Dallas cop kills innocent man

[Riemann]

@monstro

Multiple news websites come up. But the text no longer appears on any of them. Why? Because the narrative has now mysteriously changed…

I don’t really understand what you think has happened here. A conspiracy to cover up and change the narrative among the police I can understand. But after someone spoke to the press, a conspiracy among journalists to hide that story? I don’t understand how you think that’s plausible. I mean, yes - I’d like to understand why and how a story that was up on websites has vanished, if that’s the case.

ETA: what I’m seeing when I google sentences from that quote is that it comes from “activist” Shaun King, who is claiming it was an earlier report.

[Leaffan]

@John_Mace

Check the username…

I’m aware of pescado.

[chaika]

@monstro

Copy and paste the following and do a Google search on it:

"A Dallas police officer, who spoke with NBC 5 under the condition of anonymity, said Guyger was assigned to the department’s elite Crime Response Team and had just finished a 14-hour shift serving warrants in high-crime areas. When she arrived home, she took the elevator to a floor that was not hers. She then went to what she thought was her door, put the key in and struggled with the lock. Guyger 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. Guyger believed Jean, who was wearing only underwear, was an intruder and shot him with her service weapon. It wasn’t until police and rescue units began arriving that she realized she was not at her apartment. Once realizing her deadly mistake, she became emotional and fully cooperated with officers, including offering to provide blood samples.”

Multiple news websites come up. But the text no longer appears on any of them. Why? Because the narrative has now mysteriously changed. Now, the door was not only unlocked, but it was ajar (which of course would creep out anyone). Now, Guyger actually went into the dimly lit apartment (which of course means she wouldn’t see how different everything was). Now, Guyger shouted commands that were obviously unheeded (if only the guy had obeyed…). Now, she shot him inside the apartment (which of course she’d have every right to do, given that she thought she was in her home).

My guess? She and her lawyer have had a couple of days to figure out a less shitty story.

I think you may be right. Revising the story does sound like a severe case of CYA. What do police officers always say when they shoot someone? They feared for their lives, they identified themselves as police officers, the suspect refused to comply. Check, check, check.

I mean, I hope that Guyger is telling the truth. It won’t make her actions less reckless, or Jean’s death any less tragic, but at least she wouldn’t be a liar. But if it turns out that she has concocted a fake story, that would be reprehensible.

[Lucas_Jackson]

@HurricaneDitka

In what way(s) would you like them to handle it differently?

To treat it like the crime it is. If you are carrying a firearm and are to drunk or tired to not walk into a strangers and kill them, you are criminally negligent. It shouldn’t take 3 days to decide to issue a warrant for her arrest.

[monstro]

@Riemann

I don’t really understand what you think has happened here. A conspiracy to cover up and change the narrative among the police I can understand. But after someone spoke to the press, a conspiracy among journalists to hide that story? I don’t understand how you think that’s plausible. I mean, yes - I’d like to understand why and how a story that was up on websites has vanished, if that’s the case.

A conspiracy of journalism? I don’t know about all that. But yes, I’m baffled why 1) the initial narrative that everyone has been talking about for the past couple of days has been suddenly swapped out for this new totally conflicting narrative that is conveniently less shitty and 2) no one seems to be even talking about why the two narratives are different.

[Riemann]

@monstro

A conspiracy of journalism? I don’t know about all that. But yes, I’m baffled why 1) the initial narrative that everyone has been talking about for the past couple of days has been suddenly swapped out for this new totally conflicting narrative that is conveniently less shitty and 2) no one seems to be even talking about why the two narratives are different.

If a prior news story has really been taken down from news websites, there will be an objective record of that, and surely some reason for it other than a nationwide conspiracy on the part of all journalists. All I can see so far is accusations from a Twitter “activist”, which I’m no more inclined to accept at face value than statements by the Dallas Police.

[Ambivalid]

@Riemann

My point is that her knowledge of the law may affected her state of mind, and led to her shooting when she could easily have retreated.

So you’re suggesting that she (may have) had the presence of mind to mentally connect the relevant legal code which would exhonerate her to deciding to the man? Buuuuut, she didn’t have enough presence of mind to not “go home wrong”? Even after her keys shouted at her “wrong door stupid!!” and the red carpet was not what she had at her ‘real’ place?

