Latest Headlines
- FDOT Updates Status Of Century Highway 29 Construction Work
- Tate Grad, UWF Standout Darrien McDowell Selected In 2024 MLB Draft
- Suspect, 19, Indicted For Fatal Drive-By Shooting Of 70-Year-Old
- Blue Angels Select Officers for 2025 Show Season
- ECSO: McDavid Woman Claims Crockpot ‘Magically Makes Meth”, Charged With Child Neglect
- Driver’s License, Tag, Tax Collector Services This Week In Walnut Hill, Century
- Florida Gas Prices Hold Steady Over Last Week
- Register Now For Northview Chiefs Football Camp
- Wahoos Drop Back-and-Forth Road Finale
- Walnut Hill Man Was The Boss Of The Pensacola Beach Air Show. Here’s A Behind The Scenes Look.
Accused Sister Shooter Rendell Seeks Lower Bond
September 19, 2011
A bond hearing will be held next week for the former Northview High School student accused in the August fatal shooting her adoptive sister.
Elena Janelle Rendell, 17, was charged as an adult with manslaughter by a firearm and remains in the Escambia Jail with bond set at $300,000 for the shooting death of 14-year old Christina Marie Sneary, a former Molino resident.
She will appear in court before Judge Nickolas Geeker on September 28 as her attorney seeks a lower bond amount.
The two girls had recently moved with their mother from Sunset View Lane in Molino to the 7600 block of Kipling Street in the Ferry Pass community.
Rendell told deputies that she began to argue with Sneary over a cell phone. During the argument, Rendell ran into her parent’s bedroom and retrieved her father’s 9 mm handgun from the top of a television shelf that stood about 12-feet high. Rendell then pointed the handgun at her 14-year old sister and fired a single gunshot into the right side of Sneary’s neck. Sneary died a short time later at Sacred Heart Hospital.
For more details about the shooting, click here for an earlier story.
Comments
18 Responses to “Accused Sister Shooter Rendell Seeks Lower Bond”
REGARDING:
“Was the gun registered to the father??? ”
Another fellow pointed out that no guns are registered
I feel bad for the family, however this girl should be tried as an adult as well as premeditated murder. This girl had more than enough time to count to ten and make the right choice. She pulled a gun on a 14 year old…my God what is this world coming to. I think the parents should be held accountable, why wasn’t the gun locked up anyway, why did she know where to find the gun. Was the gun registered to the father??? So many unanswered questions, such a worthless killing, this all could have been prevented!
REGARDING:
“She killed someone . Kill her”
But if you killed everyone who killed anyone, you’d have to be killed for killing THEM and your killer would have to be killed for killing you and his killer would have to be killed for killing him and ……
David considering a minor problem with that solution
Y give her a chance . She killed someone . Kill her
REGARDING:
“She has confessed and the evidence is in concurrence, so why waist any additional time or effort going through a trial;”
Our government’s just silly that way. Trial first then punishment if found guilty. Lynchings are no longer favored.
You’re thinking, “BUT SHE CONFESSED! She admitted she shot and that the shot killed.” She could have lied about it. I doubt she did but people DO confess to crimes they didn’t commit. Further, sometimes people foolishly kill while trying to frighten others or when playing with weapons (or when driving while texting or when they feel threatened). The people are just as dead, but most look on the killings differently from what is charged as first degree murder or even second degree.
For example, she is charged with manslaughter. This means the prosecution doesn’t consider harsher charges justifiable or reasonable. I don’t know their reasoning but am certain they know way more about the case than I ever intend to know. I shall assume they are reasonable people (like you and me).
AND
“you came to the same conclusion in your own words, “Bond is not to be given if the accused is believed to be a flight risk or a danger to others.” “
That’s not a conclusion, it’s a statement of fact.
High bail means high flight risk but not dangerous.
Low bail means low flight risk and not dangerous.
No bail means dangerous and/or extremely high flight risk.
David still considering
the system of justice
the founding fathers chose
David Hue Green wrote, “nobody has convinced the judge the child is a danger to others.”
Really?! The $300k bond was set by someone and I’d bet it was approved by a judge more than once since her arrest. The first would have been during her initial appearance, which should have taken place within 48 hours of the arrest (8/5). Secondly, it has been more than 21 days since Rendell was arrested (8/4) and she should have had an arraignment (8/18 w/ Judge Boles) which afforded her yet another opportunity to seek a reduced bond in front of a judge; however, the bond remained set at the present level. Hmm, a judge must have decided that the amount of bond was reasonable at the time (and in my opinion, it still is).
