#151  
Old 09-11-2018, 06:50 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
If that's true (IF), then that bolsters my belief that she had a beef with this guy and murdered him, using mistaken house as an excuse. I mean, if she said "let me in" that indicates she was expecting a person in there.
I can believe that she had a beef with him, that's really why she went there, and that she ended up killing him in a fit of rage or whatever. And that the mistaken apartment thing was made up afterwards. I have trouble believing that she really planned it out to murder him this way, because as a prepared excuse "I thought it was my apartment" is just so implausible and was never going to get her off the hook for at least manslaughter.
  #152  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:02 PM
Lucas Jackson's Avatar
Lucas Jackson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
In Texas, Sec. 9.42 of the Penal Code provides that deadly force is legal when used by a person protecting their own property from burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime.

Sec. 9.32 provides that force is lawfully used against a person who unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment.

So if she entered her own home, and encountered someone she reasonably believed to be present unlawfully to commit theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime, Texas law seems to permit deadly force.

This analysis addresses your comment, "Even if she was on her own home." It does not address the actual situation at hand, where she was not in her own home.
(underline mine)
I disagree. I'm guessing that is a point that lawyers would argue and a jury would decide, but based on what we know happened the events don't meet the above criteria. As filmore (above) pointed out there could have been any number of reasons another person might have been in there and not been up to mischief. She neither took the time or prudent steps to identify the victim to meet the Penal Code requirements above. I mean, come on, she didn't turn on the light until after shooting. He did not enter with force.
  #153  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:04 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
I can believe that she had a beef with him, that's really why she went there, and that she ended up killing him in a fit of rage or whatever. And that the mistaken apartment thing was made up afterwards. I have trouble believing that she really planned it out to murder him this way, because as a prepared excuse "I thought it was my apartment" is just so implausible and was never going to get her off the hook for at least manslaughter.
Easiest thing of all, if that's what she wanted to do, was to close Jean's door immediately after making sure he was dead, go back to her apartment, and act she heard nothing. She was up 15 hours, crashing as soon as she got home wouldn't be unlikely.

If asked, be like, "Gunshots? What gunshots? Here?!" This after picking up her brass, and doing other things to muddy the physical evidence waters. Cops may never have even thought of her as a suspect, and only tangentially as a witness during their canvass.

People die all of the time in big cities, and the authorities have only an inkling of who might've killed them. They catch most murderers because most people are murdered by those they know, or those they were involved with. That, and most criminals can't keep their damned mouths shut. Thankfully.
  #154  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:10 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,499
I haven’t seen this question answered anywhere. Where is the cop’s apartment relative to the victim’s? Were the units situated similiarly (like one on top of the other) but on different floors, or were there few similarities in their placement?

In other words, out of all the units in that complex, what was it about the victim’s that could make her think it was her home?
  #155  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:11 PM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,730
His apartment was directly above hers.
  #156  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:15 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,499
Never mind, I found this:

Quote:
The only connection we have been able to make is that she was his immediate downstairs neighbor,” Meritt said.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/att...omments=disqus
  #157  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:29 PM
PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,738
Because she was still in uniform will Jean's heirs be able to collect a multi-million dollar settlement from the Dallas Police Department--or will the fact she was off-duty get them off the hook?
  #158  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:52 PM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,398
Still haven’t released the drug/alcohol test results. My guess is THAT’S where the explanation lies. Who overlooks the wrong parking spot, wrong floor, red doormat, wrong apartment? And then instantly fires their weapon? That sounds like an LE officer with impaired judgement to me.

Would a police force pull together to protect one of their own? It’d be easy enough to alter the shift length to match the hour. Would they fudge the drug/alcohol results? Unfortunately current attitudes to the police are not favourable due to the public watching, time and again, police officers get away with shootings, that seem highly suspect.

It’s become painfully obvious that good cops are totally at ease with standing by and remaining silent in such situations, which horribly undermines people’s overall trust in LE.

Last edited by elbows; 09-11-2018 at 07:52 PM.
  #159  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:20 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,761
Thailand is noted for having more images of Buddha than it has human beings.

The U.S.A. has more guns than it has human beings.

Americans are 51 times more likely to be killed by gunfire than people in the United Kingdom. The majority of America's firearm-related deaths are attributed to self-harm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
I don't think gun control or repeal of castle laws would matter here, but don't let that stop you from trying to make political hay. Since she's a cop, she'd have had a gun no matter what. We don't do the unarmed police thing here, if you hadn't noticed. Castle law doesn't matter, either. She's a cop and they get to play by different rules from the rest of us.
All this confused thinking results from the American love of carrying and brandishing guns. In a country with saner mentality and/or gun control, cops would be much less inclined to fire so frivolously. It's sad that this has to be explained.

