Anyone planning to kill the family with the intent of getting away with having to pay back huge debts, or simply with the intent on getting their hands on the parents estate(s) would not shoot Sheila, they would require her to live and to be held accountable for what took place, she herself would not in these circumstances have been able to benefit from the parents wills if held accountable or responsible for their deaths, she would arguably have been able to get away with murder on the basis of her mental health condition, but sectioned off and ultimately taken out of the equation as a beneficiary. Sheila left alive would have worked, but Sheila shot and killed changed the whole emphasis of the case. The accomplice did not intend to shoot Sheila, and did not shoot her, she was left at the scene alive to become the patsy...