Analysis of the shooting of Barbara Scharton

Transcription

1 Summary Analysis of the shooting of Barbara Scharton 1. After gaining entry on the first floor in the Lyons/Scharton home, the assailants discovered Barbara Scharton in a bedroom on that floor. Assailant 1 was likely armed with a.22 revolver and assailant 2, a 12 gauge shotgun. Assailant 1 entered Scharton s bedroom followed by assailant Assailant 1 approached the bed where Scharton, who was alerted to the trespasser entry, was sitting up and about to get off the bed when she received the first of three.22 bullets, which hit her in the right forearm. Assailant 1 fired the second.22 bullet at the sitting victim, an intermediate range shot to her upper right chest. The third.22 shot was by a hard contact shot to Scharton s right arm. After this third shot, Scharton fell back onto the bed inserting a pillow between her and the assailants. Assailant 1 was now to the left of Scharton and assailant 2 discharged his shotgun at her face. Assailant 1 fired another.22 bullet at Scharton s neck near her chin, likely within a second of the shotgun blast. 3. The shooting attack on Barbara Scharton was coordinated and rapidly executed and lasted no more than 5 seconds from entry to her bedroom to the final shot. Introduction This report is a reconstruction of the homicide of Barbara Scharton at 621Aurora Street, Santa Barbara in the early morning of May 4, The homicide was reconstructed utilizing the crime scene images and reports and the autopsy images and report. Barbara Scharton received five shots while she was on her bed in a bedroom on the first floor of her newly-constructed house. The first three shots were received while she was sitting and the final two when she was on her back on the bed. The assailants. The reconstruction of the scene necessitates two assailants. As will be discussed below, the evidence indicates the Scharton homicide occurred too rapidly and with two firearms for this to be committed by a single shooter. Assailant 1 likely had a.22 revolver because of the lack of shell casings at the scene and the weapon was not used for Daniel Lyons attack (i.e., it was nearly empty after the attack on Barbara Scharton). Assailant 2 had the shotgun which due to the rapid multiple shots later at Daniel Lyons, was likely a 12 gauge semiautomatic shotgun. The Daniel Lyons attack, which also cannot be reconstructed with only one shooter, probably involved the same two shooters. However, there could have been a third assailant who had a.38 revolver. The attack Assailant entry. A short time after 1 AM on May 4, 2009 the two, perhaps three, assailants entered the home at 621 Aurora Street, Santa Barbara, California. It could be that the assailants were unaware of Scharton being in a bedroom other than the master bedroom on the

2 Figure 1. Left. Deceased Barbara Scharton on her bed as she was found (DSC 0145). The position of her legs indicates she was in the process of getting out of her bed when she was attacked. Right. The body after the pillows and bed spread were removed (DSC 0300). The tucking of the bed sheet around Scharton s body indicates she had pulled and wrapped the sheet around her upon the assailants entry into her bedroom. second floor of the house. She, upon hearing the trespassers, called out thinking it was Daniel Lyons. Scharton was concerned enough by foot steps and/or muffled voices as well as the lack of verbal response to her, that she sat up in bed and started to get out of the bed (Fig. 1, left and Fig. 2). It was at this time that the assailants entered her bedroom. In the early part of the assailant entry into her bedroom, Scharton pulled at her overlying bed sheet, bringing it up to her neck and wrapping it around her (Fig. 1 right). The pattern of shots to Scharton indicates the assailants approached her while she sat on the bed (Fig. 2). Figure 2. A mannequin overlay on crime scene image, DSC 0145, showing the likely position (at 1 ) of the.22 firearm for shot 1.

3 Figure shot 1 distant range, as demonstrated by a mannequin. The red dot approximates the entrance and the X, the approximates the position of the bullet that was recovered from the right forearm. The bullet trajectory is shown by the arrow. Right. This graphic shows this likely trajectory on the horizontal plane. Figure 4. Left..22 shot 2 at intermediate range using a mannequin simulation. The shooter appears to have been to the right of Scharton for this shot. Upper right. The muzzle of the.22 was likely within 2 or 3 inches of her sheet-covered chest as indicated by the soot deposit on the sheet (at arrow, DSC 0265). This shot might have occurred after the next.22 shot and visa versa. Lower right. This graphic shows this likely trajectory on the horizontal plane.

