Holy shit! Most likely he was raping her and then shot her. Why the fuck would he have a pistol on his nightstand? Especially considering the fact that she made it clear she didnt want him around. I bet he tried to kill her so that after he raped her, she wouldnt be able to give weight to her side in court.

This man has already been convicted of assaulting his wife, violated some sort of restraining order, and admitted to "sex" despite that order. Now he's shot his wife. How he is not being processed for attempted murder I do not know.

That said, there are people not assumed to be rapists, abusers or murderers, including women; who keep guns within easy reach of the bed - under the pillow, in the nightstand, on the nightstand, on their person, on the side of the bed, under the bed, on the floor. Please try an online search for "nightstand" and "gun."

If it were not uncomfortable, I'd sleep with a shotgun next to me. If I did not move in my sleep, I'd wear a revolver (which does not have a safety).

I actually don't see anything wrong with the article. It's way too early for any substantial evidence to come out about whether this was an accident or an assault. So from the article's standpoint, they reported what they had: a man said he accidentally shot his wife. I think the article makes it clear that the husband's version may not be truthful.
Also, I think that the article does a good job of retaining the notion of "innocent until proven guilty." I could construct a narrative based on the information in the article that would make this guy a misogynistic attempted-murderer, or a husband who was getting back together with his estranged wife and a weird accident happened.
Yes the circumstances are peculiar, but one, there's just not enough information to get the whole picture, and two, the available information: someone reaching for a nightstand, a gun, and sex could produce an infinite amount of scenarios ranging from tragically ironic to sinisterly horrific.

"Yes the circumstances are peculiar, but one, there's just not enough information to get the whole picture, and two, the available information: someone reaching for a nightstand, a gun, and sex could produce an infinite amount of scenarios ranging from tragically ironic to sinisterly horrific."

Because of my fascination for the unusual and macabre, I have read some incredible stories of shootings, such as separate incidents of how animals thought dead by the hunters who shot them, shot the hunters back when they suddenly began struggling while being carried, and caught their hoof (deer) or foot (rabbit) in the trigger of the hunting rifle. (Carrying a gun loaded or unloaded, somehow pointed at oneself? And with the safeties off? That's ignoring fundamental gun safety.)

I'd like to hear about powder burns or residue, spatter, and pattern of fingerprints on the gun to understand more about "how" it happened. IF they were all consistent with say, gripping the gun backward, like if the thumb accidentally got hooked in the trigger guard while "reaching" without paying attention or during sudden movement, and it were a near contact or point blank shooting, I might consider the possibility it was an accident. (There are safer ways to try murdering someone than pointing a gun backwards at someone right in front of you.) If however, there was evidence that the gun was being held normally, or that there was some distance between the man and woman (disproving the "during sex" claim), or evidence of a struggle, then I would of course dismiss the story out of hand. That's for a grand jury and jury who allegedly "knows" to decide. Like I said "processed" for attempted murder, not lynched.