Michelle Garner Hall was convicted of malice murder and aggravated assault in the shooting death of her husband, Britt Hall. She appeals from the denial of her motion for new trial,1 contending that the trial court erred by admitting similar transaction evidence and prior consistent statements and by failing to charge on involuntary manslaughter. Finding no error, we affirm. 1. The evidence adduced at trial authorized the jury to find that appellant was married to the victim and that the couple was experiencing stress as a result of serious financial difficulties. On July 30, 2008, appellant called 911 and stated that the victim had shot at her and then shot himself. There was medical testimony that the victim was shot in the chest from a distance between six and eight inches and died from this injury. The victim also sustained pre-mortem gunshot wounds to his thigh and the back of his left arm and had a bruise behind his right ear. The jury heard the audio recording of appellant’s 911 call and the video recorded statements she made to police officers, in which she initially reiterated her suicide statement but later claimed that, after a struggle in which the victim was accidentally shot in the leg, she got the weapon, left the house, tried to unload it, then returned inside where, during a final struggle in which the victim wrapped his arms around her and pulled her down, the gun discharged inflicting the chest wound.2 The only other person in the home at the time of these events was appellant’s eight-year-old daughter, Alyssa Davis, who testified that, from her bedroom directly over the struggling couple, she heard the victim repeatedly tell appellant to “put the gun down.”
Appellant, through her statements to police officers and ballistics testimony presented at trial, raised the defenses of justification and accident by claiming the victim was fatally shot during her struggle with him to prevent him from killing her and then committing suicide. However, witness credibility as well as the question of justification are matters for the jury, which was free to reject the version of the events favorable to appellant. See Roper v. State , 281 Ga. 878, 880 1 644 SE2d 120 2007. On appeal this Court does not resolve conflicts in trial testimony or reweigh the evidence. Dockery v. State , 287 Ga. 275 1 __SE2d__ 2010. The evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charged crimes. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.
