|
Edited on Mon Feb-13-06 04:10 PM by nashuaadvocate
I just read what Katherine Armstrong told Fox News, and I'm trying to figure out who was standing where--and how everyone came to be where they were--in this Cheney shooting situation.
At the base of this post is what Armstrong told Fox News.
My question is, can someone construct an exculpatory (tending toward innocence) scenario in which a) Armstrong was close enough to hear and see what happened, and b) Cheney would have had no reason to see Whittington walking towards him? I'm baffled. Maybe someone could diagram this somehow, but right now this story is sounding like BS. I mean, the sun was directly behind Whittington, and it was mid-day? The car never moved, Cheney walked 200 yards away, and Armstrong was still able to see (and more importantly, hear) everything? Whittington walked somewhere between 1.7 and 2.3 football fields toward Cheney, in broad daylight, wearing bright orange, and Cheney didn't see him? This is insane.
From Fox News:
" Armstrong, who remained in the car, said Whittington shot a bird and went to look for it in the tall grass, while Cheney and a third hunter walked to another spot and found a second covey.
Armstrong told FOX News that Cheney, thinking he was the last hunter on the right of the party, turned and fired at a quail. Whittington was standing on lower ground with the sun to his back. He was knocked to the ground, but not knocked out. All members of the hunting party were wearing blaze orange, she said.
'Mr. Whittington decided to join them. He came up from behind the other two hunters, and unfortunately, he did not announce to the hunters he was there and trying to join the line,' Armstrong said. "The vice president and other hunter believed that Whittington was 200 yards away, when, in fact, he was 30 yards and behind the line."
|