It has been asserted in various places (and earlier in the thread) that the story somehow changed from an earlier more incriminating account after it broke. But I’ve yet to see any reliable explanation of what this really means. Of course it’s plausible that she or her police buddies might try to change their account to try to make her actions seem less egregious. But it’s not plausible that all the news outlets are also in on this conspiracy, that news websites would then just delete an older statement from their websites simply because the police released a new version.
Well, the initial story that she was trying to get into a locked apartment sounds the most likely, and it’s not just me saying this. This article seems to corroborate that she did indeed try to get into the apartment, which was locked - neighbors heard someone knocking on a door and a woman yelling “Let me in!” right before the shooting, which no one would say if they could just walk into an apartment. So, ergo, her story about walking into an unlocked apartment is complete & unadulterated bullshit:
Again, Dallas is a high crime city (I know from personal experience), and I don’t see why anyone would be stupid enough to leave their door unlocked - unless you’re a complete idiot. And, B. Jean did not strike me as stupid.
nm
Based on that article, this is hearsay passed on by activist attorneys for the victim. I agree that the police account is implausible, but I’m not going to take that as reliable either until we get first hand accounts from reliable sources. Unfortunately, the activist side have repeatedly undermined credibility just as much as the police side by their lack of concern for the truth when a case doesn’t fit their agenda.
The “activist” side?
Which side would that be, again?
No problem. You can choose to believe that someone would leave a door unlocked in a high crime city - especially in an apartment, when numerous people are coming and going at all hours. I do not believe this. I can guarantee that you’d have to be a naive fool to leave your door unlocked in Dallas - and, again, an risk assurance associate doesn’t strike me as naive or a fool.
When I said I find the police account “implausible”, what did you think I meant?
The fact that I don’t think that second-hand hearsay claims from people with a strong agenda the other way are not a reliable source does not mean I believe the police.
I can believe that someone might have left their door unlocked in a high crime city. I live in a high crime city, but I am absent-minded enough to occasionally leave my freakin’ keys in the door. Because I am stupid sometimes.
But never have I ever left my door ajar. Not at 10:00PM, dressed only in my underwear. If the apartment was dark and the hallway was brightly lit, it would have been hard for Jean to not notice that his door was open. So an ajar door seems way too pat to me.
It won’t take investigators long to find any connection between Guyger and Jean.
For now, it’s 2nd hand info from neighbors they heard Guyger demanding to be let in. A personal connection between these two people would shift the focus of the entire case. It wouldn’t be a tragic error anymore.
This case is going to a Grand jury. They’ll decide what charges are indicated.
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.
(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.
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.
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?
His apartment was directly above hers.
Never mind, I found this:
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?
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.
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.
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!
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!”
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.
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.
I agree that this still sounds likely, whichever version of her approach and entry to the apartment is true.