Jury Decisions in Use of Force Incidents

[Kukuforguns]

A jury convicted a Balch Springs, TX police officer of murder.

Officers were dispatched to a scene with a report of under aged drinking. When officers arrived, the scene was not threatening. Officers then heard shots fired and observed multiple people trying to leave the scene. One officer radioed in a license plate number as a car backed away from him and then tried to stop the car by breaking a rear window and ordering the driver to stop. Second officer saw the moving silhouette of passenger in the car and fired five shots, including one that hit the decedent in the head. Based on the linked article, it appears the defense presented two different theories:

1) the car itself was a threat to the officers' safety; and
2) the shooter reasonably determined the decedent was a threat

The two justifications do not appear to be consistent. The decedent was not the operator of the vehicle and the shooter stated he perceived the decedent to be a threat, suggesting he targeted the decedent (I'm summarizing the news report, not a transcript of testimony). If the shooter had perceived the car to be a threat, then he should not have been aiming at decedent who was not operating the vehicle. With respect to why he considered the decedent to be a threat, the shooter indicated he believed his partner had observed something because the partner had radioed in the license plate. The news report does not indicate the shooter saw any weapon or that he had any independent reason to believe the decedent was a threat other than that he was moving and that his partner radioed in the license plate and attempted to stop the vehicle. It's highly likely the news article omits some testimony.

[willie]

The jury gave the former officer a 15 year sentence.

[Stephanie B]

Defense justifications/theories need not be consistent. The jury need only buy one.

[Kukuforguns]

Defense justifications/theories need not be consistent. The jury need only buy one.

True. Also true that the jury did not buy either here.

If the jurors are interviewed, we may find out why they didn't buy the defense's arguments.

[willie]

This sentence is a political statement. To me the man's action seems to be an error of judgment without malice. If I'm correct, manslaughter with a less harsh sentence is much more appropriate. However, I would have tied up the jury on this one, but of course I would have never been selected as a juror.

[Stephanie B]

Do they have the “depraved heart” standard in Texas?

[Gadfly]

Do they have the “depraved heart” standard in Texas?

No. No Depraved Heart in Texas.

We have Capitol Murder, Murder, Manslaughter, Criminally Negligent Homicide.

For Murder: A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or
(3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, and in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commission or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.

For Manslaughter: (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.

Which is applicable? Up to the DA and Jury.
The death was tragic. In hindsight, the cop ticked up. He should no longer be a LEO. But is society in danger from him roaming the street? Will he “offend” again? Was he trying to murder someone, or was he trying to do what he felt was the right thing when responding to shots fired outside the party? Some time is appropriate...15 years?

Manslaughter would have applied as well. But politics demand a sacrifice, lest the city burn.

Link for penal code reference.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/D.../htm/PE.19.htm


Sent from my iPhone
(So Excuse the typos)

[Tamara]

I think the actions of both his partner and his sister during the trial and its aftermath are informative.

[Lon]

He was an idiot to take it to a jury trial unless there’s some info about the judge I don’t know. Bench trial would have been smarter I think. Should take the emotional side out of it. I’d be interested to see what the appeal court says.

[Zincwarrior]

Do they have the “depraved heart” standard in Texas?

Yes, this is the mood Texas women get if they are displeased...