Sunday, February 24

Attempted Murder Headline = "Armed woman arrested after entering police HQ"

I read the following in the Police Blotter section of the DC Examiner:
Armed woman arrested after entering police HQ

A woman was arrested after she walked into the Metropolitan Police headquarters Thursday afternoon, pointed a gun at one of the armed security guards, demanded his weapon, then pulled the trigger on her handgun, according to court documents.

When the gun failed to fire, the security guard grabbed the woman, Cynthia Marlene Nixon, and wrestled her to the ground. Police found 36 rounds of ammunition and two plastic bags of marijuana. Nixon told detectives that she wanted to rob a police officer of his weapon, court documents state. - Scott McCabe, DC Examiner

Of course, only in a place like Washington, DC would a case like this end up tucked away on the side of page four. This probably should have been a major story. The only reason it was not, was simply because, for one reason or another, her gun failed to fire when she pulled the trigger.

Had she murdered the guard and been caught, she most likely would not have faced the death penalty unless the Federal Government stepped in. (Not likely since she targeted a guard and not a police officer) Even then, the local community sitting as part of a jury would never give it to her anyway.

If I was the security guard I am pretty sure that I would have shot her down once I realized that I was really not dead. At the very least, I would be facing police brutality charges for 'overreacting' to her attack. Imagine the balls of this lady to walk right into police HQ with the goal of stealing a gun from a cop. The question I have is why attempted murder has a much lower punishment than actual murder? Like in this case, she had intended to kill the man. Why is it that the death penalty would only come into play if she was successful? She will be rewarded for failing in her goal even though the failure was due to a technicality and not due to any hesitation or second thought on her part. Even the title of this crime report totally fails to convey what took place. you can bet that many people in DC reading only the headline will tkae the story as another example of overreaction on the part of the police. According to this Washington Post Story she is so far only being charged with assaulting an officer:
Nixon was charged with assaulting a police officer while armed, authorities said. She was ordered held without bond by a judge yesterday in D.C. Superior Court. - Washington Post
What about attempted robbery? Illegal use of a firearm? Illegal possession of a firearm? Trespassing? Attempted Murder? How about drug charges as well? Not surprisingly, the Washington Post also glosses over the seriousness of the criminal act in their headline which is "Armed Va. Woman Arrested After Scuffle With Guard". The only reason there was a scuffle was because she failed to kill the guard outright. So far there is no word on whether this woman was charged with any additional crimes such as attempted murder or not. (At least she was ordered held without bail which might mean that they are investigating what else they can charge her with to better reflect the crimes she committed.)

The Washington Post mentions that this woman Cynthia Nixon is from Northern Virginia. This is relevant because it is legal to buy handguns in Virginia. So what motivated this woman to go into Washington, DC to steal a gun from a policeman instead of trying the same stunt in VA? Why didn't she just go and buy a gun? Could it be that she has a criminal record preventing a gun purchase? Could it also be that she wanted to commit her crime in the District because it is a 'Gun Free Zone'? Surely, this is yet another example on why the DC gun ban should be eliminated. After all, despite having a gun ban, this woman traveled to DC to shop for a gun, once again proving that criminal will find a way to obtain guns, despite banning them. Then again, perhaps DC should disarm their police force to prevent others from trying to obtain weapons by attacking police around the city. I bet the police would really love that idea!

This is an unbelievable story on a number of levels. The paper notes that nobody was hurt. I bet the security guard might disagree with that statement. I know that I would.

Note: Be sure to read the comments to the Washington Post story. They are very interesting and provide more details about the incident.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I think it is safe to assume she is either a bit crazy... or could have been looking for help in her own suicide. Maybe she hoped he would fire back. At any rate, a sane person does not do this. it is obvious that she needs mental help. Thank God the gun did not fire. You are right about the way the story was not really told. It didn't make the news the way it should have.