@monstro

Copy and paste the following and do a Google search on it:

"A Dallas police officer, who spoke with NBC 5 under the condition of anonymity, said Guyger was assigned to the department’s elite Crime Response Team and had just finished a 14-hour shift serving warrants in high-crime areas. When she arrived home, she took the elevator to a floor that was not hers. She then went to what she thought was her door, put the key in and struggled with the lock. Guyger 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. Guyger believed Jean, who was wearing only underwear, was an intruder and shot him with her service weapon. It wasn’t until police and rescue units began arriving that she realized she was not at her apartment. Once realizing her deadly mistake, she became emotional and fully cooperated with officers, including offering to provide blood samples.”

Multiple news websites come up. But the text no longer appears on any of them. Why? Because the narrative has now mysteriously changed. Now, the door was not only unlocked, but it was ajar (which of course would creep out anyone). Now, Guyger actually went into the dimly lit apartment (which of course means she wouldn’t see how different everything was). Now, Guyger shouted commands that were obviously unheeded (if only the guy had obeyed…). Now, she shot him inside the apartment (which of course she’d have every right to do, given that she thought she was in her home).

My guess? She and her lawyer have had a couple of days to figure out a less shitty story.

I can’t even feign surprise.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Lucas_Jackson

To treat it like the crime it is. If you are carrying a firearm and are to drunk or tired to not walk into a strangers and kill them, you are criminally negligent. It shouldn’t take 3 days to decide to issue a warrant for her arrest.

I’m saddened by the man’s tragic death, and hope she’s punished for her alleged crime if convicted, but I’m not sure I can get too worked up about a 3-day interval before the arrest. Government is mostly slow and incompetent. This (meaning the interval until the arrest) doesn’t strike me as a particularly egregious example.

[Riemann]

@Ambivalid

So you’re suggesting that she (may have) had the presence of mind to mentally connect the relevant legal code which would exhonerate her to deciding to the man? Buuuuut, she didn’t have enough presence of mind to not “go home wrong”? Even after her keys shouted at her “wrong door stupid!!” and the red carpet was not what she had at her ‘real’ place?

I’m not talking about complex legal reasoning about an obscure part of the law here. Do you really think that most gun owners aren’t aware of the lesser duty to retreat under castle doctrine and stand your ground laws, and that it’s implausible that this makes people more trigger happy?

[Ethilrist]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m saddened by the man’s tragic death, and hope she’s punished for her alleged crime if convicted, but I’m not sure I can get too worked up about a 3-day interval before the arrest. Government is mostly slow and incompetent. This (meaning the interval until the arrest) doesn’t strike me as a particularly egregious example.

Bull. If you or I had done what she did, we’d have gone directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not go on administrative leave.

[excavating_for_a_mind]

@monstro

Copy and paste the following and do a Google search on it:

"A Dallas police officer, who spoke with NBC 5 under the condition of anonymity, said Guyger was assigned to the department’s elite Crime Response Team and had just finished a 14-hour shift serving warrants in high-crime areas. When she arrived home, she took the elevator to a floor that was not hers. She then went to what she thought was her door, put the key in and struggled with the lock. Guyger 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. Guyger believed Jean, who was wearing only underwear, was an intruder and shot him with her service weapon. It wasn’t until police and rescue units began arriving that she realized she was not at her apartment. Once realizing her deadly mistake, she became emotional and fully cooperated with officers, including offering to provide blood samples.”

Multiple news websites come up. But the text no longer appears on any of them. Why? Because the narrative has now mysteriously changed. Now, the door was not only unlocked, but it was ajar (which of course would creep out anyone). Now, Guyger actually went into the dimly lit apartment (which of course means she wouldn’t see how different everything was). Now, Guyger shouted commands that were obviously unheeded (if only the guy had obeyed…). Now, she shot him inside the apartment (which of course she’d have every right to do, given that she thought she was in her home).

My guess? She and her lawyer have had a couple of days to figure out a less shitty story.