4 The first shot. The assailants entered the bedroom with assailant 1 in the lead. He rapidly reached the base of the bed and started shooting his.22 firearm at the sitting Scharton. The first bullet hit Barbara Scharton s right arm (Figs. 2 and 3). This is Gunshot Wound No. 5 in the autopsy report. Due to the uncertain angle of her body and arm positions, the position of the shooter is approximate, but he was somewhere at the base of the bed, likely near the right side. Considering the location and bullet track (as indicated in the autopsy report) and the position of the body on the bed, this wound as well as the next two.22 bullet wounds could not have occurred while Scharton was on her back in the bed, her position when found. Shot 2. Assailant 1 fired his second.22 shot when he was just to the right of Barbara Scharton. This is Gunshot Wound No. 3 in the autopsy report. Soot on the bed sheet that was covering her chest (Fig. 4, upper right) in the vicinity of this.22 entrance wound shows the.22 muzzle was probably between 2 or 3 inches of the bed sheet when fired. A contact or near contact shot is discounted because the sheet fabric was not torn by the muzzle blast nor was there soot noted on or near the entrance wound and the sheet was high enough for her skin not to receive any soot. No soot was reported in the wound track by the autopsy report. This shot could have occurred after the.22 shot to Scharton s upper right arm (shot 3, see below). Regardless of the shot order, the shooter was quite close to his victim when both of these shots were delivered. Figure 5. Shot number 3. Left and lower right. The assailant pressed the muzzle of the.22 firearm against the arm at the location shown and discharged the gun. Upper right. Image DSC The nearly uniform distribution of the soot around the wound suggests the muzzle was pressed hard against the skin forcing that skin, but not the arm, to be almost 90 degrees to the muzzle.

5 Figure 6. The shot gun wound to Barbara Scharton s face. A. X-ray of the side of Barbara s head showing the direction of the blast as well as the.22 bullet that was the last fired into the body (DSC 0030). Arrow show the direction of the blast. B. Scharton s left arm and hand (IMG 1527). The left forearm caught part of the shotgun s blast. C. the right arm and hand (IMG 1519) showing the avulsed injury caused by the arm being in part of the main shotgun blast. D. Not only were Scharton s arms involved in the shotgun blast, but so was the pillow on her lower chest and abdomen (at arrow)(dsc 0261). Shot 3. The autopsy report noted for this wound (Gunshot Wound No. 4) copious amounts of black carbonaceous debris around the entrance defect (Fig. 5, upper right) and declared this wound as a contact-range gunshot. Obviously, assailant 1 firmly pressed the muzzle of his.22 firearm against Barbara Scharton s lateral/posterior aspect of her right upper arm near her elbow and fired. The nearly uniform distribution of the soot around the wound (Fig. 5, upper right) suggests the muzzle was pressed hard against the skin forcing that skin, but not the arm, to be almost 90 degrees to the muzzle. The bullet went the length of her upper arm and lodged in the right deltoid muscle at her shoulder. The shot trajectory is simulated in Fig. 5 left. Either Scharton fell back or was pushed by an assailant so that the final 2 shots to her occurred while she was on her back on the bed. Shot 4. This is a 12 gauge shotgun wound to Barbara Scharton s face (Fig. 6) and is Gunshot Wound No. 1 in the autopsy report. The autopsy X-ray of Barbara Scharton s head shows the direction of the shotgun pellets were upward as reflected by the arrow in Fig. 6A. This X-ray indicates Scharton was lying on the bed when she received this devastating wound. Scharton

