Bocephus said:

---

tysker said:

---

The facts remain dont seem to matter as much as the burden that police officer may or may not have higher benchmark to 'form a reasonable belief' that negates culpability pursuant the mistake of fact standard. This isnt some Joe Schmo; this is a highly trained and well regarded Dallas Police Officer. And thats the higher level issue: if Guyger 'wins' because she, even as a DPO, doesnt have the skills/training/wherewithal to ascertain reasonable facts to avoid shooting an innocent person in a case such as this, what does it look poorly on the DPD in general?



edit to add: I've always thought that if she had been drinking in some ways the situation would be more clear overall, right? If she had a couple drink in her, then she's obviously negligent, and manslaughter is the obvious charge and she goes to goes to jail for 7-10 with chance for parole just like a drunk driver. But given she may get acquitted by claims a mistake of reasonable belief of perceived facts along with her being tired and/or overworked, is detrimental to the perception and reputation of the DPD.

---

You guys need to keep in mind that she was off duty. She was a civilian at the time of the shooting. At least that's what the city will argue during the civil trial. I think she should be held to the standard of the average civilian. JMO

---

Yes, she was off-duty. But, at the time of the crime, she was in her uniform and not treated like a civilian. A normal citizen isn't visited - at the crime scene, nonetheless - by the president of the police union. If what the DMN has reported is correct, then she should be held to the standard of a police officer in this trial because she was treated as a police officer on the night of the shooting.

Asking for inclusion is going to be a sign of weakness to the jury. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

If she wasn't a cop, everyone would be claiming it was murder. Unarmed man shot and killed in his own home by intruder.

Wait, has it been released before that the shell casings were found in the kitchen? I just assumed they would have been found at the doorway.

TSUAggie said:

---

Wait, has it been released before that the shell casings were found in the kitchen? I just assumed they would have been found at the doorway.

---

The front door opens into the kitchen.

Main area of apt is laid out in a long rectangle: Front door->kitchen-> dining area -> living area

I think "Severely Punished" is very subjective.

CJS4715 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

I keep coming back to the undisputed fact that she murdered a man in his own home.

---

I am with you, nai. It's hard to walk back from that point, and I would be hard pressed to go any other direction if I were a juror. Murder still seems like a high bar that I can't imagine every juror agreeing with though.

---

I should be clear that my personal views probably don't any legal basis. I understand the legal arguments her defense is laying out and they likely have some merit.

I don't know about anyone else, but I have mistakenly tried to open up the wrong car before. It looked like mine but definitely wasn't. At the drive in one night a guy came up to my window and jumped and pounded on it. He was trying to scare his girlfriend and picked the wrong car. I've even had someone open my passenger door and sit down before realizing it was the wrong car.

All of those were simple honest mistakes. But none of them involved me pulling out a gun and shooting someone. I think its reasonable to say that people get distracted and make mistakes. I also think as a society we should be able to hold someone responsible for their mistake and punish them if their mistake ends a life. I think Amber Guyger probably has a lot of personal feelings of guilt. She likely feels very sad about killing Botham Jean and didn't mean to. But that doesn't change the fact that he's dead and no amount of remorse is going to change that.

AggieC07 said:

---

I think "Severely Punished" is very subjective.

---

Oh, I agree. Point being - and this is probably a stretch - the DA should not be trying to "win" - he should be trying to see justice done. And justice can be served with a manslaughter conviction.

I doubt anyone on a jury would sit back and say "ho ho ho they included manslaughter as an option - they think their case is weak so we should acquit!"

proc said:

---

Somebody is going to come in at some point as a witness for the defense and talk about police training.

I asked two different police trainers in departments other than Dallas, they both work in SWAT teams as well. If they are in a dark room, hands free and are surprised by an advancing suspect, their training is not to draw their flashlight, or their taser, or to run out the door. There are too many variables that could go wrong. They are trained to draw and fire their pistol. They are trained until that is their default reaction.

If 1 juror believes that Amber really thought that she was in her apartment, they are not going to convict her of murder and there will be a mistrial. If all 12 believe that, and the DA does not ask for a lesser charge of manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, Amber is going to walk.

---

"Jean was on his couch in his shorts, watching TV and eating vanilla ice cream when Guyger walked through the front door, Hermus said.

Under the circumstances, he said, protocol demanded that she take cover and call for backup instead of opening fire -- which Lee confirmed was the normal order of business for police officers in such situations."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/24/us/botham-jean-amber-guyger-murder-trial/index.html

I agree and wasn't trying to be facetious or anything.

