Man claims he was trying to shoot family dog, killed wife instead
A San Bernardino County man who claims he fatally shot his wife while aiming for the family dog was being held Monday in a local jail, authorities said.
Twin Peaks resident Brant Bater was initially booked on suspicion of manslaughter, but the charges were amended after homicide detectives uncovered additional evidence, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.
Bater told investigators that he was trying to shoot his dog but hit his wife, who was shot once in the head, the department said. His wife, Faith Bater, was pronounced dead at the scene Friday afternoon.
Anyone with information is asked to call Det. Steve Pennington or Sgt. Don Lupear at (909) 387-3589.
ALSO:
Couple confesses in Jaycee Dugard kidnapping, rape case
Lawsuit by Mexican claiming sex abuse by a priest can be heard in U.S. federal court
Memo suggests Bell police turned ticketing, impounding cars into a game
-- Robert J. Lopez








Either he's a really bad shot or he's a really bad liar.
Posted by: Coriolana | March 01, 2011 at 07:40 AM
The charges were amended to what?
Posted by: Silhouette | March 01, 2011 at 08:00 AM
oh, yeah - that's plausible
Posted by: 2cents | March 01, 2011 at 08:05 AM
The man was trying to shoot his dog?? If the dog was ill it should have been taken to a vet. This street is not located in a poor neighborhood, in fact it is one of the most expensive area in Twin Peaks so it wasn't a question of money.
The man shot his wife in the head, OK now someone who would miss a dog and shoot his wife in the head was obviously too incompetent with a weapon to own it, much less be waving it around. As a weapon instuctor it has long been clear to me that at leas 1/2 of gun owners are incompetent. You see them waving a weapon around with their finger on the trigger, I have seen them use their weapon to punctuate conversations. Thus when I first read the story it seemed possible that it was another incompetent gun owner. However the later story does make more sense. A homicidal murderer who thought it was his right to steal someone elses life.
Nastiness abounds in nice neighborhoods just as much as in poor neighborhoods.
Posted by: Angela Birch | March 01, 2011 at 09:16 AM
To often there's a story that confirms that everyone should not have a gun.
Posted by: Jim | March 01, 2011 at 09:32 AM
She should have been suspicious when he said "here, hold muh dog"...
Posted by: link | March 01, 2011 at 09:39 AM
How's the dog?
Posted by: Diogenes | March 01, 2011 at 09:55 AM
Last time she'll serve a frozen pizza for his poker buddies.
Posted by: Steveo | March 01, 2011 at 09:58 AM
A man who can't distinguish between his wife and a dog should probably have neither.
Posted by: Tim McHugh | March 01, 2011 at 10:18 AM
I've read where pets often resemble their owners.
Posted by: olthadi | March 01, 2011 at 10:21 AM
I'm going to appear as a defense witness:
I can testify that some wives, who are a few years past their prime, can look like a dog.
Mine certainly does.
Posted by: Dan | March 01, 2011 at 10:21 AM
both
Posted by: Tom, Long Beach, California | March 01, 2011 at 10:26 AM
Which dog was he trying to shoot?
Posted by: Ray | March 01, 2011 at 10:31 AM
"To often there's a story that confirms that everyone should not have a gun.
Posted by: Jim | March 01, 2011 at 09:32 AM"
By this logic, because some people drink, drive, and kill people, nobody should have cars. Let's get rid of all knives while were at it, then on to pointed sticks. Face it. Anything can be misused or abused. Punish the people who do that, don't penalize us all for the bad behavior of others. I thought liberals were against "collective guilt". Guess I was mistaken....
Posted by: Zipity | March 01, 2011 at 10:55 AM
It's certainly a bizarre account. The only scenario that would seem credible to me would be one where the dog was ATTACKING his wife, and he attempted to shoot it but a sudden movement of the struggling woman and animal caused the bullet to hit her in the head instead. And if the police belatedly discovered evidence of this (e.g. bite marks on the woman's corpse) then it would explain the whole story. Beyond that scenario, though, it's difficult to picture how this could be accidental.
Posted by: DBL | March 01, 2011 at 11:08 AM
And he was gonna shot the dog because it ate his homework?
Posted by: George Soros | March 01, 2011 at 11:19 AM
So, Mr. Bator can't shoot straight?
Posted by: Robert | March 01, 2011 at 11:26 AM
maybe someone should adopt the dog?
Posted by: freddy please | March 01, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Couldn't he come up with a better lie?
There's a thing inside the skull on his shoulder, it's called brain.
Use it
Posted by: Mime | March 01, 2011 at 12:16 PM
What type of dog was it? If it was a pit bull or great dane or something of that size that was attacking the wife, okay it could have happened. However, if it is a miniature anything or any type of "fufu" dog, then he was trying to shoot the wife.
Posted by: dag | March 01, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Who is going to take care of the dog?
Posted by: California Sun | March 01, 2011 at 12:28 PM
Dan, That was an awful thing to say...awful funny!
Posted by: California Sun | March 01, 2011 at 12:29 PM
Honey...can I see you in here for a minute...can you bring the dog?
Posted by: oooter | March 01, 2011 at 12:34 PM
Maybe he couldn't tell the two apart.
Posted by: sailbyme | March 01, 2011 at 12:44 PM
I don't believe this man's story for a minute! I would put him in Jail anyway for shooting a dog. I hope he doesn't get away with this.
Posted by: jmpgodiva | March 01, 2011 at 12:54 PM