Many Americans want to Make America Great Again by reliving the Wild Wild West. Too bad they're too ignorant to know that towns in the wild west often had strict gun control!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Yup, but the "if I came into what I thought was my house" clause is the key to that sentence, isn't it. It's why any sensible society should hold people who are armed and prepared to kill (whether police officers or otherwise) to a high enough standard of sobriety and awareness that they would not be in the wrong fucking apartment without realizing it.
Very good point. Someone encouraged to hold and brandish and who'll probably be acquitted of the likely negligent homicide(s) that result, should be held to very high standards. Instead we see cowards, drunks and racists killing with impunity because they wear a badge.

In another thread I suggested that an LEO who decided to do cartwheels and ended up accidentally discharging his safety-less weapon should have taken the precaution of uncocking the gun before the cartwheels. I was ridiculed for ignorance of America's gun culture: "Can anyone image carrying a weapon WITHOUT a round in the chamber? Boy, is septimus a clueless gun grabber!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
... I mean, if she said "let me in" that indicates she was expecting a person in there.
I think she heard someone walking in "her" apartment and, too drunk to put 2+2 together and connect that with the failure of key to work (or thinking burglar had set the deadbolt?), demanded that the "burglar" let her in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
I can believe that she had a beef with him, that's really why she went there, and that she ended up killing him in a fit of rage or whatever. And that the mistaken apartment thing was made up afterwards...
Were the apartment numbers identical except for the floor, i.e. one immediately above the other? Annoying noises are a way beefs develop when two apartments are adjacent vertically.
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.
  #160  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:29 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Still haven’t released the drug/alcohol test results. My guess is THAT’S where the explanation lies. Who overlooks the wrong parking spot, wrong floor, red doormat, wrong apartment? And then instantly fires their weapon? That sounds like an LE officer with impaired judgement to me.
I agree that this still sounds likely, whichever version of her approach and entry to the apartment is true.
  #161  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:37 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
The "activist" side?
Which side would that be, again?
"Activist" is intended to be a value neutral description of someone with a social agenda beyond just this specific case. In some contexts, I suppose it might mean a pro-police agenda, but obviously not in the context of an attorney representing the victim here.

Do you think it's an inappropriate term, or is there some other subtext to your passive aggressive "question"? If so, you'll have to spell it out, because I don't know what views you are imputing to me.
  #162  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:40 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,936
What I don't get is the arrest affidavit says that she lives in apartment 1478 and that she parked on the fourth floor of the parking garage and then walked down the fourth floor hallway to his apartment, 1378. Wouldn't apartment 1378 be on the third floor of the building and adjacent to the third floor of the parking garage?

Last edited by Dewey Finn; 09-11-2018 at 08:40 PM.
  #163  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:40 PM
Roy Batty is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 120
The idea that the LE officer had a beef with the victim is possible (but I doubt it). If you want to explore this, though - IMHO there are two possible scenarios:

1) Was this a case of the LE officer & the victim having been romantically involved at one time, had a bad breakup, and that this was a "revenge" killing?! Sure, it's possible. They lived close to each other. But, something like this can be easily researched & proven (i.e., if they were in a relationship) and she would have to be incredibly stupid to have killed him over something like that & then tried to "cover it up" with the "wrong apartment" excuse. Not saying that this definitively didn't happen, but I find it to be an extremely unlikely scenario. I know that very early in this case a news article claimed there was a connection between the two of them, but this was later proven to be erroneous.

2) Was she upset over the noise coming from his apartment (since it was adjacent to hers) and decided to get her revenge with this "wrong apartment" scenario?! Again possible, but I don't find this too likely either. B. Jean was a youth leader & professionally employed. I somehow doubt he was having wild parties all night that would cause a lot of noise, and/or playing loud music all night. But, it's possible. However, as in the scenario #1 above, if the LE officer made official complaints against him - or even if they were known to have arguments about noise, etc. - that could be easily proven as well. And, there is no indication anything like this happened.

Last edited by Roy Batty; 09-11-2018 at 08:41 PM.
  #164  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:41 PM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,578
never mind, found the story

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 09-11-2018 at 08:42 PM.
  #165  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:47 PM
nelliebly is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,781
I understand walking into the wrong apartment. What I don't understand is a police officer firing her weapon at a vague figure in a dark apartment. In a dark apartment, she couldn't have known how many people were in there or where they were. In a dark apartment, she couldn't possibly tell if her orders were being followed. Shooting into a dark apartment isn't just a violation of basic police procedure; it's not even sensible civilian procedure.

