Monday, August 31, 2009

Family Slaughtered in Gwinnett Co. near Atlanta

The Associated Press reports on the Gwinnett County family slaughtered in their home.

When police responding to a 911 call banged on the door of a suburban Atlanta home, they were greeted by a 4-year-old girl in a blood-soaked shirt who said her whole family was dead, a neighbor said.

Gwinnett County police said 44-year-old Richard Ringold fatally shot two women, a man and an 11-year-old girl and injured the 4-year-old Thursday night. Police believe Ringold lived at the house and was the boyfriend of one of the women killed but were still investigating the motive and circumstances Friday, said spokeswoman Cpl. Illana Spellman.

I wonder if the police had more to go on than the fact that Richard Ringold lived there and was the boyfriend of one of the victims. In the two stories I've read about this case nothing else is mentioned. They do say he was arrested when he returned to the scene of the crime. But, I've never been a believer in the myth that the criminal always returns to the scene of the crime. How about you?

Police obtained an arrest warrant for Ringold on charges of murder and aggravated assault, Spellman said.

They put out an alert for Ringold and said he was armed and dangerous.

Ringold arrived at the home shortly after midnight Friday and was arrested."

He asked what we were doing and why we were looking for him," Spellman said.

I wish I could say I'm sure the police know what they're doing, but I'm afraid that's not what I think. What I wonder is if this could be the very first step in a twenty-year-long mistake that ends up with an innocent man being executed. I don't think Texas has a monopoly on that; they do it in Georgia too.

I wonder about the gun too. Like in many of these cases there's little focus on the gun. I suppose the police and the news reporters know better than to focus on an inanimate object. But, I'd like to know if the gun used was owned by the alleged shooter, if he owned it legally, if he had a concealed carry permit, etc., etc. Is that focusing too much on the gun, or is that focusing on the shooter who used the gun?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.


  1. According to this story, the four year old identified the shooter. Not enough for a conviction, but certainly enough for an arrest.

    Looking at the various stories, there are lots of contradictions, once again indicating that sensationalism is more important than getting the facts--This story says the child escaped to a neighbor's house, rather than greeting police at the door, one story said she was hysterical, another that she was calm.
    News says that he lived there. He likely believed that if he didn't come back, that would indicate his guilt. On the other hand, another story said he was pretending to be a bystander...

  2. Are you also going to do a post about the entire family that was beaten to death with a blunt object?

    Just wondering.

  3. Of course not Kaveman. There's no evil object that MikeB can call for restrictions on.....unless he wants to ban fists.