I did find this

@NBC Chicago 5

Editor’s Note: A previous version of this story included an account of events told by a Dallas police source. Due to conflicting reports of the incident from various sources, we’ve removed that account from the story.

I guess it is in the sense of “fairness” they no longer are publishing the original version.

[MichaelEmouse]

How do police officers tend to be tested for drugs? That kind of confusion is what I’d expect from someone who’s seriously intoxicated.

[monstro]

@excavating_for_a_mind

I did find this

I guess it is in the sense of “fairness” they no longer are publishing the original version.

I saw this language. But I would like to know where those details came from in the original version.

Are we supposed to believe that a fellow police officer concocted all those details (like that she struggled with the key for so long that she had to set some items down on the floor…presumbly right next to or on the red door mat that didn’t belong to her)? Why would a fellow police officer make all of that up?

Why should the public or the jury (if it comes to that) trust this new narrative over the other one? I wish we knew when she gave her official statement. If it was right after the shooting, great. It means the anonymous police source was full of shit. But if she’s had a couple of days to come up with something that conflicts with other accounts (including what she told her fellow officers on the scene) and it just happens to make her look less shady, then that just stinks to high-heaven.

[Lucas_Jackson]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m saddened by the man’s tragic death, and hope she’s punished for her alleged crime if convicted, but I’m not sure I can get too worked up about a 3-day interval before the arrest. Government is mostly slow and incompetent. This (meaning the interval until the arrest) doesn’t strike me as a particularly egregious example.

It does to me. The police aren’t guessing what might have happened. She told them. She wasn’t on duty responding to a dangerous police situation. She walked into the wrong home and accidentally (her version) shot a man to death. “Oops” is not a get out of jail free card. What she did is a crime whether she meant to or not. She should have been arrested on the spot.
.

[BigT]

The thing that’s ridiculous is that people don’t seem to think about it this way: what if a cop walked into your house? What if your loved one was the one who didn’t immediately comply with a stranger’s orders? Would you still be acting like the cop was in the right?

A man died because a cop was too stupid/tired/drugged to realize that they were in the wrong house, and then chose to shoot someone without any signs that they were an actual threat. If she had time to issue orders, she had time to turn the lights on.

People should be not terrorized by the police, constantly worried that a cop may even just show up at their house and shoot them. I should not have to lock my door to keep the police out.

They’re supposed to be our friends and helpers. This should be a much bigger deal than manslaughter.

[Riemann]

@BigT

The thing that’s ridiculous is that people don’t seem to think about it this way: what if a cop walked into your house? What if your loved one was the one who didn’t immediately comply with a stranger’s orders? Would you still be acting like the cop was in the right?

Huh? Isn’t everyone thinking this way? Who has suggested in any sense that “the cop was in the right”?

I think the only think in question here is the exact details, how this could conceivably happen, whether she was drunk etc.

[DCnDC]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m saddened by the man’s tragic death, and hope she’s punished for her alleged crime if convicted, but I’m not sure I can get too worked up about a 3-day interval before the arrest. Government is mostly slow and incompetent. This (meaning the interval until the arrest) doesn’t strike me as a particularly egregious example.

Seriously? So, had it gone the other way, and it was him who had shot her, you think the police let him walk around free for 3 days and turn himself in once they’d gotten around to getting their shit together? And you’re okay with that?

[Ethilrist]

@Riemann

Huh? Isn’t everyone thinking this way? Who has suggested in any sense that “the cop was in the right”?

I think the only think in question here is the exact details, how this could conceivably happen, whether she was drunk etc.

Post#48.

@HurricaneDitka

I’m saddened by the man’s tragic death, and hope she’s punished for her alleged crime if convicted

[Roderick_Femm]

@excavating_for_a_mind

I did find this

I guess it is in the sense of “fairness” they no longer are publishing the original version.

I also found several sites that talked about a “suspicious” change of story by the officer. I don’t think this difference is going to die away.

[Riemann]

@Roderick_Femm

I also found several sites that talked about a “suspicious” change of story by the officer. I don’t think this difference is going to die away.

But there must be more to this. Multiple journalists are not going to cover up a genuine prior (and more sensational) account and replace it with a modified one just because a cop says “I misremembered, here’s what actually happened”.