Even in the most generous interpretation of her actions, someone who ignores all her training when in a crisis is not someone I'd want on the force. If there's exculpatory evidence, I can't imagine what it might be.
  #166  
Old 09-11-2018, 09:01 PM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,730
This piece issues some serious criticism of the journalism involving this case:

Dallas Media Have Blindly Accepted What the Cops Tell Them About Botham Jean Killing

An excerpt (bolding mine):

Quote:
There is a degree to which a journalist must sometimes rely on accounts from interested, unaccountable parties for their scoops, and so long as this is done with due consideration for the credibility of the source, it is not necessarily a sin. There was nothing wrong, then, with J.D. Miles reporting via Twitter that “the door was unlocked and she thought she was entering her unit when she saw victim in the dark.” Nor should anyone object to a host of NBC 5 reporters relaying an account from a “Dallas police officer” who spoke on condition of anonymity that, on the contrary, Guyger actually “put the key in and struggled with the lock” and then “put down several things she was holding and continued to fight with the key when the resident swung open the door and startled her.” But when it becomes apparent — as it did to The Intercept’s Shaun King — that the two accounts being provided by the same agency are entirely different, it is prudent to stop regarding the law enforcement community as the most reliable source of information on an incident involving a vastly unusual killing by one of their own.

To their credit, NBC later posted an editor’s note at the very bottom of the article noting that they’d removed the whole door-wouldn’t-open-and-was-totally-closed-and-that-guy-swung-it-open-so-time-to-shoot story and that they did so “[d]ue to conflicting reports of the incident from various sources.” These “various sources” include the arrest warrant itself, which ultimately went with the door-was-totally-open-so-time-to-shoot variant while also expanding upon the killer’s own description of events with new details. Another “source” is the search warrant from last Friday, which, as a later piece by at least one of the same reporters notes in its subhead, “differs slightly” from the arrest warrant. In fact it differs on key aspects of the story and helpfully accuses Jean of having “confronted” the officer, while also reporting that a witness heard “an exchange of words immediately followed by at least two gunshots” (emphasis mine). This latter element is less helpful, which is presumably why it does not appear in the arrest warrant, of which more presently. But being a man of great patience, I continue to await NBC’s explanation for why it reported that Guyger shot Jean “once in the chest and once in the abdomen,” an event that goes uncommemorated in either of the official accounts, which both describe Jean being hit a single time out of the two shots reportedly fired.
The search warrant contains the detail about an "exchange of words" between the officer and the victim, which according to witnesses took place at the door. But none of this occurred according to the arrest affidavit, since it reports the only words that were expressed were the officer's (mysteriously vague) verbal commands. Commands conveniently issued inside the apartment. Seems to me that both of these accounts should be given equal weight in the reporting, and yet only one is being treated as the official record. I agree with the writer that this is some bullshit. But it does comfort me that it looks like some folks in the press are starting to realize what's going on.
  #167  
Old 09-11-2018, 09:02 PM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,547
How did her key unlock his door?

Edit Oh, I see, that is unknown at this time.

Last edited by Isamu; 09-11-2018 at 09:04 PM.
  #168  
Old 09-11-2018, 09:49 PM
Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas Jackson View Post
(underline mine)
I disagree. I'm guessing that is a point that lawyers would argue and a jury would decide, but based on what we know happened the events don't meet the above criteria. As filmore (above) pointed out there could have been any number of reasons another person might have been in there and not been up to mischief. She neither took the time or prudent steps to identify the victim to meet the Penal Code requirements above. I mean, come on, she didn't turn on the light until after shooting. He did not enter with force.
So again let me say at the outset of this post: I am not discussing the actual event. We're discussing a parallel universe in which she came home to HER apartment after 10 PM, encountered a man inside her apartment with the lights off, and who failed to respond to her commands.

Again referring you to Sec. 9.42(2), supra, deadly force may be used to protect property when the actor has reasonable belief that such force was immediately necessary to prevent the immediate commission of, inter alia, criminal mischief at night.

"At night," is satisfied by the fact that the events in question happened at, or shortly after, 10 PM.

Criminal mischief is defined at Sec. 28.03(a), which definition includes in pertinent part tampering with the property of another in a way that causes substantial inconvenience to the owner. Finding a man in your darkened apartment at night triggers at the very least reasonable belief that your apartment and its contents are at risk of substantial inconvenience.

The law does not require her belief to be correct -- merely that it be reasonable. And the law specifically removes from her any duty to retreat, so if you're asking, "Why didn't she just back into the hallway and await backup?" the answer is that the law forbids the fact-finder to consider that. There is no duty to retreat.

Now, when you say, "He did not enter with force," just how much "force," do you think is necessary to trigger this condition? Remember, again, we're discussing the parallel universe, and remember, again, at issue is not what happened, but what her reasonable belief is.
  #169  
Old 09-11-2018, 09:57 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 17,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
How did her key unlock his door?