As for the coming full circle comment, you came to the same conclusion in your own words, “Bond is not to be given if the accused is believed to be a flight risk or a danger to others.”
As for passing judgment on her… She has confessed and the evidence is in concurrence, so why waist any additional time or effort going through a trial; she should plead guilty and let the sentence be passed. This case isn’t like Casey Anthony’s which was filled with innuendo and speculation. The hard facts are known; she shot and killed her step-sister and the rest is elementary my dear David.
REGARDING:
“David comes full circle ”
I’m sure that phrase makes sense to you, so please expound so it will make sense to me. What circle?
An amount of bond has been set so this means — rightly or wrongly — nobody has convinced the judge the child is a danger to others. Therefore, the only question at the bond hearing would be the proper amount to demand to see to it she shows up for trial.
I suspect you’ve already tried her and found her guilty, but the court hasn’t done so.
David for clarity
and doing things decently and in order
REGARDING David Huie Green’s, “Bond is not to be given if the accused is believed to be a flight risk or a danger to others.”
David comes full circle and restates what has already been posted in his last last four words, “…a danger to others.”
Oversight for protecting the layman community lawyer from himself.
REGARDING:
“And the point of a lower bond is so she can spend time running the streets?”
The purpose of bond is to ensure the accused will come in for trial but to not lock up a person who has not been found guilty of a crime yet. This allows the accused to work on a defense of the charges.
Bond is not to be given if the accused is believed to be a flight risk or a danger to others. Our Constitution REQUIRES no unreasonable bond be required. The judges have to figure out what is reasonable and what isn’t.
Two side benefits of bonding are that it earns a living to bondsmen who often put up the bond in exchange for ten percent non-refundable and it saves the state the cost of caring for the accused while awaiting trial. If you were sure the accused would show up for trial and if you were sure the accused would be no danger to the community, release on recognizance would be reasonable.
David considering the mechanics
of our justice system
In my personal experience, the best way to deal with a bully, was to make an example of them. Bullies shoud be careful, because they know not what, dwells behind the eyes of their victim. It is sad that every child cannot have loving caring birth parents, even the ones that have a good family matrix, sometimes have severe problems. No gaurentees. I hope all parents use the case of these tragic young people, as an example of what tormenting others for gratification, or any reason can lead to. If you are being bullied seek help, school years will pass, life goes on, look to the future. I would suggest bullies ask themselves, why do I do this to others. I hope Ms Rendell is abel to find peace somewhere, none the less, she is dangerous.
This child had alot of problems and none of us have the answers. My child is a student @ Northview and has told me this girl was a loner. Kids picked on her and called her names daily. My daughter said she always looked so sad & unhappy. So none of you know what she was going through , she needed some kind of help. It’s a shame she didn’t get it before this tragedy happened. While you are all condemning her, you need to be talking to your children about bullying the less fortunate. It happens everyday!! This could have pushed her over the edge , everyone has a snapping point………..just sayin……..hope she gets the help she needs! RIP Christina!!
I find it odd Miss Rendell knew where the firearm was stored. It seemed once she made the decision to kill, she went immediately to the weapon storage area, retrieved the pistol and murdered Ms. Sneary. This is the kind of stuff the gun control people just soak up.
the judge should not lower the bond becuse if you have the nerves to shot and kill someone the bond should be higher if any thing because what she did is wrong. Plus who wonts someone who has killed some one to be roaming the streets not knowing what they could do next?May her sister R.I.P!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dont lower the bond becuse she can hurt sombody else that she did the same with her sister.
too sad what some people do to others…if she can think to go into a bedroom, climb 12 foot to retrieve a gun, then point and pull the trigger….she does not need her bond lowered…
But people picked on her and called her bad names……..
I agree with the first 2 comments.. This young woman has several serious issues, and needs to be closely monitored until they are resolved one way or the other.. Praying for her and her family, and may her sister rest with the Lord of us all..
And the point of a lower bond is so she can spend time running the streets? No, she shouldn’t get out of jail prior to her trial because she has demonstrated that she is a danger to her family and the community.