidence of the relationship. There was friction between the two that was brought out in court, but nothing to indicate anything other than typical marital strife. The defense gave a stong closing argument to this effect, and was quick to point out the good character of the accused, no history of violence, etc.

Answer 1

I would think you're pretty much screwed, unfortunately.

Answer 2

First I would find it hard to believe that more evidence wasn't needed for a conviction ! if a person was shot close range, there would be blood splatter and that should show where the shooter was standing, compared to the victim also it might give some relationship as to the height of the shooter. (by following the trajectory) What about other evidence did they check the accused for powder residue..? What was the arguement about ? Could hubby have been involved in something Illegal? Or did he do someone wrong in a deal of some knd? What's wrong here is there is missing information.!

Answer 3

It's called Akhem's razor -which states (loosely translated) "All things being equal, the simplest explanation is often the truth". In this case, it's logical to draw the conclusion that because the husband and wife argued, the wife disappeared (and probably had only witnesses hearing the shouting match -and not seeing her 'go for a walk), then logic dictates that she MAY have had something to do with it.

When all others possibilities (i.e., home invasion, husband's enemies, a vendetta, theft, robbery, self defense, suicide) are ruled out, only one possible outcome is reached.

If the evidence is overwhelming and cannot disprove someone's guilt and/or evidence rules out (without a shadow of a doubt) all of the other possibilities, then only one outcome is possible: the claim to innocence is incorrect or it is correct, but no other evidence exists to suggest otherwise.

In short: if you can't prove you didn't do it, have no witnesses/alibis, no evidence that someone else did it, and no evidence the he shot himself, there's only one conclusion (as circumstantial as it may sound): the wife is screwed!

Answer 4

well it's not religion lol but 1st if it was suicide the hole would be at the side of the head not in the forhead. 2nd. If i didn't do that then i would have not powder on my hands. So i am free to go back to home. 3rd. it was murder cause also if it would be suicide he still would have a gun in the head. 4 probably it was execution guy with leather gloves. Anyway hitman did great job but i am inocent. Nice try

Answer 5

was the husband checked for powder burns? he might have been the one trying to shoot the wife when she was about to leave the house but he didn't catch her on time and the bullet might have bounced back at him coz it hit a metal or something. the gun was pointing at the door.

well...it's just sad that relationships that start really beautiful could end up in a disaster.

Answer 6

There would have to be more evidence for a conviction to occur. DNA, powder burns, something besides ownership of the gun.

Answer 7

I personally believe there's a lot of incompetent cops out there. that could be the case here. IF any of the investigators HAD ANY SENSE AT ALL, they would have checked wifey, and hubby's arms for gunpowder residue. If wifey did it, she would have gunpowder residue on one of her arms. If hubby did it as a final attempt to get back at wifey, he would have gunpowder residue one of his arms. And no, that didn't come from C.S.I. or anything like it either.

Answer 8

What's wrong with this picture, you ask? Your innocent. That's what's wrong. But seriously, I think that she was having an affair and the person she was having an affair with shot her after they heard them having an argument about the affair that she must have just tolf him about. Either that or somehow she managed to shoot herself and throw the gun to the other side of the room while falling from the fatal blow. I dunno, kinda wierd.

Answer 9

What's wrong? By British standards, that ordinary citizens have guns in the first place. If the wife hadn't had one, her hubby couldn't have been shot with it.

Answer 10

That is a bad thing. Not only did you have a reasonable motive to kill your spouse but also the house is intact - the police would think why would you rob your own house. I smell appeal.

Answer 11

well first you should think hard about all your enemys then think of all them and find out who was at the fight and who knew where you lived asfter you got your top peope you show the police. but if you find out all the people who are your enemys dont know where you live then you also have proof that he/she/the person dead killed him self if they still dont belive you the your screwed