Theodore Wafer did not fear death or serious injury when he killed Renisha McBride

Sunday, June 22, 2014

Good afternoon:

Theodore Wafer did not fear imminent death or serious injury on November 2, 2013 when he opened his locked front door and shot 19-year-old Renisha McBride in the face through a locked screen door with a 12 gauge shotgun, killing her.

She was alone and unarmed.

She had collided with a parked car about a half mile from his house approximately 3 hours earlier and left the scene of the accident before police arrived. No one knows where she was or what she was doing until she started knocking on Wafer’s door around 4:30 am.

Witnesses who saw her at the scene of the accident, described her as dazed and bleeding from an apparent head injury.

The Detroit Free Press reports:

McBride’s blood alcohol level was 0.218%, and marijuana was detected in her system, according to the toxicology report released today by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s Office.

Wafer is charged with second degree murder. He claims self-defense. The trial, which is expected to last three weeks, is scheduled to start July 21st.

Wafer is white and McBride is black.

Police officers who investigated the crime scene at Theodore Wafer’s residence neglected to seize the screen door, which is one of the most important items of evidence in the case. Fortunately, they photographed it before leaving the scene and returned later to recover it.

The Voice of Detroit explains how that happened:

Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy had to order the Dearborn Heights police, who first released Wafer without charges, to do a more thorough investigation of the case. They did a second crime scene review Nov. 11, during which they discovered a key piece of evidence, the perforated front door screen, in Wafer’s basement.

The exact condition of the screen door is important because the racist right-wing-hate-machine has been spreading a false story over the internet that McBride was ripping the screen door off its hinges when Wafer opened the inner door and shot her in the face, killing her, to prevent her from breaking into his house.

Here’s the police officer’s report describing the condition of the screen door when he arrived at Wafer’s residence in response to Wafer’s 911 call:

Northern most West side door was locked and no obvious sign of tampering to that door (partially collapsed wooden steps leading up to door).

The front entry door was open (no signs of prying, kicking or tampering) and the front screen door was closed/locked. The front screen was popped out with a tear in the screen (Cpl. Zawacki had photographed that upon arrival).

On the carpet near front door lay a Mossberg Model 500A 12 ga. pistol grip pump shotgun, black in color. I unlocked screen door while ME took photograph of shotgun through screen door. ID for Renisha Marie McBride on her person. TOT DHPD at scene. I popped screen back in place (held in loosely by one screwed in tab at the top and rested in the channel at the bottom of storm door) so Cpl Zawacki could photograph it in place with a tape measure, as shotgun blast could have blown screen out of place.

[Emphasis supplied]

Here’s the photograph of the screen door displaying the rip caused by the shotgun blast.

As everyone can plainly see from the officer’s report and the photograph, the door frame was intact, closed and locked when the officers arrived.

Furthermore, here’s a photograph of the inner door and front porch. A peephole is visible in the expected position and a white globe-style porch light is visible above and to the right of the door.

I believe we can reasonably assume that Wafer would have turned on the light, unless it was on, and looked through the peep hole before he opened the door.

Why did he open the door, if he feared imminent death or serious bodily injury?

Why did he claim the gun went off by accident, if he feared imminent death or serious bodily injury?

This is our 1099th post. If you appreciate what we do, please make a donation.

Thank you,

Fred

75 Responses to Theodore Wafer did not fear death or serious injury when he killed Renisha McBride

  1. MKX says:

    I wonder if she passed out somewhere for a span of time before the walked down Outer Drive. That area is by the junction of the middle and upper branches of the Rouge River. I used to ride my bicycle down that stretch of Outer Drive to get to Hines Park which goes along the Middle Branch. Anyhow, there are a lot of woods and fields to get lost in. If she knew the area and was in a sound state of mind, she should have walked to Telegraph Road. That’s about the best chance one is going to find a 24/7 gas station to get help or at least get out of the cold.

    Also, the west side of Rouge Park has what can be deemed a decent working class area with no boarded or burned out homes.

    You will find that decay in the area on the east side of Rouge Park.

