>> jim cooney who was a lawyer well-known, very popular in palm beach county, was killed by his ex-wife lindathe cooneys were amongst the most established families in the palm beach area. >> he tried to kill me. >> who did? >> jim cooney. >> she shot him three times with a .357 magnum. she claims it was self-defense. >> reporter: but from the very beginning lieutenant scott smith knew there was something strange about the case. >> after she had shot a couple times she actually went up to him and fired up another round. that was an execution. >> reporter: linda cooney was charged with first degree murder and her son, kevin, was the only eyewitness to the shooting. >> it was loud. >> reporter: the trial linda's defense argued that jim cooney attacked her with a knife and kevin testified that he saw something in his father's hand before the shooting. >> it had a glary shine. >> i think we lost the case at this point in time. >> reporter: it took the jury just hours to determine that linda cooney was not guilty of murder. >> kevin's testimony exonerated his mother. so she was cleared of the murde

. >> it with us that time linda cooney was not guilty of murder. >> kevin's testimony was exoneratedlorida, but guess what, she uses the same gun to shoot her son kevin. >> now linda cooney is back in court, this time for the attempted murder of her son. >> next witness. >> his testimony could make all the difference again. >> which way was this gun pointed when it was fired. >> but will kevin save his mother again? >> richard schlesinger, oh, my god, i gasped out loud when i heard that. >> so did we when we first heard the story. what's remarkable is she still had the gun 20 years later. what she did was -- the prosecutors were astonished at this in las vegas where the second trial took place. it tookes out after she was akwinlted in florida she got the gun back for reasons known only to her and 20 years later used it again. >> what would be the mow tev to use a gun on your son, especially a son who testified on your behalf? >> i don't think there's any real rationale. here's the prosecutor's theory. linda controlled her two sons. she had two sons. she controlled who they tuqued to,