Edit Oh, I see, that is unknown at this time.
They didn't use keys, the apartment building uses key fobs.
  #170  
Old 09-11-2018, 10:12 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
I agree with the writer that this is some bullshit. But it does comfort me that it looks like some folks in the press are starting to realize what's going on.
Yes, it's starting to look worse and worse. Maybe some elements in the local Dallas press were unduly sympathetic to the police, and the national press just picked up their versions? But surely this stuff will get so much scrutiny now that it's going to be exposed. If there were unofficial statements by other cops that were made to journalists earlier, I really doubt that they will manage to suppress them. And somebody will get first hand accounts from the witnesses in the other apartments. I think the Dallas police are going to get crucified if they are exposed as covering up anything here.

Did you see the end of that article? Ironically, there's link explaining a correction to that article, since in a prior version it had claimed Guyger's brother in law was on Facebook making signs that the ADL database identifies as white supremacist. To their credit, they did manage to track the guy down, and discovered that he was actually signing "69" for somebody's 69th birthday.

Last edited by Riemann; 09-11-2018 at 10:14 PM.
  #171  
Old 09-11-2018, 10:27 PM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,564
Initial accounts had the first responders administrating first aid. The Rangers’ completely, 100% unbiased report, created several days later had her initiating care. The video of her pacing back and forth while making the phone call is probably just fake news. Thank god we can trust the police to police their own.
  #172  
Old 09-11-2018, 11:43 PM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 22,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
And no matter what, you don't shoot if you don't know what is going on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
Even if this was her apartment and there was someone in it, that doesn't seem sufficient justification to shoot on that alone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
I understand walking into the wrong apartment. What I don't understand is a police officer firing her weapon at a vague figure in a dark apartment. In a dark apartment, she couldn't have known how many people were in there or where they were.
Worst Surprise Birthday Party Ever.
  #173  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:15 AM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Perhaps Texas will end up in a vicious circle of more and more extreme forms of the castle doctrine. You now have a right to set up Aliens-style automatic sentries to wipe out anyone who comes within 50 meters of your apartment immediately, just in case the potential intruder is lost and mistakenly thinks they are about to enter their own apartment and will therefore believe they have a right to shoot you. We'll basically all end up barricaded in our apartments shooting at each other.

Last edited by Riemann; 09-12-2018 at 12:19 AM.
  #174  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:31 AM
Melbourne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post

And I also think that calling this a "police shooting" is inaccurate- she didn't shoot him in the course of doing her police job. I'm not sure what the right term is, but I'm pretty sure "police shooting" is misleading at best.
Actually, I think the point about "police shootings" is that they are like this, and shouldn't be.
  #175  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:58 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
This piece issues some serious criticism of the journalism involving this case:

Dallas Media Have Blindly Accepted What the Cops Tell Them About Botham Jean Killing
This is how local news stories about police killings almost always work. Sometimes the story is just the police press release with a few words moved around. You can tell it comes from the police if it uses language like "officer-involved shooting" and exclusively uses the passive voice to refer to the killing. Bonus points if it includes a mugshot of the victim to pre-salt the jury pool with the belief that he was no angel.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 09-12-2018 at 01:01 AM.
  #176  
Old 09-12-2018, 03:52 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,761
Night time is especially wonderful time for gun wielders in places like Texas. (When does the magic immunity of night turn on? Is it affected by Daylight Savings Time?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
...
Again referring you to Sec. 9.42(2), supra, deadly force may be used to protect property when the actor has reasonable belief that such force was immediately necessary to prevent the immediate commission of, inter alia, criminal mischief at night.

"At night," is satisfied by the fact that the events in question happened at, or shortly after, 10 PM.

Criminal mischief is defined at Sec. 28.03(a) ...
The law does not require her belief to be correct -- merely that it be reasonable. And the law specifically removes from her any duty to retreat, so if you're asking, "Why didn't she just back into the hallway and await backup?" the answer is that the law forbids the fact-finder to consider that. There is no duty to retreat.

... remember, again, at issue is not what happened, but what her reasonable belief is.
So it was a good kill. Move along, folks; nothing to see here.
  #177  
Old 09-12-2018, 06:51 AM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,499
I don’t know much weight to assign this, but apparently this video shows that doors at this complex are designed to shut completely unless held open.

Last edited by you with the face; 09-12-2018 at 06:51 AM.
  #178  
Old 09-12-2018, 06:55 AM
Grey is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 6,781
Sure but you could easily put a piece of tape over the latching mechanism, put a small block at the floor etc. etc. It's an interesting extra piece of information but it's not the smoking gun.
  #179  
Old 09-12-2018, 07:09 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,547
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
I don’t know much weight to assign this, but apparently this video shows that doors at this complex are designed to shut completely unless held open.
Yes, the door is the key question here. Apartment dwellers don't leave their doors unlocked and keys for one door (obviously) don't open other doors except in exceptional circumstances.