    I say this because the right wing {you know, the guys who are experts on Detroit, although they never step foot in it} will be floating a meme that Wafer’s area was overrun by druggies looking to score.

    And the friend’s of Rouge Park might scare Zimmerman, but not any of us, I hope.

    http://rougepark.org/

    • Dave says:

      Actually, the nearest business to the accident site that would have been open is the Rouge Park Lounge at the corner of Warren and Outer Drive. I’d bet that she stopped in there to use a phone and take a pee if nothing else.

      • MKX says:

        God, that joint has been there for a long, long time. If my memory has not failed, didn’t there used to be a roller rink just to the south of the bar?

        • MKX says:

          Duh, I meant to the east of the bar.

        • Dave says:

          I don’t know about the roller rink. It’s not my neighborhood. I did drive around there a little just after the shooting to get a sense of where all this happened.

          For those not familiar with the Detroit area, the accident occurred in a residential neighborhood a couple of blocks north of Warren Ave (a semimajor east-west through street) and about half a mile from Telegraph Road (US24) to the West and Evergreen Rd to the East. The abovementioned bar is the only business that would have been open along Warren late at night.

          The Rouge Park Lounge at the southeast corner of Warren and Outer Drive is a very short walk from the accident site and maybe a quarter mile northeast of Theodore Wafer’s house.

  2. J4TMinATL says:

    The family’s attorney said, “To get a conviction for manslaughter you show that he shot and killed her and he was upset and excited and he pulled the gun, he pulled the trigger. She’s less of a threat because she’s so drunk.”

    Couple of things about scene. ME said body arrived with no shoes. Detective on scene said her feet were pointed toward the front door and her head in a bush. Pictures shows that the boot on her left foot was torn away with her foot covered with a sock sticking out. David Balash, a firearms expert believes the screen in the outer door was out of its frame before the shooting.

    A few things. Several people tried to help her after the accident. One witnessed the accident. Witness Carmen Beasley asked her if she could call anyone for McBride. She kept walking away saying she wanted to go home. At one point, she tried to start the car. Carmen said McBride couldn’t find her cell. Turned out to be in middle compartment. Witnesses say she was speeding. Witness LeDerll Hammond said he couldn’t tell if she was intoxicated. He says he wished he had done more to help. I think it’s odd that she wandered off and that was that. First 911 call was made by Carmen, she didn’t ask for an ambulance. She went back into her house to call 911 back and ask for ambulance. I would have done different but that’s just me. This whole situation after the accident is just not normal to me. More than 2 people chose to do and not do things I believe a reasonable person would have. I looked at photos of her car. It’s bad really bad. I don’t understand how anyone could let her walk away. It was raining off and on and in low 40’s that night.

    She left her house (lives with family) at 11pm in dad’s car. First 911 call about wreck was 12:57am after she hit the witnesses’ husbands car. Appeared at 16812 W. Outer Drive and shot at 4:46am. The intoxication is relevant because it indicates state of mind and will be used to show his fear could be reasonable. To be that drunk after the crash and time it took for ME to do toxicology report is scary. And at 19 years old. I can’t remember but I believe her friend may have testified about her demeanor on phone but it was conflicting. Who supplied her with so much alcohol? If she had died at scene of wreck, this may have been explored.

    I also do not understand why her family reported that she was shot in the back of the head. And why would the family say this:

    http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/23865365/womans-body-dumped-in-dearborn-heights

    I don’t think judge is allowing her past accident that she wandered off, texts, and school records in as I don’t think they are relevant and we know what that tactic is about. Defense also wants crime patterns of neighborhood entered. Also, the crime of DUI, underage drinking, and fleeing scene of accident aren’t relevant to actual shooting as he had no way of knowing what had happened. But I do believe jurors will ponder that and the 3+ hours of no one knowing where she went and no one caring including 2 witnesses.