It seems like a case of all or nothing.

If they could prove those circumstances, which they cannot. Let me find a good photo of the crime scene.

My opinion.

The victim's head was next to the red towel, and the flip flops were next to his feet. You can tell from the red towel and the flip flops that the victim was not shot while sitting on his couch. He was shot while or after advancing towards the shooter's direction. If the shell casings were found in the kitchen to the right, she was standing inside the apartment with the door behind her, and not in the doorway.

It is important to note that the tv and laptop are behind the victim at this point, so if the lights were off the shooter would only see a silhouette when she fired. Only one witness in that apartment will be available, and I am certain she will testify that the lights were off.

There are a number of important points that the lead Texas Ranger made on the stand this morning. I would like to address those after his testimony has been completed.

AggieC07 said:

---

proc said:

---

Somebody is going to come in at some point as a witness for the defense and talk about police training.

I asked two different police trainers in departments other than Dallas, they both work in SWAT teams as well. If they are in a dark room, hands free and are surprised by an advancing suspect, their training is not to draw their flashlight, or their taser, or to run out the door. There are too many variables that could go wrong. They are trained to draw and fire their pistol. They are trained until that is their default reaction.

If 1 juror believes that Amber really thought that she was in her apartment, they are not going to convict her of murder and there will be a mistrial. If all 12 believe that, and the DA does not ask for a lesser charge of manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, Amber is going to walk.

---

"Jean was on his couch in his shorts, watching TV and eating vanilla ice cream when Guyger walked through the front door, Hermus said.

Under the circumstances, he said, protocol demanded that she take cover and call for backup instead of opening fire -- which Lee confirmed was the normal order of business for police officers in such situations."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/24/us/botham-jean-amber-guyger-murder-trial/index.html

---

Interesting. But also important: A citizen has a right to stand their ground in their home in Texas. That's significant if you accept the mistake of fact defense.

I was about to post the same thing. It seems that anyone who wasn't carrying a gun would have immediately run out the door and called the police. And her concern for herself vs. the victim is likely to be a factor.

I know the prosecutor personally and I can tell you that my impression is that the man's ethics are beyond reproach with respect to how he goes about his job.

Kellso said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

The fun part is going to be when they put the Rangers o the stand and they say that they were not going to issue a warrant bc they did not think an offense had occurred. That the DPD chief and Dallas DA pushed the warrant through despite what the independent investigators said.

---

There is nothing about this case that is "fun".

---

Lighten up Francis

Seems like she had a sporadic approach to applying her training. So according to some she followed her training when taking the shots, but then others say she should have taken cover and continued to make demands. Then she leaves the victim to die on the ground, and is out in the apartment as the next police officers arrive. I'm fairly certain that is not how they are trainedm considering those officers immediately started applying cpr.

Hi Proc.

Good stuff. Keep us updated!

FincAg said:

---

Can someone explain how these door locks are supposed to work? There is a physical key and a fob key? So a deadbolt by key and an automatic knob lock by fob?

Would there be a civil case for the family against the complex if they knew their locks were deficient?

---

My understanding is that the door would not close all the way whenever there was rain or moisture in the air. The family will get a large settlement from the complex owners.

tysker said:

---

proc said:

---

Somebody is going to come in at some point as a witness for the defense and talk about police training.

I asked two different police trainers in departments other than Dallas, they both work in SWAT teams as well. If they are in a dark room, hands free and are surprised by an advancing suspect, their training is not to draw their flashlight, or their taser, or to run out the door. There are too many variables that could go wrong. They are trained to draw and fire their pistol. They are trained until that is their default reaction.

If 1 juror believes that Amber really thought that she was in her apartment, they are not going to convict her of murder and there will be a mistrial. If all 12 believe that, and the DA does not ask for a lesser charge of manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, Amber is going to walk.

---

If this is the case, the public perception will be that any LEO can accidentally enter a dark space, even while off duty, and kill a person, without criminal recourse, because that's what they are trained to do. I'm not sure how this ends well for the DPD.

---

People are going to riot. It is what it is. This isn't a problem for DPD. When she is found innocent of murder, morons are going to frame this as saying that any white person can walk into a black man's home and kill him. People are going to riot in response. The 5 percent of the people who always hated Dallas PD are still gonna hate them. The 15 percent who were on the middle will dislike them for a while. The 80 percent who like them will still like them.

TSUAggie said:

---

If she wasn't a cop, everyone would be claiming it was murder. Unarmed man shot and killed in his own home by intruder.

