From the article that I linked to above:
Pullum's wife, Teri Pullum, who was in the car along with his mother, told police they had planned to stop at the car wash. About 120 feet away, her husband said a vehicle behind them "needed to get off his ass."
Pullum was less than 50 yards from his destination before the car behind him had been there long enough to say something about it to his wife and mother. Not a lot of time to make a decision to go past his destination, and even if he had, he still wasn't the aggressor.
There is
zero evidence that Pullum "stopped
to confront the guy." He stopped at his destination according to both of the people in the car with him.
Teri Pullum told police Taylor's vehicle was so close they couldn't see its bumper. Her husband didn't react with any communication, such as hand gestures or tapping on the brakes, she said. They didn't know why Taylor was tailgating and there hadn't been any signs of a problem, she said.
While certainly not the best tactical decision he ever made to stop, as short as the "event" was up to that point, would it not be a somewhat natural notion to think the tailgater would simply drive on by if he just got off the road?
In any case, at the point at which he did pull into his destination's parking lot, there is no evidence that he considered the event anything more than a guy that "needed to get off his ass." How many times have every one of us said that when nothing else untoward happened after the tailgater went around us or we got out of their way?
Teri Pullum told police she heard her husband tell Taylor he needed to "stay off his ass." The two men were nose-to-nose as they exchanged words, but she couldn't make out their conversation. One man pushed the other and she saw Taylor pull out a handgun and shoot her husband at "almost point blank range," the police report states. A medical examiner's autopsy confirmed that Pullum was shot from close range, the 50-page police report shows.
While it might be an interesting factoid to know which man pushed the other, as it says further in the article, Pullum exited his vehicle without his weapon, so he certainly had no intention of shooting or really harming anybody that night. Another boneheaded tactical decision to be sure, but absolutely zero criminal or otherwise nefarious intent can be discerned from anything he did that night.
An auctioneer who contacted police after the incident said Taylor called him in April, identifying himself as "RC Taylor" and saying he wanted to get rid of some of his guns "due to his condition," which was not elaborated on. The auctioneer told police that Taylor, during a lengthy conversation, "carried on about the militia, the NRA, and conspiracies reference governmental gun control," according to the report.
The auctioneer told police he contacted Taylor in May in regard to an auction and Taylor couldn't recall their previous conversation.
No, my name is not "RC Taylor." LOL Sorry, couldn't resist.
It is interesting though, that one out of the two men involved is said to have been trying to get rid of his guns "due to his condition." Is there any kind of physical malady that anyone can think of that would necessitate such an effort? Obviously he still had the physical ability to carry and fire a weapon. Assuming the auctioneer told the truth to police, it is reasonable to believe that Taylor had a mental "condition" that he himself was aware of enough to consider himself too unstable to have guns.
Officers located a bag of about nine medications that treat depression, anxiety and insomnia in Taylor's car. Authorities asked his wife about his health, and she said he had been doing "pretty well" and his mental health was "good." Taylor's wife said his psychiatrist was surprised to hear of his involvement in the incident.
So apparently Taylor himself was more aware of the severity of his mental illness than his own psychiatrist was, at least back in April of 2013 he was (the article is dated November 1, 2013, and the incident happened Sept. 18, 2013).
As far as not wanting to engage in "Monday morning quarterbacking," why not? That's pretty much what happens on forums like this. When we're discussing specific incidences of defensive uses of carried guns, we're always trying to put ourselves in the position of the carrier who was
justified in firing his weapon. We certainly don't attempt to identify with the criminal, the
unjustified instigator, or in this case, the mentally ill person who went off the rails for no discernible reason.
To scrutinize (or Monday morning quarterback) Pullum's actions and/or tactical decisions in relation to how any one of us would react in the same or similar situation is perfectly fair and proper.
To avoid discussion of the events and speak untruths about someone who simply pulled into the parking lot of his destination, but accuse him of stopping "...
to confront the guy" is hardly fair to the one guy that was quite obviously the only justified shooter that night.
I suppose to be fair, there is an
article linked at the page I
linked to earlier where the investigating detective is quoted in the title of the page as saying,
"Fatal road rage lessons: Detective says 'I wouldn't advise pulling over and confronting anyone.'" That article is dated Sept. 21, 2013, just three days into the investigation though. The author of the article says that police are having trouble with the investigation because of a lack of "independent witnesses." That's total crap as far as I'm concerned. The police report says that Pullum was shot at very close range, corroborating his wife's assertion that it was at near "point blank" range. Both Pullum's wife and mother
were independent witnesses. They certainly weren't principles to the events. They were eye witnesses to most of the entire event, maybe all of it. Being related to a victim is not reasonable cause to disregard what they said about what happened. On Sept. 21, there was no justification for publicly questioning the veracity of their witness reports, which later were proven true through putting
all the facts together, including the wife's 911 call, other 911 calls, autopsy reports, physical evidence at the scene etc. The fact is, the cop was wrong for taking for granted that Pullum pulled into the parking lot
to "confront" Taylor. According to the only surviving
independent witnesses, he pulled into his predetermined destination, and Taylor pulled in behind
to confront him.
Here is a link to
all the articles that MLive.com has done on the story, the last one being dated Nov. 26, 2013 in which the toxicology reports on both drivers were reported to "show no excessive medications or alcohol" found in either man's system.
I am certainly nobody's "boss," but when I see knee-jerk reactions to an event that lays equivalent amounts of blame on the victim of a crime as on the aggressor, I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask such people to validate those statements based on the available facts instead of their uninformed, knee-jerk reactions. So I posted a link and asked someone to do just that. Boo-friggin'-hoo.
Blues