    I think his accident / self defense case is weak from what I’ve looked at. My best guess and it is a guess is guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

    • bettykath says:

      Conviction should be 2nd degree murder. Opening the door with loaded gun in hand shows intent. If she had opened the door it would self-defense. I expect a hung jury if not outright acquittal. It all depends on how competent the prosecutor is in getting an impartial jury, as well as how assertively the case is presented. As we have learned from the Trayvon Martin case, the prosecutors and judges can make the case go one way or the other depending on their own biases.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        I think manslaughter is what jury will come back with. I did look at some of Maryland’s definitions, etc. I’m trying to find Maryland jury instructions on the various charges and self defense.

        We kind of got a look at what each side will present from his hearing. Conflicting firearm experts and conflicting opinions on distance.

        I definitely am interested in following this.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        Opening the door with loaded gun does sound retarded I know. Obviously begs the question why open door at all. But it’s not a crime in Maryland. He didn’t open second door. I want to know what in the world occurred for him to shoot, if anything. I know he said it was an accident but I don’t put much stock in him “changing to self-defense” once he got a lawyer. In other words, I don’t think he thought hey how can I make this look like something else. The problem with his story is claiming he thought someone was breaking into his house and he opens first door to do what? Defense isn’t saying he opened door and then fear set in because of something she did. So I get what you’re saying BK.

        Do you think he will have to take stand? Defense is going to be aggressive on the intoxication issue. Was she acting hostile, erratic, confused, calm, what? We do have witnesses’ that can answer that question after the accident. Did she say anything? Did she ask for help once he opened the first door? Would it have mattered who it was banging on the door at 4:30am to him?

        • Malisha says:

          Opening the door with loaded gun does sound retarded I know. Obviously begs the question why open door at all. But it’s not a crime in Maryland. He didn’t open second door. I want to know what in the world occurred for him to shoot, if anything. I know he said it was an accident but I don’t put much stock in him “changing to self-defense” once he got a lawyer. In other words, I don’t think he thought hey how can I make this look like something else.

          “Opening the door with loaded gun” doesn’t sound retarded to me. It sounds murderous to me. I don’t really think he opened the door from stupidity (if that stupid, why bother with a loaded gun, how would he have thought of it?).

          To me, “Opening the door with loaded gun” indicates that he felt protected so he was going to see whether he wanted to shoot somebody or not. Once he saw her face, he shot it. Pretty clear to me that the only decision he had to make was whether the person at the door was someone he could get away with killing. He was in a “make my day” position.

          As to the question of “why open door at all,” I believe it was so that he could see whether the person was kill-able (black and not in uniform) or not. After all, if he shot through the wooden door without checking he might kill somebody he shouldn’t kill and get prosecuted. Or worse, they might shoot HIM.

          Now when you get right down to “But it’s not a crime,” remember what the judge and jury said in the Fogen trial. It wasn’t a crime to profile Trayvon Martin; it was not a crime to call NEN# saying there was a “real suspicious guy” there; it was not a crime to follow Trayvon Martin; it was not a crime to demand (although he did not admit this part) an accounting from the boy as if he had authority of some kind; it was not a crime to carry his loaded gun and chase after a kid in the dark. None of these things were crimes. Fine. That’s the society we want to live in? Where it’s not a crime to open a door so shooting somebody in the face after doing so is less murderous than murder?

          Now: “He didn’t open second door.” Didn’t need to. He could aim and fire right through it which is what he did.

          The crux, I believe, is this: “I want to know what in the world occurred for him to shoot, if anything.” I think there are two guesses available here. (1) KILL; and (2) MISS. Which do you think “occurred to him”? (After all, if you remember the Marissa Alexander case, she shot up in the air to scare her abuser. Wafer could have shot up in the air. He shot directly into the woman’s face.

          My guesswork about the whole thing is different from yours. When you say: “I know he said it was an accident but I don’t put much stock in him ‘changing to self-defense’ once he got a lawyer. In other words, I don’t think he thought hey how can I make this look like something else.” My guess on this one is easy: With the cops who wanted the investigation to end without them finding anything, he felt confident enough to say, “Hey guys, it was an accident; I’d like to go home now and repair my screen door.” Once he realized there was going to be trouble, he lawyered up and was told in no uncertain terms, “You need something more credible than that,” so he went for the old standby “Blacks are dangerous I was defending my poor victimized white hide.”