So how did she get in and still think it was her place?
  #180  
Old 09-12-2018, 07:31 AM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Night time is especially wonderful time for gun wielders in places like Texas. (When does the magic immunity of night turn on? Is it affected by Daylight Savings Time?)


So it was a good kill. Move along, folks; nothing to see here.
In Bricker's hypo? Where she opens up her apartment, at 10 PM, sees a guy in there with the lights out, and the guy doesn't obey her commands to stop and show his hands? I don't even think she'd need to command him to stop, if a reasonable person in her position would think they didn't have the time to do so. The use of force has to be reasonable, according to what a reasonable person in her position would believe necessary to either protect themselves against an imminent threat of serious bodily injury, or the commission of one of the crimes mentioned in either § 9.32 or 9.42. I'd think it reasonable to shoot an intruder, in my own darkened Texas apartment, at 10 PM, if that intruder constituted an imminent threat of injury. If I can't see his hands, that counts as an imminent threat of injury.

(Aside, that's one of the many reasons I carry a flashlight most places. And it's great for finding stuff that falls between the seats, or these days, reading small print. A cop should be using a light in this situation, either on her weapon, or a handheld. I wonder why she didn't?)

Anyway, Bricker's hypo, I'd like to stress, is not what happened here.

But if the facts were as in Bricker's hypo, then if she shoots him---then my guess, and IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's how it's going to shake out---she's going to be no-billed 10 times out of 10. I wouldn't call it "a good kill", but the Grand Jury is not going to indict her on that set of facts. If you want to trespass in someone else's dwelling in the dark, Texas is not the state to do it in.

As far as "what's in the nighttime" as far as Texas law is concerned, AIUI, the definition of "in the nighttime" comes from the Texas Transportation Code § 541.401, and reads:
Quote:
5) “Nighttime” means the period beginning one-half hour after sunset and ending one-half hour before sunrise.
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/transpo...t-541-401.html

I know there's got to be a case where when certain events happened, and were they in the "nighttime," changed how the defendant's conduct was viewed. For instance, it comes up a lot in hunting situations, as you aren't supposed to hunt many game animals at night.

It's not unknown for the Penal Code to borrow definitions from other parts of the various Texas Codes or Statutes, and to have those definitions recognized in caselaw. IIRC, before they sensibly defined the term "intoxication" at Texas Penal Code §49.01, to interpret the term in regards to what it meant for a concealed handgun license holder, you had to go to the Texas Government Code to get the definition.

As to the incident at hand, and the differing narratives coming out, I don't think the Texas Rangers are corrupt. I don't think that Dallas PD is necessarily corrupt, though they have two significant conflicts of interest that might get in the way of their objectively determining what happened: on the one hand, their municipal entity is going to have to pay through the nose if they find that their employee was criminally liable. On the other hand, if they find no probable cause or no true bill of indictment against the Officer, a chunk of their city may burn down from protests/riots.

I just think that Officer Guyger and her counsel have had several days to get a story together that matches the available evidence, and puts her in the best possible light. Unfortunately for her, were I on the jury, that story still means she's criminally liable for her conduct.
  #181  
Old 09-12-2018, 07:39 AM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,379
To bump's point about it not being a police shooting, or that's it's misleading, I see his point. But, AIUI, Dallas PD did treat it as an "officer-involved shooting," as opposed to a self-defense shooting involving a non law enforcement officer. That triggered several procedures, that I don't believe exist for non-LEOs implicated in the same conduct: not pushing for a statement until some time (2-3 days or so) after the shooting, not moving immediately for a warrant for a blood draw on the shooter, etc... Further, I've talked to officers who've indicated that not arresting non-LEOs for things like this isn't unusual, if they thought the shooter would show up to jail/court when needed, and if they thought the shooter would be more forthcoming if not immediately arrested, Mirandized, and counsel retained. That said, not arresting Officer Guyger for some degree of criminal homicide upon the police seeing a gunshot victim in the hospital, the shooter admitting she did it, that's the gun she used, and no other justification given for the assault, seems really peculiar, and only explained by the fact that she was a Dallas police officer.
  #182  
Old 09-12-2018, 07:44 AM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
Yes, the door is the key question here. Apartment dwellers don't leave their doors unlocked and keys for one door (obviously) don't open other doors except in exceptional circumstances.

So how did she get in and still think it was her place?
I think it is overstating things to say that apartment dwellers don't leave their doors unlocked. Everyone is prone to forgetfulness. I know that when I lived in an urban tower high-rise, I would leave my door unlocked quite frequently out of carelessness. Once someone actually did walk into my apartment, only to be greeted by my loud, terror-filled scream. It was one of the scariest things to ever happen to me. But it still wasn't enough to learn me. Fifteen years later, I still occasionally discover I've fallen asleep without properly securing my doors.

