I haven’t been following this trial, but I was surprised to hear that Guyger testified in court. My understanding is that criminal defendants almost never testify in their own trials, because if they do, it usually goes badly for them, as it did in this case. Why did Guyger’s defense team have her testify?
They argued self-defense, which I think would be hard to argue without testifying.
IANAL but there is no benefit to testifying unless the accused is an extremely compelling person. Imagine a police interrogation but 10x worse. The most likely result is that they get murdered by the (very well trained and professional) prosecutor.
I don’t feel a sense of closure. I just have a hard time accepting that if any one of a number of things had or had not occurred that this tragedy would have been avoided.
Guyger works a shorter shift and is more mentally aware.
Guyger does not park on the 4th floor instead of the 3rd.
Guyger does not get a wonderfully close parking spot.
Guyger is not on the phone with her boyfriend as she exits her truck.
Guyger’s apartment was not directly below Jean’s.
There was not a scheduled maintenance of her apartment that day.
The locks on Jean’s door were engaged and not defective.
Jean had the lights on in his apartment
Jean was in the bathroom or sleeping or doing something where he would have been unaware of Guyger’s entrance into his apartment.
One. Just one of those things could have changed the course of events. What are the chances all of this things would happen? It doesn’t make Guyger any less culpable. It’s just hard to grasp. Like the reverse of winning the lottery.
What’s so hard to grasp about coincidence? Are you starting to doubt that she didn’t intend to enter the wrong apartment?
Could have been avoided if:
Guyger had followed proper police procedure for responding to an active burglary
Guyger had noticed she was entering the wrong apartment, which had a red welcome mat
Guyger had not fired a weapon at an unarmed man who posed no threat
I do not know for a fact, but I am guessing they were trying to present her as a sympathetic figure, someone with great remorse who made a terrible mistake and acted without malice. You can’t show that if you don’t put her on the stand.
This is the key. Yes, it was a long string of coincidences that led to the confrontation. But it was Guygers actions that turned it into a murder.
Is this post serious, or am I missing the intended humor?
It could have even been avoided if she had followed procedure and taken cover and called for backup. She might have eventually realized on her own that she was not in her own apartment.
10 years. That’s not too bad. She’ll be out before she’s 40.
That seems fair. She poses no future danger to the community. Felons can’t own or use guns. Her background shows that she’s worked hard in various jobs since 16. Put herself through school.
She poses no threat as long as she doesn’t walk into someone else’s apartment.
But she wasn’t responding to a burglary. She was just returning home. I think watching too many movies and television shows skews your understanding of reality. There’s a big difference between being dispatched to a burglary in progress with a partner versus coming home exhausted and being caught off guard.
I think she was in total auto-pilot. She wasn’t paying attention to anything around her. The site of Mr. Jean completely surprised her and she instinctively drew her weapon. I suspect we’re going to learn that she wasn’t a very good police officer and lacked focus even when she wasn’t tired.
That’s a slap on the wrist, but at least she’s serving prison time. Doesn’t seem fair at all to me; Jean, who did absolutely nothing wrong, was shot dead in his apartment, and will never see 40. Unless she’s going to somehow resurrect him by 40, which I doubt. Not really sure why you think a racist murderer willing to lie on the stand and use her status as a police officer to try to get away with the murder is not a danger to the community.
I think 10 years would be an appropriate sentence for perjury for her lies on the stand, not for a blatant racist killing an innocent man in his own house. But they pretty much never prosecute that.
She ran into his apartment with the intent of killing whoever she found; which she did. Jean never stood a chance of surviving from the moment she entered his home.
Whooa, there, Sparky. Assumes facts not in evidence.
Ten years doesn’t seem like a long time for such a crime. But the jury* knows a lot more about the crime and the law than I do (and was mostly people of color) so who am I to second guess them?
*in texas, the jury determines the sentence, iiuc. Other states it’s the judge.
You have been the most prolific poster in this thread. I’ve just been through all 43 of your posts, and you have spent about half of them trying to excuse or minimize Guyger’s actions. You’ve also not once talked about the ACTUAL victim as anything except another piece of evidence.
You should look into your priorities a bit.
I care about Botham Jean, the victim of this crime. I supported Guyger’s prosecution. Was concerned she was over charged because it increased the chance of an aquittal. Murder is harder to prove than the lesser charges.
I support the sentence. It’s a little higher than I expected but it is a fair sentence. Guyger had many opportunities to avoid this tragedy and she deserves punishment.
I followed this case because Jean recently graduated from Harding University in Arkansas . The case is local news.
If you’re black and selling marijuana, that’s apparently worth a life sentence as happened to Ferrell Scott. If you’re white and break into a black guy’s house and shoot him, that’s only worth ten. Yeah, it’s not a long time for straight up murder by an agent of the government, but again at least the lying, racist murderer is doing some prison time instead of paid leave.