          “How can I make this look like something else?” Yes, obviously. It LOOKS LIKE murder and apparently he’s being prosecuted by the book, so he wants to make it look like something else. Put differently: It looks like he’s possibly going to be punished; he wants to make it look like he should NOT be punished.

    • Dave says:

      It seems to me that the witnesses responded properly to the situation. They offered assistance and called 911. You can’t expect them to restrain her. They aren’t cops. They probably figured (as I would have) that she wanted to avoid a breathalyzer test and a near-certain DUI arrest and thought it best not to interfere. It’s too bad that the cops didn’t show up promptly. Ms. McBride might be alive (and licenseless) today.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        I agree you can’t restrain her. I would have followed her knowing she was in shock and confused and it was cold and raining. I look at how I’ve responded before to other accidents and I hope that’s what I would have done. Those vehicles were in bad shape. I don’t think it crossed their mind that she was trying to avoid a breathalyzer. She was bleeding and confused. That just wouldn’t even cross my mind at all.

        I did notice that 2 witnesses were same race as McBride.

        • Dave says:

          I don’t think that I would follow a lone woman down a dark Detroit street at half past midnight. She (and others) might not think that I was just looking out for her welfare and (knowing the futility of calling 911) take direct action.

          Also, if I witnessed someone speeding down a residential 25 MPH street after midnight and crashing her car into the back of a parked vehicle I would assume that the driver was drunk out of her skull and had good reason to leave the scene.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        Also Dave, any time I’ve called in an accident one of the first things I’m asked is anyone hurt. If yes, police and ambulance are dispatched immediately. It’s not pushed to low-priority like a fender bender would be in a city. I just don’t get that and why witness had to make second call to ask for ambulance. Just looking at the 2 cars even from a window you know likelihood someone is injured.

        • Dave says:

          That’s illustrative of the terrible state of Detroit’s city services.

        • MKX says:

          The city of Detroit, where the car accident took place, has an very poor police and EMS response time.

          One of my colleagues at work had a job in a 24/7 gas station on Warren by the WSU campus when he was a student. He worked the night shift. Well, one night, the police arrived and demanded information about the robbery. He had to tell them that the robbery was reported by the morning shift.

          And police in suburbs that are adjacent to Detroit are often very hostile or indifferent to any person they deem a “Detroiter”.

          Detroiter is a term that racists in that region use to make generalizations about what they really mean are black persons.

          So I can see why Kym Worthy had to make the Dearborn Heights PD do a more thorough investigation. Just another “Detroiter” to them.

          One exception to that rule is the Southfield PD.

    • We can pretty accurately estimate her BAC at 1 am by multiplying the alcohol burn-off rate (0.16/hour), which is pretty consistent for all humans, times the elapsed time (3.5 hours) and adding the total to her blood toxicology result 0.218 BAC.

      (0.016 X 3.5) + 0.218 = 0.056 + 0.218 = 0.274

      Unless she was an alcoholic and used to drinking heavily, she would have been visibly impaired, which explains hitting the parked car.

      • Dave says:

        According to her cousin, the Taurus was either the third or fourth car that she totaled. That’s a pretty impressive record for someone who couldn’t have been driving legally for more than 3 years. I suspect that she and John Barleycorn had been on familiar terms for some time.

  3. racerrodig says:

    In a real Court of Law, he’d lose since everything you said appears to be true.

    Don’t worry, we got your back.

  4. MKX says:

    He is a self-proclaimed expert on everything.

    Can I claim to be the next Sigmund Freud and publish a book wherein I conclude Zimmerman is a low IQ, insecure, sexually incompetent, cop fantasizer who uses his gun as a means to compensate for his numerous inadequacies?

    He could sue me for definition of character, and win!!!

  5. Amazon features excerpts from the books they sell. To read the excerpt, click on the book cover and the book opens . . .

    To a disclaimer from Zimmerman that says, in part,

    Not everyone will agree with the statements herein, which may or may not be factual, but in some ways may prove to be helpful.

    Could be a description of Ebola and how to treat it.

    More useless bullshit from George Zimmerman.

