Dallas cop shoots man after walking in to wrong apartment

[GardoneVT]

From BBC News:



I hope this gets reduced. She shouldn't walk, but murder just doesn't make sense.

This is one of the casualties of the case. When she shot Botham Jean she didn’t just kill a man in his apartment; she also shot a hole in the public trust of LE. Before ,most cases of BLM type activity was based on heavily biased or outright fabricated data. Thanks to Guyger they now have a hook to prop their argument forevermore.

Insofar as murder goes, the only view I have is that she was not justified to use deadly force on Jean. The rest is up to the Texas judicial system to decide.

[willie]

Often I have wondered why her attorney did not work a plea deal where she pleaded guilty to manslaughter and then released an apology to the family.

[ssb]

Often I have wondered why her attorney did not work a plea deal where she pleaded guilty to manslaughter and then released an apology to the family.

She's not the only one with a vote in a plea deal. In this case, I imagine that - in addition to a belief they could prove all the elements of murder - the BLM angle factored into any negotiations. My guess is that any offer that didn't contemplate a murder plea was a nonstarter for the State.

The other side is, of course, the client. Some people have a firm belief a jury will vindicate them, regardless of what the proof shows. Sometimes that belief is less than reasonable. Other times, the consequences of any conviction are simply too much for the client to bear - meaning they may not wish to negotiate at all. I would guess there was a little bit of this in play as well.

[mmc45414]

Other times, the consequences of any conviction are simply too much for the client to bear - meaning they may not wish to negotiate at all.

I remember reading that she made some early comments at the scene reflecting on the damage this was going to do to her career, so probably yeah.

[Kukuforguns]

Uh, that's not how legal intention works.

Deliberately breaking down his door and shooting him resulting in his death is murder. The deliberate part of that act is the intent. If it is was mistake, then there is no intent, thus at best it's manslaughter (reckless actions resulting in death) or criminal negligence (after shooting him, it could be argued she was negligent in her responsibility to provide first aid, resulting in his death).

Neither of those is murder.

This isn't murder. There should be motive to establish intent to make this murder. Did she wake up intending to kill someone that morning? Okay, murder. Was she fried after a too long shift and too many days in a row, fucked up, and shot a guy when she had a false impression of what was going on? Manslaughter.

Obviously, I didn't review all of the evidence in this case, but thus far, I haven't seen any compelling evidence that would suggest this case even met the definition of murder. Again, I doubt this particular verdict survives appeal. This appears to be entirely a show for optics.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. The elements are knowingly causing the death of another person. Officer Guyger intentionally shot Botham. She knew that shooting him was likely to kill him. Her actions did cause the death of Botham. Done.

As BehindBlueEyes pointed out above, she will have the opportunity to reduce the level of the offense at the penalty phase by arguing there was an "immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause." This defense arose from incidents that were thought to decrease the level of culpability - the classic example is finding your spouse having sex with another would explain a fit of rage during which the other was killed (or even the spouse). It will be tough to apply here (I don't see how Botham provoked Guyger), but it does not seem to be a frivolous argument.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

For those who think nothing will hurt you in court - https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...m-jean-murder/

Coming up again at sentencing, it seems. Race and utterances about violence, guns and killing. Naw - no influence on court or jury decisions.

Funny how her defense was based in part on standard cognitive psychology. Attention, memory, stress, etc. All classic topics. Watched that Caleb Giddings video on sequence of shot timing based on reaction times - standard psychology dating back to the 1860's. I guess an officer who was charged with shooting someone in the back would be better if the high and mighty never researched response times.

[Lon]

For those who think nothing will hurt you in court - https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...m-jean-murder/

🤦*♂️

Ex-Ofc: “Yes, Texas Department of Corrections? I’d like to make a long term reservation for 1.”

Sigh, I’m at a loss for anything more.

[HJB]

Sentenced to 10 years in prison....

[CWM11B]

Less than I thought she'd get.

[TGS]

For those who think nothing will hurt you in court - https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...m-jean-murder/

Coming up again at sentencing, it seems. Race and utterances about violence, guns and killing. Naw - no influence on court or jury decisions.

Funny how her defense was based in part on standard cognitive psychology. Attention, memory, stress, etc. All classic topics. Watched that Caleb Giddings video on sequence of shot timing based on reaction times - standard psychology dating back to the 1860's. I guess an officer who was charged with shooting someone in the back would be better if the high and mighty never researched response times.

Are you seriously trying to relate this to another thread about paying for instruction from someone who has sleeve tattoos, and my disdain for you looking down your nose at people with sleeves?