So it's not the unlocked door claim that I find bullshit. I find it unlikely, but it isn't implausible. It's the claim that Jean left his door *open* that I find suspicious. I can maybe buy this if it had been the middle of the day and he had been throwing a big party and people had been streaming in and out of the apartment. But it was late at night, the guy wasn't hosting anyone, and if the apartment was truly dimly lit and he was clad only in underwear, it is very likely he was about to go to bed. Assuming these last things things are true, then a door standing open doesn't make a lick of sense. It screams, "I'm going to throw everything and the kitchen sink into this story and hope someone swallows it because blue lives matter, amirite?"
  #183  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:29 AM
pool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 4,567
Is testing a cop for alcohol/drugs standard procedure when they shoot someone on the job? I know stuff like putting them on administrative leave is a standard action. Basically I was wondering if they were testing this officer because she was technically off duty during the event or if they would have tested her if she had been on duty as well.
__________________
"You can do anything you set your mind to...But money helps"
  #184  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:41 AM
Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
As to the incident at hand, and the differing narratives coming out, I don't think the Texas Rangers are corrupt. I don't think that Dallas PD is necessarily corrupt, though they have two significant conflicts of interest that might get in the way of their objectively determining what happened: on the one hand, their municipal entity is going to have to pay through the nose if they find that their employee was criminally liable. On the other hand, if they find no probable cause or no true bill of indictment against the Officer, a chunk of their city may burn down from protests/riots.
I also wouldn't presume either was corrupt, but municipal hierarchies do have a mixture of conflicts of interest in police shootings. The department itself at some level because it's 'one of them', other levels of the dept and the civilian elected leadership to accommodate public pressure which often means presuming police guilt. It's not simply fixed by changing the 'bias setting' toward convicting police personnel involved. And IMO it's naive at this point in the social/political evolution to assume every piece of information leaked from govt is designed to exonerate police rather than the opposite, or neither. Some conflicting info given to the press, particularly on unnamed source basis, is probably from people who just don't actually know what they are talking about.

I don't see a reason to assume in a case like this that an investigation and trial would 'cover up' basic facts like whether the guy's door was open, unlocked or what other explanation how the officer could have got in without it being obvious it wasn't her apartment. It's not uncommon to use the word 'open' in English wrt a door when it would be more exact to say 'unlocked'. I doubt this will remain a central mystery when all is said and done. I particularly doubt the officer would claim the door was wide open rather than unlocked if there's actually a more nefarious underlying story (premeditated killing, stole or copied the key).
  #185  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:54 AM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,568
One big issue in how this plays out is that the police version sounds exactly like a committee created fiction to spin everything in Guyger's and the police's favor. It's what you expect from a defense attorney defending their client trying to create maximum doubt. While it's possible it did happen as they say, it seems unlikely from common sense and what witnesses have said. If it comes out that the official statement was totally incorrect, it's going to greatly solidify people's belief that you can't trust the police and they'll make up any lies necessary to protect themselves.
  #186  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:58 AM
Falchion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
So it's not the unlocked door claim that I find bullshit. I find it unlikely, but it isn't implausible. It's the claim that Jean left his door *open* that I find suspicious. I can maybe buy this if it had been the middle of the day and he had been throwing a big party and people had been streaming in and out of the apartment. But it was late at night, the guy wasn't hosting anyone, and if the apartment was truly dimly lit and he was clad only in underwear, it is very likely he was about to go to bed. Assuming these last things things are true, then a door standing open doesn't make a lick of sense.
The door being "open" seems inconsistent with the idea of the woman banging on it and yelling let me in (obviously, it's also inconsistent with the idea of her not realizing it wasn't her apartment, unless she expected someone to be in her apartment).

But I don't know that the claim is that it was "standing open." I've had a few apartments (and plenty of hotel rooms) where the door has failed to latch completely because I've tried to close it quietly (instead of letting it close itself and slam). This looks (in the video upthread) like a similar door. To me, one of the more plausible components of the story is that she puts her key in the (wrong) door and it opens because it wasn't fully latched (and, as a result, she doesn't realize that she has the wrong keys).
  #187  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:31 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,981
ISTM that she should have known it wasn't her apartment even if the door was unlatched. And all the background about how tired, or maybe drunk, she was after a 12 hour shift doesn't make any difference. Or even if she was a police officer or not. She should have known it wasn't her apartment.

Even putting the most favorable spin on her story as it stands doesn't help. OK, she was tired, and it was dark, and the door was unlatched. That doesn't make going into the wrong apartment reasonable. So she acted without malice. So what? That makes it involuntary manslaughter, or reckless endangerment, or something like that.

Treat her the way you would any other licensed carrier who shot someone because they made an unreasonable mistake. Not better, not worse. The same.