    Caution: Book may be a parody

  6. J4TMinATL says:

    I’m just curious. We know the jurors identities have been released. Nelson unsealed them many months ago after our good ole POS’s at Orlando Sent requested. So they are public record and OS admitted to reaching out to each one for a comment.

    It’s amazing that the names have not been found on the internet still to this today. Can’t find a citizen that has uploaded names even anonymously. Correct me if I’m wrong and missed it. Certainly proves to the nuthouse that nobody is after these jurors. Not that there is anything to prove.

    What are y’alls thoughts? Should be able to look it up on internet or no?

    • I believe we should be encouraging people to serve as jurors.

      Publishing juror names on the internet would frighten many people and discourage them from serving.

      • bettykath says:

        I agree. It would satisfy our curiosity to find out but it would be discouraging for potential jurors.

        • Malisha says:

          But it would really be discouraging to STEALTH JURORS and therefore I am actually FOR it. I want people to be afraid to sneak onto a jury for the purpose of subverting the justice system.

  7. MKX says:

    I found this book in the interested readers link. For anyone who likes number, it might be worth a read:

    http://www.amazon.com/Trayvon-Martin-Bayes-Theorem-Zimmerman-ebook/dp/B00GSMU5UE/ref=pd_sim_sbs_kstore_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1WGDMHYP8400ABFG83JX#reader_B00GSMU5UE

    I have tried to use probability in many of my posts on this site. Apparently, this author deems Zimmerman 99.9% likely to have been guilty of manslaughter.

    I played a lot of war games that use probability to simulate real events.

    And that is how one should have approached this trial. What are the odds that Zimmerman will tell the truth or lie in the face of at least 20 years in prison?

    If the forensic evidence does not correlate with what George claims to be a true story, what are the odds that he is telling the truth?

    What are the odds of a teen walking down the street unarmed of attacking a man in a residential community wherein said teen could:

    A) be hurt by the man

    B) face a long term in prison for attacking the man

    How do A and B effect the odds that Zimmerman is telling the truth?

    What do the 100% known facts in the case prove?

    And we can used the same approach in the Wafer trial.

  8. aussie says:

    haha, did you see the other one? Jonathan Good is claiming, via e-book, that his life got changed that day

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Reluctant-Witness-Between-Zimmerman-ebook/dp/B00JUDSWGC/ref=pd_sim_sbs_kstore_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=17KRKQSZGQJXDAYNA0RT

    my heart bleeds for him…..

    • Malisha says:

      If he had acted decently it would have changed his life a different way.

      • MKX says:

        His testimony, based on the excerpt from the book is not very useful.

        He states that he could see both of them lying on each other with their feet facing him. And the guy on top has darker clothes.

        Well, Trayvon Martin had tan pants, white shoes and a grey hoodie vs. the blue jeans, brown boots and red jacket worn by Zimmerman. I submit that, in night lighting, Zimmerman’s clothing is darker than that worn by Trayvon.

        And he can tell that the guy on the bottom is lighter skinned.

        How?

        Most of the guy on tops skin is covered by clothing and Trayvon Martin was not from Sudan. In that light, I seriously doubt one could make a determination of relative skin color unless they were up close.

        And his later description of the tussle sound like a wrestling math, not an MMA beat down. Any person being subject to 20 blows to the face would be crying out in extreme agony.

        And the “Help! Help!” should have, if Judge Nelson had done her job, made the prosecution case stronger.

        The audio analysis clearly identified two distinct voice wherein the final scream was voice 2.

        Well, George admitted in his testimony that he asked Goode for help, thus making him voice 1.

        I had never really done a critical review of Goode’s testimony.

        Having done that, it is clear to me that Trayvon was struggling to break free.

        And this is what Zimmerman supporters use for proof that he was being beaten to death?

  9. I am just the messenger you guys.

    But, on Amazon, there is this:

    Zimmerman Book.

    • masonblue says:

      Crane-Station here. What the actual fuck?

    • bettykath says:

      3 panning reviews all found helpful by six who read the reviews. Estimated 10 pages at 2.99 = 30 cents per page.

