AHM
NES Member
FTFY, sigh.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Dallas PO enters wrong apartment, kills occupant
- Thread starter Palladin
- Start date
KBCraig
NES Member
Disoriented Amber Guyger Opens Fire After Mistakenly Entering Wrong Courtroom
Leave it to The Onion to find humor in this. There's no article, just the headline and a photo of her in court.
Leave it to The Onion to find humor in this. There's no article, just the headline and a photo of her in court.
No way in hell she gets convicted of Murder.
Is that all she is being tried for?
Can she be convicted of manslaughter?
She should be convicted of manslaughter.
The DA might be charging her with murder just to keep the peace in the neighborhood.
There are two lesser included charges they may or may not make it to the jury. Won’t know that until after both sides have made closing statements. That will get hashed out at the end during discussions about jury instructions.
And if you read the Texas penal code, it is murder. She already testified that she intended to shoot and kill him. She didn’t accidentally shoot him. She wasn’t trying to shoot something else and recklessly shot him. It was intended.
And murder, as opposed to capital murder, only carries a 2-20 year sentence.
She planned to cause him serious injury or death when she pulled the trigger. It wasn’t a mistake, though it was for a mistaken reason. The difference is very important and precisely why she is facing a murder charge.
Juries can be sympathetic to a pretty white girl who is a cop.
Especially when she shoots a black man.
It may not be right but juries have feels.
However, if she testified that she intended to shoot AND kill him - she should be convicted.
When is the jury suppose to get this?
How much longer is this trial?
KBCraig
NES Member
I posted the link to the Texas statute just for people who have this response.
You should read it.
KBCraig,
I thank you for the link but it's getting late for me tonight.
Can you please outline that part in the murder statute that can help me understand this.
I'm not trying to be lazy but I already read it a couple times.
It could be in the hands of the jury as soon as tomorrow.
kevin9
NES Member
The cliff notes version, as I understand it, is that what most of the rest of the country calls "1st degree murder", or premeditated murder, Texas calls "capital murder". Texas then calls "2nd degree murder" (deliberate but not premeditated murder) plain "murder". It's confusing because most people equate the term "murder" with "1st degree murder" whereas in Texas it equates to "2nd degree murder".
Juries love cops. I'm not optimistic. I predict either a hung jury, or a guilty verdict for a much lesser charge.
Closing arguments being made now. Likely to be going to the jury later today.
Edit:
Jury instructions have been given. Murder and manslaughter charges will be considered. “A person is justified in the use of force in self defense against another when and to the degree she reasonably believes that the use of force was immediately necessary to protect herself against the others use or attempted use of unlawful force...The term reasonable belief means a belief that is held by an ordinary and prudent person in the same circumstances.”
Edit:
Jury instructions have been given. Murder and manslaughter charges will be considered. “A person is justified in the use of force in self defense against another when and to the degree she reasonably believes that the use of force was immediately necessary to protect herself against the others use or attempted use of unlawful force...The term reasonable belief means a belief that is held by an ordinary and prudent person in the same circumstances.”
Last edited:
AHM
NES Member
Extenuating circumstances: he was eating ice cream.
Sigh.
Under reported because it’s not decisive evidence, which is also why the jury deliberated for like 4-5 hours today and didn’t yet reach a verdict.
If 23% of residents have mistakenly entered the wrong apartment, and shooting occupants in their own apartment, while mistakenly, is something an ordinary and prudent person might do, why is this the only example of that happening? Are the 23% unreasonable and not prudent?
KBCraig
NES Member
"Murder", in Texas, only requires intentional use of deadly force. She didn't have to intend to kill. Premeditation isn't a factor at all. She intentionally shot him. It wasn't an accident. He died from the gunshot. That qualifies as murder in Texas.
Self defense is an affirmative defense that can be raised at trial, but none of the facts in this case support that claim.
What will the jury do? I have no idea. It's a cop, in cop-loving Texas. It's a jury. We all know how that goes.
What does the law call for? Conviction on the charge of murder.
I would have thought that too, but watch the video link of Atty. Andy Branca in Post #254. Maybe we are wrong here.
I agree, it really is a toss up. The jury has the option of manslaughter, but as you say, there's really no legally consistent logic that would justify the manslaughter charge. She deliberately killed Botham, and the letter of the law would seem to call that Murder in Texas.
Juries don't really have to be legal scholars though, so they may find a way to return a manslaughter verdict. I guess this is preferable than an outright acquittal, but doesn't really make much sense for the reasons you say. It only takes one stubborn bootlicker juror to cause a mistrial.
Texas juries can be weird. Sure, the love cops, but they often take property rights pretty seriously. There have been multiple cases in which a Texas jury has found in favor of defendants who killed cops conducting no-knock raids, citing self-defense and castle doctrine type lines of thinking. So maybe Botham being killed in his own home by an intruder will rub them the wrong way.
My view of this is that she is guilty of murder, by the letter of the law. The appropriate place to assess her culpability would be during sentencing, and if the jury wants to consider this "mistake of fact" issue there, that's fine.
23% of residents have mistakenly entered (or tried to enter) the wrong apartment? I can't even think of a time I've gone to the wrong hotel room when traveling...and that's in places where I'm not familiar (including times I've been drunk off my ass). Going to the wrong apartment and thinking it's mine, in a place I live and am familiar with, seems very unlikely.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 1,732
- Likes
- 1,206
Safe bet that at least one of the jurors will be black.
Verdict in:
Guilty of murder!
Guilty of murder!
Last edited:
I guess I was wrong before. I must have been wrong on what I read for the possible punishment. I thought it was 2-20 years possible, but I’m now seeing it’s 5-99 years. Way off!
I’m also very surprised on both the verdict and how relatively quickly they reached it. I thought there was no way they’d get a murder conviction at first. I didn’t even think it was appropriate. Then after watching much of the trial and reading the legal requirements for it, it did appear to be murder. I still wasn’t hopeful the jury would reach the same concluding. Wrong I was.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7C8vZramNkI
I’m also very surprised on both the verdict and how relatively quickly they reached it. I thought there was no way they’d get a murder conviction at first. I didn’t even think it was appropriate. Then after watching much of the trial and reading the legal requirements for it, it did appear to be murder. I still wasn’t hopeful the jury would reach the same concluding. Wrong I was.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7C8vZramNkI