6 Figure 7. Blood spatter from the shotgun blast to Barbara Scharton s face. Left. Spatter on the pillow to the left of Barbara s head. Right. A pillow was in front of Barbara when the shotgun discharged. If that pillow received spatter resulting from the shotgun blast, the bleeding from the severely wounded right hand obscured it. The bloodstains on the pillow (the upper right of the image) indicate the arm had been moved several times after its wounding. had her left arm in front and slightly above her right in a defensive posture likely in response to the shotgun pointed at her so that both her left arm (Fig. 6B) and right arm (Fig. 6C) were caught in the blast. In addition, she had a pillow on her chest which also caught part of the shotgun blast (Fig. 6D, arrow). Figure 8. Reconstruction of the shotgun blast to Barbara Scharton s face. The red line represents the trajectory of the blast. The arms of the mannequin would not flex to their probable position for the shotgun blast and Scharton s arms were probably lower than shown here. The shotgun muzzle was likely more than 2 feet from the face, and could have been as much as 3 feet. See text.

7 7 Figure 9. The.22 shot 5 into the upper neck of Barbara Scharton. Left. Autopsy image DSC 0032 showing the.22 caliber wound (arrow) surround by defects caused by shotgun pellets. Right. The mannequin s arms would not flex enough to rest on the pillow so they were removed to show the trajectory of the shot. The shotgun muzzle had sufficient distance from the victim s face that gunshot distributed impact blood spatter was relatively minor considering the nature of the firearm. Judging from the satellite pellet wounds on Scharton s right face and left arm, the shotgun s muzzle was more than two feet from the victim, perhaps as much as 3 feet (see Hueske, 2006, p. 114). The gas input by the shotgun blast into Scharton s head wound was minor at this distance. Blood spatter, however, can be seen on the pillow to the right of Scharton s face (Fig. 7, left). Spatter is not seen on the pillow which Scharton had in front of her due to the bleeding from her severely wounded right arm obscuring any of the spatter derived from the shotgun blast (Fig.7, right). Figure 8 recreates this shot to Scharton with a mannequin. Shot 5. The shotgun blast pushed Barbara Scharton s head back a small amount. Following the shotgun blast, assailant 1 fired his.22 firearm at Scharton s upper neck (Fig. 9). This is Gunshot Wound No. 2 in the autopsy report. The shooter, assailant 1, was standing to the right of the shotgun shooter and left of Scharton, when he fired this shot. This bullet s trajectory was from her upper neck to the right part of her head. Since it is unlikely the shooter would return to Scharton after her homicide for another shot, this shot probably occurred immediately after the shotgun blast and, of course, prior to the attack on Daniel Lyons. Discussion The bloodstaining on the pillow indicated that the right arm was moved several times after the shotgun injury (Fig. 7, right). This may have occurred after law enforcement enter the building. How long did the assault on Barbara Scharton take? The homicide had to have been performed so quickly that Daniel Lyons on the second floor had little time to react to the noise. I would give it 5 seconds at most for the assault on Barbara Scharton and 7 to 10 seconds to reach Daniel Lyons bedroom. Barbara Scharton s homicide was carried out with precision. Assailant 1 incapacitated the

8 victim which allowed assailant 2 to position himself for the killing shotgun blast. Assailant 2 resisted discharging his shotgun until he was in position to be assured of a kill by a stationary victim with only one shot, reserving his remaining cartridges for the second victim. It is apparent each assailant knew what to do. The assailants knew the other victim, who by the firing of their guns at Scharton would arouse him and if given enough time, he would call the police. Daniel Lyons would be aroused enough to quickly understand he was being attacked when the assailants neared his bedroom on the second floor. Daniel Lyons was awakened by the gunfire. The assailants knew where he was and in order to avoid potentially fatal resistance to them by Daniel or him calling the police or yelling to his neighbor to call the police, they had to attack him within seconds of finishing with Scharton. This is another indication of a well-coordinated operation with Scharton. Indeed, the confused Daniel Lyons probably was attacked within seconds of being aroused, naked and unarmed, which suggests a third assailant was involved in the attack on Scharton and Lyons. Reference. Hueske, EE Practical analysis and reconstruction of shooting incidents. CRC Press. New York. Bryan Burnett Meixa tech P.O.Box 844 Cardiff, CA COMMENTS WELCOME bryan@meixatech.com