She says it was self-defense. Police say it was cold-blooded murder.
35-year-old Ashley Ruhland has been charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of 49-year-old Justin Emmick. The Sioux City, Iowa resident was killed on July 29 in a remote spot on his 30-acre property, accessible only by foot and ATVs.
According to authorities, Ruhland had been staying with Emmick, but also had an active order of protection against him. That’s odd enough, but if you’re really in fear of your life then why would you put yourself in a position where you’re going to be around him while he has a gun?
The victim and Ruhland were in a corner of the acreage target shooting when Ruhland allegedly shot the victim twice, once in the back and once in the head. Officials state that the crime happened at around 3:10 p.m. on Wednesday in the 31000 block of K-18S.
According to the complaint, Ruhland called 911 to report shooting him in self-defense. In the complaint, Ruhland told law enforcement, “akin to ‘it’s got to be now, or it’s going to be me,’ ‘it was either him or me,’ and ‘I didn’t want him to suffer.’”
Officials reported that Ruhland was uninjured, while the victim was shot from behind.
According to the complaint, Ruhland had told family members that she wanted a gun for protection and that the victim was going to teach her how to shoot.
None of Ruhland’s story makes sense. She was supposedly in fear for her life and had taken out an order of protection against Emmick, but was “temporarily” staying with him. She told family members she wanted a firearm for protection, but the man she was supposedly afraid of was the one who was going to teach her how to shoot?
Then there’s the fact that Emmick was shot twice from behind, though Ruhland told police it was “it was either him or me.”
There’s been virtually no reporting beyond what the sheriff’s office detailed in its initial press release, so there are a lot of questions that have yet to be addressed. Why was an order of protection granted, for instance, and when was it issued? Was Ruhland’s family aware of the protective order when she told them that Emmick was going to teach her to shoot, and did Ruhland indicate that she wanted a gun for protection for a specific reason?
There are some questions that may go unanswered, like why Emmick would allow Ruhland to stay with him despite an active order of protection, and why he would have felt comfortable putting a gun in her hand under those circumstances.
An arrest is not the same as a conviction, and I suppose it’s possible that Ruhland really was acting in self-defense when she shot and killed Emmick. Based on what little information has been released so far, though, I have to say it sounds pretty unlikely. If Ruhland is going to maintain her position that she was acting to defend herself, she’s going to have to provide reasonable responses to the swarm of legitimate questions that surround her actions.
Read the full article here