---

If she wasn't a white cop this would not be going to trial for another year or two and would end up being pled out without her doing any time in jail.

Bocephus said:

---

tysker said:

---

proc said:

---

Somebody is going to come in at some point as a witness for the defense and talk about police training.

I asked two different police trainers in departments other than Dallas, they both work in SWAT teams as well. If they are in a dark room, hands free and are surprised by an advancing suspect, their training is not to draw their flashlight, or their taser, or to run out the door. There are too many variables that could go wrong. They are trained to draw and fire their pistol. They are trained until that is their default reaction.

If 1 juror believes that Amber really thought that she was in her apartment, they are not going to convict her of murder and there will be a mistrial. If all 12 believe that, and the DA does not ask for a lesser charge of manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, Amber is going to walk.

---

If this is the case, the public perception will be that any LEO can accidentally enter a dark space, even while off duty, and kill a person, without criminal recourse, because that's what they are trained to do. I'm not sure how this ends well for the DPD.

---

People are going to riot. It is what it is. This isn't a problem for DPD. When she is found innocent of murder, morons are going to frame this as saying that any white person can walk into a black man's home and kill him. People are going to riot in response. The 5 percent of the people who always hated Dallas PD are still gonna hate them. The 15 percent who were on the middle will dislike them for a while. The 80 percent who like them will still like them.

---

Is that the official DPD response, Commander?

The facts of this case are very simple.

Is there any evidence that AG and BJ had any prior interaction or previous relationship? -No (just getting this out of the way first, as I'm tired of seeing people insist that they were secret lovers or she had some sort of grudge with him).

Is it reasonable that AG parked on the wrong floor of the garage without realizing it? - Yes

Is it reasonable that AG walked to what she thought was her front door while distracted on her phone (sexting) and inserted her keys? - Yes

Is it reasonable that AG's initial reaction upon seeing that the door was unlocked and unlatched was confusion and fear that someone had been in her house? - Yes

The next step is where reasonableness comes into question. Upon seeing that "your" door was open, is it reasonable to enter "your" apartment and shoot someone who you believe is in "your" apartment, or would most people have taken a moment to asses their surroundings and try to figure out was was going on? Personally, I think most of us would have done the latter. In my opinion, it was at this point where she acted unreasonably and therefore should be held accountable. Murder or manslaughter, I really don't care, we're just getting into the weeds about the number of years she would be in jail.

In my opinion, this case speaks more to the quality of people recruited into the police department and the type of "shoot first ask questions later" mindset that is drilled into them during training. I believe that police departments around the country are training their officers to be fearful of their lives with every interaction, rather than training them to be prepared for every interaction.

For me the facts boil down to nothing more than she shot and killed an innocent man in his own home. But I admit, I'm a legal idiot and got tired head just reading this thread.

AggieC07 said:

---

proc said:

---

Somebody is going to come in at some point as a witness for the defense and talk about police training.

I asked two different police trainers in departments other than Dallas, they both work in SWAT teams as well. If they are in a dark room, hands free and are surprised by an advancing suspect, their training is not to draw their flashlight, or their taser, or to run out the door. There are too many variables that could go wrong. They are trained to draw and fire their pistol. They are trained until that is their default reaction.

If 1 juror believes that Amber really thought that she was in her apartment, they are not going to convict her of murder and there will be a mistrial. If all 12 believe that, and the DA does not ask for a lesser charge of manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, Amber is going to walk.

---

"Jean was on his couch in his shorts, watching TV and eating vanilla ice cream when Guyger walked through the front door, Hermus said.

Under the circumstances, he said, protocol demanded that she take cover and call for backup instead of opening fire -- which Lee confirmed was the normal order of business for police officers in such situations."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/24/us/botham-jean-amber-guyger-murder-trial/index.html

---

He's wrong. They're trained to take the burglar into custody. If the burglar has a gun and begins firing on you, then you take cover and call for backup.

I find it hard to accept that someone could come into MY apartment and kill me, claiming they made a mistake and simply walk away free. And that leaves race out of it entirely. I live in a stacked complex. My kitchen is first and my living at the back like this. I could seem me getting off the elevator on the wrong floor and going to an apartment in the same location as mine.

However, I have a door decoration. Many of my neighbors do. The number is next to the door. Apartments have a smell. Mine has scent of Bassett hound, Door open a crack, lights dark, I still as a thinking and functioning adult would VERY quickly know I was in the wrong place.

I would hope any of my fellow residents would know that also and not decide to KILL me as I was watching sometthing on my computer in the supposed safety of my own home.

