Skip to comments.Cunningham convicted [of shooting man who raped her daughter]
Posted on 10/28/2005 10:09:54 AM PDT by SmithL
MARYVILLE Kimberly Cunningham, the 33-year-old South Knoxville woman who shot to death a man she believes raped her daughter twice when the child was 10, was convicted today of voluntary manslaughter in the man's death.
The verdict was returned about 10 a.m. by the seven-woman, five-man jury after five hours of deliberation Thursday and one hour today.
Cunningham had been on trial on a charge of second-degree murder, but the jury acquitted her of that and found her guilty of the lesser charge. She had already been tried once in the death of Coy Hundley.
In that trial last April, she was acquitted of first-degree murder, and the jury deadlocked on all lesser charges.
Cunningham will be sentenced on Dec. 19 by Judge D. Kelly Thomas in Blount County Circuit Court.
This is the hometown of popular Sen. Lamar Alexander.
"She had already been tried once in the death of Coy Hundley.
In that trial last April, she was acquitted of first-degree murder, and the jury deadlocked on all lesser charges. '
How can she be tried a second time for the same offence? Isn't that double jeopardy?
Both of us would've set her free.
I thought you could only be tried once for the same crime. Unless the first was a mistrial, is that what happened? I couldn't open the link...
It said "she believes" he raped her daughter. Was she right?
Ditto. And I'd be talking Jury Nullification, too. What happened here wasn't justice.
As she was acquitted of first degree murder she couldn't be tried for that but she could be tried for the deadlocked charges.
She was aquitted on the 1st degree murder charge. Likely, she was charged and tried a second time because a jury deadlocked on the lesser charges (whatever they may have been).
Hung juries are mistrials, generally.
I thought the same thing. I would have awarded her a medal.
If the guy had,in fact,raped her daughter then she should get a week behind bars and 5 hours of community service.
She should get a medal!
Indeed, this piece of info is fairly crucial in judging her actions.
You're assuming that the dead man did it.
Come to think of it, you're right. Either way, what happened wasn't justice.
I would have voted to aquit also.
Hopefully the sentenance will not be jail. She did the killing so she was found guilty but, the jury could understand that and give her a one dollar fine and 10 seconds in jail.
>>>>How can she be tried a second time for the same offence? Isn't that double jeopardy?
Double jeopardy only applies if there is an actual decision in the first trial. As the Jury deadlocked, there was no decision, and she can legally be retried.
Liberals constantly talk about how "society is to blame" for criminal behavior. In general, I don't agree with that, but if it were true, then this would be a pretty good example of a situation where there would be no crime but for the failure of society--the failure of society to deal with crime.
Vigilanteism is the direct result of an ineffective criminal justice system. People take the law into their own hands because the authorities refuse to do their jobs, and because of the public perception that justice will not be done unless they do.
If liberals are going to blame society for criminal behavior, then this lady should go free.
Sounds like double jeopardy to me. The prosecution should be able to take their best, most likely shot.
One time. One time only.
IMHO, somebody here has conspired to violate her constitutional rights, but it's hard to say, because this was not a federal trial. Not sure what the State constitution of Tennessee says.
I dunno about the 'behind bars' part, but if the 5-hours of community service involve teaching women how to handle a gun, I agree...
It ain't right. Give the same crime 25 different definitions, then keep trying till ya get one thats sticks!
It AIN'T right!
The woman was tried a second time because the jury hung on the second-degree charge.
The system didn't have a chance to work in this case (not that there's any guarantee it would have). Her daughter told her the guy had raped her, mom confronted him that day, and then shot him eight times, pausing to reload.
She should be put on probation. The condition of her probation will require her to give speeches calling for a mandatory death penalty for all child rapists -- it'll get rid of child rapists, and it'll prevent mothers like her from going to prison. A real twofer.
This was a retrial only on the charges that the jury couldn't decide on.
give her a medal and new better home to live in, in a nicer neighborhood
sponser her on speaking tour on how to protect your family
There was another thread about this.
The daughter who is now 14 told her mom that this guy had raped her.
The mom confronted the guy at work, he admitted it and said there was nothing she could do about it. In a smarmy fashion.
She unloaded her gun into him, reloaded and continued.
Personally, I would have just shot his testicles off and smiled at him every time I saw him.
I think she would have not even gotten a trial.
He's innocent until proven guilty.
Having said that, I too would have killed him if I thought he had raped my daughter.
What happens if another man committed the crime?
I like the "reloaded and continued" part. It demonstrates dedication!
Set her free and bought her a new box of ammo!
Well, let's face it. If she was tried for anything, it should have been manslaughter. Heat of the moment kind of thing, diminished capacity.
I don't understand how it can come out of a grand jury to indict her on multiple counts for the same offense... and without Grand Jury approval, the prosecution should be stuck twiddling his thumbs.
The whole deadlocked jury/mistrial thingy is a MISUNDERSTANDING of the intent. And I've read alot of it.
They wanted to insure that UNLESS THERE WAS A UNANIMOUS verdict, then no crime had been committed. A cultural sort of thing, if the folks themselves could not even agree that what the person did was a crime, the government was powerless to prosecute.
It's not supposed to be a "give the government unlimited shots at getting a conviction" thing.
Exactly. When the DA's office isn't sure of winning a crime they're prosecuting this is what happens. A person may have comitted one crime, but they will be charged on multiple counts. Sometimes it's a "good" thing because they really are going after bad guys. But in many cases, these are just "political" crimes (eg, hate crimes, vigilantism) and the DA wants to make a point.
Then the deceased, who reportedly admitted to the crime, deserved to die for stupidity.
A dead rapist or child molester will never become a repeat offender.
"Vigilanteism is the direct result of an ineffective criminal justice system. People take the law into their own hands because the authorities refuse to do their jobs, and because of the public perception that justice will not be done unless they do. "
I always thought that public police departments were the direct result of people not properly policing after themselves. City police departments are a fairly new invention.
>> I like the "reloaded and continued" part. It demonstrates dedication!<<
When my hubby read the original story, he stated that he would be that dedicated if someone touched one of his girls.
He would be proud to go to jail for it too.
I am not saying she should have gotten off. I'm saying that the guy should not have been on the street. Of course, we don't really know if he had any priors, but most crimes are committed by repeat offenders. It would not happen if our politicians and our judicial system would do their jobs instead of blaming "society" for crime, and letting the perps go free.
Ah, I didn't realize there was already an admission of guilt. Never mind.
She should get a medal for shooting an unarmed person? I don't know what the truth of the incident was but this guy was innocent in the eyes of the law and she decided to brutally kill him.
What's to stop anyone else committing murder and making up some story of abuse or rape to cover up for the crime. You can either be on the side of law and order or on the side of ciminality. We can't allow people to take the law into their own hands.
If she'd been Tawara Brawley's mother, had believed her lies and gone and gunned someone down ... this thread would be very different in tone. We only have the mother's word that the guy "admitted it". I just don't know enough to be completely comfortable we're on the right side here.
That's impossible! 14 yr old girls always tell the truth. Their private testament to their family is more incontavertable than DNA evidence.
P.S. If you don't know it's sarcasm, head back to DU
"and 5 hours of community service."
Could that involve giving her a .45 and a list of names?
OK, I laughed :0)
Are you sure that it wasn't a mistrial?
If there was a witness to this, then she shouldn't have been prosecuted. It's justifiable homicide. Here in Texas, we'd say the guy "needed killin".
Do we really know that? Or did Ms. Cunningham simply say he said it, after the fact? Him being dead, there may be nobody around to corroborate.