ShareThis Page

Woman shot at her gender-reveal party wasn't pregnant, cops say

| Monday, July 17, 2017, 12:10 p.m.

CINCINNATI — A woman who claimed to have lost her baby during a deadly shooting at her gender reveal party in suburban Cincinnati wasn't even pregnant, police said Monday.

Colerain Township Police Chief Mark Denney said investigators only have speculation about why the woman claimed to be pregnant, but he did not disclose the speculation.

The woman had told local news organizations she lost her unborn child after she was wounded in the leg. She was treated at a hospital for the wound.

Police said their investigation is being impeded by “leads known to be lies” that are wasting time that could be spent following more productive leads.

“From the very beginning of this investigation, we have met significant resistance that is uncommon from victims of crime wanting a resolution,” police said.

One person was killed and eight people, including three children, were wounded in the shooting when two men opened fire July 8 inside a home to learn the gender of the supposedly expectant mother's child.

A 22-year-old Indiana woman, Autum Garrett, was the only person killed.

Police haven't identified the gunmen or their motive.

An anonymous donor is offering a $10,000 reward for information.

Investigators found an unloaded handgun in the front yard of the small, single-story home. It's being examined at a crime lab, the police spokesman said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.