Regards,
Shodan

PS - this is all based on what we know so far. Maybe they were ex-lovers or had a history or something. And probably she got some of the details wrong, either innocently or otherwise.
  #188  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:37 AM
DCnDC's Avatar
DCnDC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Dueling Grounds
Posts: 12,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falchion View Post
The door being "open" seems inconsistent with the idea of the woman banging on it and yelling let me in (obviously, it's also inconsistent with the idea of her not realizing it wasn't her apartment, unless she expected someone to be in her apartment).
This is a perplexing part of the story (and, unsurprisingly, disputed). Did she live alone or not? Banging on the door and yelling "Let me in" implies that she did not live alone, in which case it makes absolutely zero sense that she'd immediately draw her weapon and open fire when she saw a figure in the dark. If she did live alone, who was she yelling at to let her in?
  #189  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:37 AM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey View Post
Sure but you could easily put a piece of tape over the latching mechanism, put a small block at the floor etc. etc. It's an interesting extra piece of information but it's not the smoking gun.
In the late evening, when the resident was in a state of undress and presumably retired for the night, it strains credibility the front door would have been propped open for no outwardly apparent reason. Rather coincidental too that at just the time this unusual occasion occurs, the shooter supposedly thinks this is her front door and waltzes right in.

Not a smoking gun but it’s definitely fishy.
  #190  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:49 AM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Perhaps Texas will end up in a vicious circle of more and more extreme forms of the castle doctrine. You now have a right to set up Aliens-style automatic sentries to wipe out anyone who comes within 50 meters of your apartment immediately, just in case the potential intruder is lost and mistakenly thinks they are about to enter their own apartment and will therefore believe they have a right to shoot you. We'll basically all end up barricaded in our apartments shooting at each other.
Ahh but can we lift off and nuke the site from orbit, just to be sure?
  #191  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:57 AM
Falchion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCnDC View Post
This is a perplexing part of the story (and, unsurprisingly, disputed). Did she live alone or not? Banging on the door and yelling "Let me in" implies that she did not live alone, in which case it makes absolutely zero sense that she'd immediately draw her weapon and open fire when she saw a figure in the dark. If she did live alone, who was she yelling at to let her in?
It would be a curious development if it turned out she was trying to kill a boyfriend in a domestic dispute, and wound up at the wrong apartment by mistake.

Last edited by Falchion; 09-12-2018 at 10:57 AM.
  #192  
Old 09-12-2018, 11:50 AM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 22,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
Not a smoking gun but it’s definitely fishy.
Yep.
  #193  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:19 PM
nelliebly is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,781
The aspect of this case that confounds me is not that she (allegedly) mistook someone else's apartment for her own, but that a trained police officer behaved the way she did in a dark apartment. Even if her account is accurate, in the dark she had no way of knowing if the one guy she (sort of) saw was the only other person present. She couldn't have determined with any certainty what he may have been armed with. Under those circumstances, isn't a cop supposed to retreat and call for backup?
  #194  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:30 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
The aspect of this case that confounds me is not that she (allegedly) mistook someone else's apartment for her own, but that a trained police officer behaved the way she did in a dark apartment. Even if her account is accurate, in the dark she had no way of knowing if the one guy she (sort of) saw was the only other person present. She couldn't have determined with any certainty what he may have been armed with. Under those circumstances, isn't a cop supposed to retreat and call for backup?
She did a whole lot of things wrong and some that seem hinky. That is why I wonder why this is about anything but her.
  #195  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:32 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
So again let me say at the outset of this post: I am not discussing the actual event. We're discussing a parallel universe in which she came home to HER apartment after 10 PM, encountered a man inside her apartment with the lights off, and who failed to respond to her commands.

Again referring you to Sec. 9.42(2), supra, deadly force may be used to protect property when the actor has reasonable belief that such force was immediately necessary to prevent the immediate commission of, inter alia, criminal mischief at night.

"At night," is satisfied by the fact that the events in question happened at, or shortly after, 10 PM.

Criminal mischief is defined at Sec. 28.03(a), which definition includes in pertinent part tampering with the property of another in a way that causes substantial inconvenience to the owner. Finding a man in your darkened apartment at night triggers at the very least reasonable belief that your apartment and its contents are at risk of substantial inconvenience.

The law does not require her belief to be correct -- merely that it be reasonable. And the law specifically removes from her any duty to retreat, so if you're asking, "Why didn't she just back into the hallway and await backup?" the answer is that the law forbids the fact-finder to consider that. There is no duty to retreat.