      • Malisha says:

        I’m sorry; the First Amendment should not cover this shit. He seriously needs his butt kicked. And Serino and Lee and that female cop who worked parties with him all three need to be thoroughly investigated and then given a fair trial and then taken out back and shot. THESE TYPES misuse our whole constitution, our whole system, our society, and they wreak havoc. If they had acted halfway decently, the name [I cannot say it] FOGEN would be synonymous all over the LE world for “ANTI-NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH.”

        • MKX says:

          Trayvon Martin was presumed guilty.

          So all these clowns waving their flags and wearing their uniforms are unfit to uphold justice.

          And they are the first to yell loud about totalitarianism.

          A totalitarian state allows those in a position of authority to deem an individual guilty and put the burden on that individual to prove they are innocent.

          And one can use statistics.

          What were the odds that Trayvon Martin was up to no good?

          1/3?

          1/30?

          1/300?

          And what gave Zimmerman the right to deem Trayvon up to no good?

          Oh, that’s right.

          He is one of the good guys.

          Translation.

          He is part of an upper rung in an area that has a de facto authoritarian hierarchy which is characteristic of a totalitarian state.

          God, guns and the flag.

      • Classified as a parody. Terrible idea, if you ask me.

    • J4TMinATL says:

      I just xxxx in my pants. POS

      Better be a hoax.

  10. bettykath!!

    That is so totally what we are here for, I saw this one yesterday and it lightened mine!!

  11. kllypyn says:

    It seems like someone is trying to make excuses for this so called man.

  12. MKX says:

    Women rock!!

  13. bettykath says:

    Totally off topic but I needed something to lighten my load tonight. Maybe you do too.

    But on the other hand…..

  14. roderick2012 says:

    “Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy had to order the Dearborn Heights police, who first released Wafer without charges, to do a more thorough investigation of the case. They did a second crime scene review Nov. 11, during which they discovered a key piece of evidence, the perforated front door screen, in Wafer’s basement.”

    I see that these police officers had the same attitude that the Sanford police had the night that Trayvon was murdered.

    The blah (re: Rick Santorum) victim got what he/she deserved.

  15. crazy1946 says:

    One of the things that I find so strange in the discussion of this case by the various hate groups is the fixation of the screen door hinges being torn off or the screen damaged by Mz. McBride. Has it ever dawned on them that this type of door can’t keep a person out if they wish to get in the house? Face it, she did not need to tear the door off if she want to get to the main door, all she had to do is tear the screen near the door knob and reach thru and open the screen door… but at that point what would she have gained? The door on the house looks like a steel door, and I don’t think she was going to break that one down very easily..

    • MKX says:

      See my link to the drug neighborhood in Detroit.

      What home invaders do is to pry open the screen door with a crow bar and then three dudes will kick the outer door in. So the homeowners who live in these areas get an outer security door with a locking bar that slides into a hole drilled into the concrete of the porch. And they will have bars over the windows.

      But McBride was not three big guys and she had no crow bar.

      And, of course, if one has a shot gun, they wait till the inner door is being breached to shoot.

      Opening the inner door is either stupid or you “want” to shoot another person.

      And, in the case of Wafer, I favor “want”.

  16. MKX says:

    The inner door looks very solid. So what did this guy have to fear if he was behind that. Besides, he had to living room window to observe who was out there.

    Criminal law aside, Wafer is guilty of no common sense with a fire arm.

    Never point a gun AT someone because it CAN go off. The adrenaline rush of fear can make a trigger finger jumpy.

    Rush a gun and run from a knife.

    If that had been a real pro of a criminal, Wafer would have been shot or bull rushed the minute that inside door cracked open.

    Never open your inside door, if you have a fear. Yell to the person outside that you have called the police, are armed, and afraid.

    One of my neighbors dropped her DOC badge and I followed her and knocked on her door. She yelled that I was a stranger and she was afraid. So I yelled back that those badges are a pain to replace and I was setting it on the stoop and leaving.

    My father had a saying about tragic events.

    Lack of communication.

  17. Dave says:

    I would like to see that tested. (Damn! I just scrapped an old screen door too!)