And if it happened I would hope there were serious legal penalties.

Her stupidity and fixation apparently on sex with her partner cost someone else his life. If that is NOT a crime it should be.

Even if it is a "mistake," it is one that a resonably responsible adult would simply not make. Don't give me the tired excuse.

When I was about her age, my son was an infant with cronic asthma. Like he would get a blue tinge and have to be rushed to Scott and White. Many times I would teach all day, be at the hospital with him for large parts of the night, have zero sleep, teach all day again, and rinse and repeat. My husband would stay up with him on weekends and I would finally get rest. NEVER even in those zombie times did I go to the wrong home. Much later and much older, when I was my father's caregiver, I had hired help in the daytime, but I spent my evenings and nights taking care of him and still teaching all day. I slept here and there as I could. Again I never walked into a different residence. I don't think race had anything to do with her actions.

I do believe she was negligent and I think her police training actually hurt her and made her make a fight decisions when flight would have been the wise and prudent choice. I believe there should be punishment for taking another's life--and oops should not be a legal excuse.

TOUCHDOWN! said:

---

The facts of this case are very simple.

Is there any evidence that AG and BJ had any prior interaction or previous relationship? -No (just getting this out of the way first, as I'm tired of seeing people insist that they were secret lovers or she had some sort of grudge with him).

Is it reasonable that AG parked on the wrong floor of the garage without realizing it? - Yes

Is it reasonable that AG walked to what she thought was her front door while distracted on her phone (sexting) and inserted her keys? - Yes

Is it reasonable that AG's initial reaction upon seeing that the door was unlocked and unlatched was confusion and fear that someone had been in her house? - Yes

The next step is where reasonableness comes into question. Upon seeing that "your" door was open, is it reasonable to enter "your" apartment and shoot someone who you believe is in "your" apartment, or would most people have taken a moment to asses their surroundings and try to figure out was was going on? Personally, I think most of us would have done the latter. In my opinion, it was at this point where she acted unreasonably and therefore should be held accountable. Murder or manslaughter, I really don't care, we're just getting into the weeds about the number of years she would be in jail.

In my opinion, this case speaks more to the quality of people recruited into the police department and the type of "shoot first ask questions later" mindset that is drilled into them during training. I believe that police departments around the country are training their officers to be fearful of their lives with every interaction, rather than training them to be prepared for every interaction.

---

This is where I'm at. I think everything leading up to the confrontation is perfectly reasonable.

From my perspective, if I walk into an apartment and see some dude sitting on the couch eating ice cream - I would be a bit startled but I'm not sure my first reaction would be I'm in danger. I also do believe in this instance any sort of tiredness would be replaced with a shot of adrenaline. I think I would take inventory of my surroundings and maybe yell "Who the eff are you?". Then realize I'm an idiot of leave with embarrassment.

Obviously I am oversimplifying but it's not like he was rummaging through the place wearing all black and a mask.

What is the estimated date they expect to announce a verdict? You may want to prepare to have your family north of 635 that day. With the amount of dip ****s in this town, I think Big D is going to burn.

Not sure it will be a good time to be out and about anywhere in the metroplex.

We have our company fair day on the 7th and I'm a little concerned about it. Driving in and around fair park could be dicey.

If she gets away with murder because "she was tired", cops need to be put on limited service like airline pilots and truck drivers.

I.e. No cop can work more than x number of hours a week and no more than y hours in a row.

I was actually selected for the first round of jury selection. They said that the case should be wrapped up on Oct 4th - not sure if that is still reasonable to hit or not.

I work inside 635 but we live in an apartment in NE Plano right on the border with Allen and Lucas. I'm not looking forward to verdict day

I'm hoping the DA is sane enough to put the compromise verdict on the table. Some factions will be pissed about anything less than murder, but I don't think the city erupts over a manslaughter conviction. At least not in a big way. But if they get greedy, go for broke, and lose. Yikes. Then any manslaughter conviction will need to come with some legitimate time, as a slap on the wrist time-wise would leave the door open to eruption.

At this point, it is down to whether what she did inside the apartment was reasonable. She is going to testify that it was too dark to see and that he advanced on her. There will be zero witnesses to testify otherwise. How on earth will the State prove the opposite beyond a reasonable doubt, that the room was lit and he was simply standing up?

The State has a real problem here. And I guarantee the defense will put that Ranger back on the stand. If they get his testimony in about her being innocent, it is game over for the murder charge. Maybe game over for manslaughter and negligent homicide as well.