300 witnesses? I have to wonder if that’s a typo or if they suspected premeditation for some reason which is why there’s now a murder charge.
What the article says is more than 300 interviews with witnesses, not that they interviewed more than 300 witnesses. Most likely, they talked to some people multiple times.
Does Texas allow video in the court?
Wondering if this trial will be available Live online.
I’ve seen trials in Florida and Tennessee online. Haven’t heard what the rules are in Texas.
I will be very surprised if there was no prior relationship between the officer and the deceased, like they had prior dealings in some way.
I bet a lot of the ‘witnesses’ were perfunctory, meaning they interviewed all of the neighbors on both floors -
“Did you know of any interactions between these two?”
“No”
“Okay, thank you”
Quite right. That’s what I get for reading while distracted. Thanks for the clarification.
The lawyers take depositions from the witnesses.
That can take quite awhile. Lawyers from the prosecution and defense have to schedule time together to conduct them.
Yes, I think that anyone claiming this was at all in any way reasonable on her part should have to say with a straight face that a black man who broke into a white cop’s apartment and killed the cop would get treated with the same standard of ‘reasonableness’ they’re advocating for her.
In Texas law, it’s murder. Manslaughter (again, in Texas) is causing someone’s death through recklessness. Intent is not a necessary element of manslaughter. In this case, she clearly deliberately caused his death with intent, even if she did so under erroneous assumptions.
And I think in all jurisdictions, “intent” does not have to mean extensive prior planning, right? It’s sufficient that you have time to form the will to do it, and choose that course of action over another, you can form intent in a fairly short space of time.
Oh, that’s an exaggeration. He probably wouldn’t get more than 10.87 years.
I can’t speak to all jurisdictions, but the Texas penal code does not list premeditation as a factor in determining which murder charge applies.
Evidence of premeditation, however, would weigh against any “crime of passion” defense (e.g., “But I wuz skeered!”) that Guyger’s lawyers might try to pitch at the sentencing stage. If they successfully represent the shooting as a result of sudden panic, it could reduce the charge from a first-degree felony (with a prison term of 5-99 years or life) to a second-degree felony (with a prison term of 2-20 years).
The trial has started.
Couple things have come out. No drugs or alcohol in Guyger’s toxicology.
She was sexting her police partner just prior to the shooting.
There was also a phone call prior to the shooting.
I don’t see Guyger & Rivera’s personal relationship as relevant to the case, but it did get allowed in court. Rivera testified about the texts and call.
A variety of Dallas media outlets are live streaming the trial. I mentioned one in this Pit post, forgetting there was a thread here about the case.
That Guyger was texting/Snapchatting Rivera throughout the aftermath of the encounter with Mr. Jean, in lieu of rendering aid to Mr. Jean, if I understand the timeline of events correctly, and the texts/chat being deleted by both Guyger and Rivera, doesn’t look good for Guyger. It may merely have been sexting; it may have been an aborted discussion of what story she needed to tell to the authorities.
I mentioned that I am concerned the Dallas County Grand Jury may have over indicted her, without also mentioning potential lesser culpable mental states, such as recklessness or negligence. AIUI, without including those mental states in the indictment, the State may not charge the jury to determine what would normally be lesser included offenses such as manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. The jury finds her guilty or not guilty on murder only, and that’s it. I’m not sure the State can prove murder here, with Guyger’s story, as repugnant as her actions were.
Should be a short trial. There’s not much at dispute. Guyger made several errors that resulted in the shooting.
They pointed out yesterday that she should have stayed in the hallway and called for backup. There was no need to enter because there’s only one way out. She could have easily covered the door and waited. Guyger eventually would have noticed the red doormat.
.
I am curious why that latch didn’t work properly. Guyger shouldn’t have ever gotten inside.
Is there any evidence Jean heard her at the door and opened it to see who it was? To which her reaction was “OMG being attacked by a black guy!”?
The testimony yesterday said he was on the sofa eating ice cream.
They haven’t established what Jean did after hearing Guyger at his door. I expect they’ll have testimony to answer that question.
The first link has testimony from several witnesses on Sept 25.
The main investigator’s testimony cleared up several questions that I had. Guyger’s story seems to hold up. She drove directly from work to the apartments. Armstrong confirmed the signage was confusing and many residents had found themselves trying their key at the wrong door. Botham’s lock was defective and allowed Guyger to enter the wrong apartment.
I still think the shooting was completely unwarranted and IMHO probably criminal. Especially for a cop with training and 5 years experience. She was on the high crimes task force and certainly should have used better judgement.
Sept 25
Sept 24 testimony
I watched the DA’s Data Analyst testimony. She put together a detailed timeline of Botham and Guyger’s movements that day.
There was no interaction between the two prior to Guyger entering the apartment. The shooting took place within 3 to 4 mins after she parked. The 911 call came immediately afterwards.
Guyger did text Martin Rivera (her partner) to come help her after the shooting. The DA’s Data Analyst testimony didn’t indicate that he responded. That probably saved his career. Blundering into this crime scene would have been a serious error. It would have also raised the question of a police cover up.