    That Google image is dated July 2013. Was that before or after the shooting?

    • MKX says:

      November 2, 2013 according to Wikipedia.

      • Dave says:

        Thanks MKX! So the pic shows the original pre-shooting screen door. Wafer was kind of late swapping out the screen for the glass or acrylic storm window.

        • MKX says:

          The report noted that the side door -these Michigan “boxes” often have side doors – had steps that were in disrepair. Maybe Wafer was not into keeping things up. We had ours swapped out by the first week of September.

          • Dave says:

            I usually remove the screen on Halloween (to simplify handing out treats) and install the glass the next day.

          • MKX says:

            @Dave

            Another thing I notice is there is not one of those iron outer security doors on any of the homes in that area. Those iron doors are very common in Detroit neighborhood that have a significant amount of drug dealing.

            So this meme about the neighborhood going bad is not too valid, IMO.

            Test link:

            https://www.google.com/maps/@42.421664,-83.253201,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sioN4GPQt9RbIjinS1-VQeg!2e0

            Drugs have been sold around here for decades. Anyhow, note the bars on the windows and the security doors. A wee bit different from Dearborn Heights, I would say.

            And I also noted not one boarded up home, not one home in disrepair with junk strewn all over the lawn, and not one burned out hulk on Wafer’s street.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          Although police did not collect the screen door at the correct time– only photographed it, I am shocked that he did not throw it away.

    • Malisha says:

      Are you the same Dave as Marinade?

  18. MKX says:

    The picture shows the hole on the side of the screen opposite the hinges. So my theory about the hole being on the hinge side is based on incorrect information.

    The forensics also indicates a blast from three feet. So she could have been pounding on the door when murderman 2 decided to open that inner door and, upon seeing her face, shot at it. The pellets have a lot of force when the blast radius is small. It would be like a sledge hammer striking the screen mess. So I don’t think the shot being able to pop the screen out is unreasonable. And that can be easily verified by tests, if needed.

    Test link:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@42.339718,-83.255792,3a,30y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sCtj7aueDURfXSfLbmzlHBA!2e0

    • MKX says:

      Click on my link above and it will take you to a google maps image of the home.

      Mcbrides body was found lying face up with the head, {what was left of it , you murdering asshole – Wafer} in the bushes.

      A blast from a shotgun will drive the victim back and, based on that picture, I fail to see how she had the screen door open to the point where it was being ripped of its hinges because a shot through the screen with the door opened would have drove her off the side of the porch in the direction of the street intersecting Outer Drive.

      Also, the police report does not note a screen door with ripped hinges. It merely notes a popped out screen.

      And the fact that someone put the screen in the basement means that the scene was altered, thus bringing into question any damage to the hinges not noted in the initial report.

  19. Dave says:

    Every screen door that I’m familiar with was designed so that the screen and storm window are removable from inside the house. They are held in place by a metal lip on the outside and typically by rotatable “tabs” on the inside. The officer’s description of the door’s state suggests to me that it’s far more likely that the screen was pushed in by someone on the porch than somehow knocked loose by a shotgun blast from inside.

    • crazy1946 says:

      Dave, The officers report said the screen portion was pushed out possibly by the shotgun blast. How do you propose that the deceased managed to do that? I did note that it is/was a rather large screen and probably pretty thick screen material, that would account for the blast “pushing a portion of the screen outward from the frame. Please Dave take a moment and explain how you think Mz. McBride pushed outward against the screen while standing outside a locked screen door.

      • Dave says:

        I didn’t suggest that Ms. McBride (or anyone else) pushed the screen outward. If the police found the screen hanging precariously by one of the attaching “tabs” (which are always mounted on the INSIDE of the screen door it indicates to me that the screen was pushed inward. If the screen had been forced outward It would have been bent all to hell and the cop wouldn’t have been able to replace it without doing some serious straightening. I’d like to think that he had more sense than to mess with the evidence that much. While a shotgun blast would easily tear through just about any window screen I’m pretty sure that the screen fabric would pull loose from the screen frame before the screen frame was dislodged from the door, which is held in place by continuous lip on the outside of the door.