Now, when you say, "He did not enter with force," just how much "force," do you think is necessary to trigger this condition? Remember, again, we're discussing the parallel universe, and remember, again, at issue is not what happened, but what her reasonable belief is.
And this is why we have dozens of stories like this one:

https://people.com/crime/ohio-dad-sh...s-an-intruder/
  #196  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:41 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
She did a whole lot of things wrong and some that seem hinky. That is why I wonder why this is about anything but her.
No true Scotsman, erm, good guy with a gun, right?
  #197  
Old 09-12-2018, 01:11 PM
Lucas Jackson's Avatar
Lucas Jackson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
The law does not require her belief to be correct -- merely that it be reasonable. And the law specifically removes from her any duty to retreat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey Ghost
But if the facts were as in Bricker's hypo, then if she shoots him---then my guess, and IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's how it's going to shake out---she's going to be no-billed 10 times out of 10.
Here's where Bricker's hypo breaks down - opinion. My wife and I are fans of Investigation Discovery TV. We watch several true crime dramas a day and have for several years. In almost every case, the defense attorney quotes state law, statutes, etc and states unequivocally how their client was complying with the laws and how they were right. In almost every case their client goes to jail. Being a lawyer and quoting state law will not make you right or keep your client from going to jail if they have done something despicable.

Again, Bricker is just another lawyer. In almost every case that goes to trial there are two opposing ones. One always loses.
  #198  
Old 09-12-2018, 01:48 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas Jackson View Post
Here's where Bricker's hypo breaks down - opinion. My wife and I are fans of Investigation Discovery TV. We watch several true crime dramas a day and have for several years. In almost every case, the defense attorney quotes state law, statutes, etc and states unequivocally how their client was complying with the laws and how they were right. In almost every case their client goes to jail. Being a lawyer and quoting state law will not make you right or keep your client from going to jail if they have done something despicable.

Again, Bricker is just another lawyer. In almost every case that goes to trial there are two opposing ones. One always loses.
Where I'll disagree with you is that: I don't think that what the shooter did in Bricker's hypo was despicable---nor would most Texans---and if the shooter gets "no-billed", there's no indictment and therefore no trial. Tragic, not despicable.

Bricker's hypo isn't what happened here. It is illustrative though for showing that, if you believe she thought she was at her apartment, Guyger lacked the mens rea necessary to commit murder. I think it's easier to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Guyger was reckless in her disregard for a bunch of objective evidence that she wasn't in her apartment, and that the guy approaching her had every right to be there and every right to ignore whatever commands she may or may not have given him.

(I tend to believe that the witness accounts of pounding on the door, yelling Police, etc... came from hearing the cops show up a few minutes after the shooting. We may find out at a later point what happened regarding that. I have read that Guyger may have called 911 before trying to enter Jean's apartment. If so, there should be a record of that, and it may support a finding that Guyger was merely negligent as opposed to recklessly causing Jean's death. Or it may mean she was justified after all, as hard as that is to believe right now.)

For Riemann, and his quip about placing Aliens-style sentry guns around one's residence, funnily enough a similar case happened in a Houston suburb the other day: Shooting victim wounded while trying to rig doors and windows of Tomball home with booby traps. https://abc13.com/man-shot-while-try...traps/4214308/ From the article:
Quote:
The sheriff's office SWAT unit was called to the home after deputies determined the home may be rigged to open fire. The sheriff's office said every door or window of the home had some sort of device that triggers a gunshot shell to go off.

They believe the homeowner was hurt from one of the as many as a dozen devices found.

According to law enforcement, it is illegal in Texas to rig your home with explosives. Authorities believe the devices were to scare off burglars who have broken into the home before...
Basically, mid 70 year old rigs his house with a dozen or so booby traps. This is illegal, even in Texas. He manages to cleverly shoot himself with one, the cops are called, and one of the responding officers damn near shoots himself with another one. I am guessing dementia, along with a good dose of paranoia, and maybe a lengthy stay in a state hospital. Glad the officer was unhurt. So far, sentry-guns are not allowed.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 09-12-2018 at 01:48 PM.
  #199  
Old 09-12-2018, 01:59 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,379
Ran out of edit time. I agree with Corry El's post in response to mine. I particularly agree with the idea that ambiguous language, as relayed by media accounts, and by the witnesses themselves, can lead to different perceptions of what happened. Ambiguous terms such as "an open door", when the witness really meant, "an unlocked door that didn't close all of the way, but looks like it's closed and locked" etc... Also the part where he mentions that many of the people talking to the media about this, or discussing it in the media, don't know what they're talking about.

We really need more information about what happened---I've mentioned before wanting to know just where Mr. Jean got shot in relation to the door, among other things---and what the authorities did in response when they got their call.
  #200  
Old 09-12-2018, 02:31 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
No true Scotsman, erm, good guy with a gun, right?
Go ahead and check, sparky. You will find that I have never used that expression, other than to point out to others like you that I have never used it. Swing and a miss for you.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017