        • crazy1946 says:

          Dave, Ok, but I am still trying to understand your point? Was your point that Mz. McBride pushed the screen portion of the door inward? If so what effect would that have on her entering the house? You must surely realize that a screen/storm door is not a security type door used to prevent anything much larger than a fly from entering. Regardless, to whether she pushed the screen inward or not the screen was still somewhat attached when the shotgun was discharged into her face and head..

          • Dave says:

            I’m not really trying to make any point other than to figure out what exactly happened. At this point, based on the police statement cited by Prof. Leatherman, I believe that It is likely that the screen was pushed inward by Ms. McBride. Was she trying to break in? Was she trying to defend herself against the armed man on the other side? Did she fall against the screen after being shot? I don’t know.

          • crazy1946 says:

            Could she have perhaps fallen against the door while trying to stand on the porch? Could there have been a verbal confrontation between she and TW? If so, could she have hit the screen with her hand in a moment of disgust, causing TW to overreact and open and shoot her? I would suspect that only two people knew what took place that night, Mz. McBride and TW, but only one is alive to defend their actions… Will we ever know the truth? Some pretend to know the truth but the truth they know is the one they chose to believe and perhaps is not the factual truth at all…

          • MKX says:

            McBride could have been pounding on the metal frame and, given her state, might have hit the mesh with a few blows.

            But that is not a justification for shooting her.

            Wafer was safe behind the inner door with his loaded gun and decided to open the inner door.

            So the chain of intentional acts are:

            He hears pounding

            He gets a loaded gun

            He opens a door that protects him

            And he shoot the young lady

            I fail to see anything that McBride did that was cause for Wafer to fear for his death.

            Still, he will get a hung jury.

            There is an all too large element in the Michigan population that feel killing those who damage or steal their property is justifiable.

            And if the killed happens to have non-white skin, the justification can become adulation.

            Look at the old man who shot the Mexicans who were stealing from one of his neighbors homes. The Texas jury found him not guilty and he was deemed a hero by a large segment of our population.

        • Malisha says:

          Some serious physics is required to figure out approximately (and nothing can figure it out exactly, after the fact because NOT ALL the conditions are known) what happened to the screen door. After all, the victim could have fallen into it as she collapsed post-mortem (when you get shot in the face you can be forgiven for being a little clumsy) or — or anything. Also, forensics will have to determine things like the tear and what made it, and the force, and the direction, etc. etc. etc.

          What happened to the other parties besides the screen (what happened to the guy who accidentally opened the door and feared-for-his-life to death a person outside the door) (what happened to a young woman who was drunk off her ass when she knocked or bumped a door and got shot in the face) (etc.) will also take some scientific evaluation.

        • In the same way that opposite ends of a teeter totter go in opposite directions when the teeter totter is balanced equally at the midpoint on a fulcrum and weight is added to one of the ends, the force of a shotgun blast fired through a screen with the muzzle in contact with the screen should cause the frame to which the screen is attached to bend inward toward the source of the blast.

          The more solid frame of the storm door, to which the screen and its wimpy frame would be attached by fitting it into a groove and secured by a tab, would serve as the fulcrum function.

          I would expect the wimpy frame of the screen, especially the tabs, to displace inward toward the source of the blast.

          I say the muzzle was in contact with the screen because the hole in the screen exhibits starring with two long rips away from the hole. One is above and one is below the hole.

          More than shotgun pellets were involved. The full and focused force of the exploding gunpowder must also be considered.

          Of course, we’re just a couple of guys having a discussion, This is where forensics comes in. They have the shotgun, the ammo and the screen. A firearms expert needs to reproduce the event with an identical screen door and photograph the results.

    • I disagree.

      I linked to the photograph taken by the cops. Looks to me like the screen is perforated outward from the blast.

      • MKX says:

        There also appears to be damage to the metal of both the screen border and frame that is proximate the hole in the mesh. A shot gun pellet blast at close range has a huge amount of kinetic energy and momentum that can twist and deform metal.

        I am sure this issue will get scrutiny during the trial.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: