TX - Botham Shem Jean, 26, killed when police officer entered his apartment, Dallas, Sept 2018 #3

[Cobra Jet]

<modsnip>

Officer fatally shoots man after entering wrong apartment 'believing that it was her own': Police

Thread #1
Thread #2

 

[Sillybilly]

Please continue discussion here.

Remember, do not introduce race into the discussion unless it becomes known via MSM or LE that it was a factor in this tragedy.

Also, please be respectful towards one another; so no snark, sarcasm, rudeness, personalizing. There is no need to show disrespect to anyone, even if their opinion or view may be different than yours. If you just can't handle another member's point of view, scroll and roll or use the Ignore feature so you won't see their posts.

And ... Please stay on topic.

 

[Steft50]

I'm curious. How do they use?

bongs, pipes, vapor pens, edibles

 

[Jax49]

Experts Disagree on Whether Dallas Officer Could Be Credible

"Law enforcement has no place for fearful officers," said Jameca Woody Falconer, a police psychologist based in St. Louis. "Fearful officers make hasty decisions and bad decisions. In this situation, the officer allowed her fear to influence her decision-making and it cost an innocent man his life."

Falconer said Guyger should have been better trained to de-escalate any conflict with Jean once the two saw each other, and to determine quickly that she was in the wrong apartment.

Laurence Miller, a police psychologist in Boca Raton, Florida, said that based on the current information available, Guyger appears to have "basically followed the procedure for handling a potential deadly force encounter."

bbm

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

A. WHAT IF AG actually told any of the following conflicting accounts of what she claimed happened; 911, LEO first on the scene, DPD's detectives presumably on the scene, or the Texas Rangers.

1) Still manslaughter because she really thought it was her place and the decedent really was a nearly naked burgler?

2) Murder 2

3) Murder 1

WHAT IF PROOF EXISTS SHE LIED TO OFFICIALS, even one of them and about something that matters?

B. It is clear that law enforcement officers were either told conflicting accounts by the defendant OR they simply interpreted what they thought they understood she said to them OR LEO is shaping the narrative assisting her in not getting locked away for a very long time.

Which is more plausible and likely?

1) LEO did not misinterpret her statements to then risk their names falsely swearing affidavits for warrants and any conflicts likely happened due to people improperly swearing warrants that did not speak to her first hand.

2) The accounts on the affidavits for the first search warrant and then the arrest warrant were made to the affiant and not misinterpreted.

3) Perhaps some of those in 'blue' are unreasonably sympathetic toward the cute young officer perhaps even having prejudice against the defendant and maybe some involved have made efforts to assist her in improper bending of the rules and procedures.

4) She lied and after consulting counsel provided by the Fraternal Order's vast network of attorneys speicializing in cop shoootings, a "final version" was settled on calculated solely aimed at providing her the best chance for aquittal or sentence much lower than she'd get for even murder 2.

What seems clear is many excellent efforts have been conveniently occured so far making a huge mess of this and her favorable treatment leading up to and after her arrest makes anyone with healthy skeptism expect this trainwreck to get worse and further departed from actual justice.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

AG, age 30 and purported to have been a police officer 4 years.

What was her work and academic background prior?

Does anyone know?

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

1) So you have first hand inspected all forensic evidence? Exactly who are you other than somebody that appears to be AG herself, her legal counsel or a fraternal brother?

How long was her 911 call if you actually know the facts well enough to make such assertions?

Did she tell 911 a security guard had shot a victim?

Did DPD's dispatch mistakenly convey that mis-info to EMT's and such or is that what she told them?

2) Her "story" has not always been the same according to the first published report, the affidavit sworn to secure the first search warrant by DPD's Detective Arrendondo, with the former two both conflicting with the affidavit of arrest warrant sworn by a Texas Ranger.

a) You wish for everyone to believe that the next morning, Detective Arrendondo swore an affidavit yet in all the hours prior, she nor anyone else had taken any statement from AG?

b) Are you suggesting Detective Arrendondo made up the story in her affidavit?

c) Are you suggesting AG made no statements trying to explain what happened to 911 dispatch or any who responded and were on the scene within about 4 minutes?

d) Do you think the people will place more weight on her spoken words made to the Rangers, likely after consulting with and with counsel present, than everything she said starting with the 911 call and until DPD had handed the Rangers the case?

3) See Detective Areedondo's affidavit which clearly swear an accounting that directly conflicts your premise about "earwitnesses" and do note that other residents not only were NOT interviewed upon DPD arriving, they were ordered to go back into their apartments.

a) It is unclear what time it was when DPD handed this case to the Rangers although it seems clear it was that night. That would make it likely that many of those residents finally went to sleep IF INDEED the Rangers did attempt to take statements of residents some hours later.

4) Why was she seen out in the hallway for several minutes after killing the decedent pacing, prior to DPD arriving and talking on the phone instead of providing life saving assistance to the decedent?

That should have been a 20 second call at most. "Officer has shot a victim at South Side Flats, send EMT's and backup." Resume first aid, triage or CPR as determined to be needed to save his life.

<Modsnip - remove quoted post>

 

[Mickey Mouse]

The difference between this case and a car accident, and why she should be charged with murder instead of manslaughter...

There is no intent to get into a car accident; typically they are caused by speed, driver impairment, distraction, etc.

In this case, AG intended to shoot. She unholstered her gun, pointed it, and shot, twice. She intended, at a minimum, to cause bodily harm. That is not an accident, that's murder, I would presume second degree. If she dropped her gun and it discharged accidentally, that would be manslaughter. If she were cleaning it, didn't realize there was a round in the chamber, and it discharged, that's an accident and manslaughter.

Self defense, even if she thought she was in danger, isn't a defense, even giving her the benefit of the doubt. She was, objectively, not in danger; she ignored multiple indications that she was in the wrong place: floor level signage in the garage, the lighted apartment number, the red doormat, the red light on the key indicating that it was the wrong door (there have been multiple videos from residents posted online showing these doors are designed to shut automatically, I don't buy that it was unlocked), no dog greeting her at the door. Even if she incorrectly thought she was in danger, she put herself in that position.

If any one of us were in her situation, we would have been charged with murder.

Some similar "accidental" shootings:

Father accused of shooting son, thinking he was an intruder

UPDATE: Man killed in York County shooting identified

UPDATE: Waukon man charged with second degree murder

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

UPDATE: Man killed in York County shooting identified

Excellent post and here is a snippet from the second of the three links you posted, nice research and on point:

“In this case, while it was accidental, it was at least reckless, because the shooter never identified his target,” Diggs said. “When you have no idea whatsoever what your intended target is, you take the responsibility legally – you have now murdered someone.”


He said the Sheriff’s Office consulted with the York County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office and decided that second-degree murder was the appropriate charge, noting that it includes any homicide that doesn't rise to the level of first-degree murder. The charge carries up to 40 years in prison.

“Had this not been a reckless act, there probably would not have been a second-degree murder charge, or any charge for that matter," Diggs said. How culpable Bartlett actually is is up to a judge or jury, he said.

 

[Rocco]

1) So you have first hand inspected all forensic evidence? Exactly who are you other than somebody that appears to be AG herself, her legal counsel or a fraternal brother?

How long was her 911 call if you actually know the facts well enough to make such assertions?

Did she tell 911 a security guard had shot a victim?

Did DPD's dispatch mistakenly convey that mis-info to EMT's and such or is that what she told them?

2) Her "story" has not always been the same according to the first published report, the affidavit sworn to secure the first search warrant by DPD's Detective Arrendondo, with the former two both conflicting with the affidavit of arrest warrant sworn by a Texas Ranger.

a) You wish for everyone to believe that the next morning, Detective Arrendondo swore an affidavit yet in all the hours prior, she nor anyone else had taken any statement from AG?

b) Are you suggesting Detective Arrendondo made up the story in her affidavit?

c) Are you suggesting AG made no statements trying to explain what happened to 911 dispatch or any who responded and were on the scene within about 4 minutes?

d) Do you think the people will place more weight on her spoken words made to the Rangers, likely after consulting with and with counsel present, than everything she said starting with the 911 call and until DPD had handed the Rangers the case?

3) See Detective Areedondo's affidavit which clearly swear an accounting that directly conflicts your premise about "earwitnesses" and do note that other residents not only were NOT interviewed upon DPD arriving, they were ordered to go back into their apartments.

a) It is unclear what time it was when DPD handed this case to the Rangers although it seems clear it was that night. That would make it likely that many of those residents finally went to sleep IF INDEED the Rangers did attempt to take statements of residents some hours later.

4) Why was she seen out in the hallway for several minutes after killing the decedent pacing, prior to DPD arriving and talking on the phone instead of providing life saving assistance to the decedent?

That should have been a 20 second call at most. "Officer has shot a victim at South Side Flats, send EMT's and backup." Resume first aid, triage or CPR as determined to be needed to save his life.

Good questions in response to an alleged article.
There's no link, so who knows what the article actually says.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

 

[BTL1]

It seems to be assumed that AG lied about mistaking his apartment for her's just to cover up for the shooting itself. Assuming that she did lie about mistaking the apartment for her own, what if she lied to cover up for the real reason she was at his apartment? For example, what if she was the one selling him the mj, and she was there to collect payment? An altercation took place, and she shot him in self defense. As a cop she couldn't admit she was his drug dealer & thats why she was there, even though that is her best defense, so she came up with the wrong apartment story. I don't think this is what happened, but there's a lot missing here, and I won't be surprised if her story is self defense by the time it goes to trial.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

As a cop possibly far too proud and with far too much ego, she might not have brought herself to forthrightly disclosing over the air that SHE, not a security guard, shot a man that laid there dying while she vigorously paced around nearly stomping holes in the floor.

It seems to be assumed that AG lied about mistaking his apartment for her's just to cover up for the shooting itself. Assuming that she did lie about mistaking the apartment for her own, what if she lied to cover up for the real reason she was at his apartment? For example, what if she was the one selling him the mj, and she was there to collect payment? An altercation took place, and she shot him in self defense. As a cop she couldn't admit she was his drug dealer & thats why she was there, even though that is her best defense, so she came up with the wrong apartment story. I don't think this is what happened, but there's a lot missing here, and I won't be surprised if her story is self defense by the time it goes to trial.

 

[BTL1]

As a cop possibly far too proud and with far too much ego, she might not have brought herself to forthrightly disclosing over the air that SHE, not a security guard, shot a man that laid there dying while she vigorously paced around nearly stomping holes in the floor.

As a cop possibly far too proud and with far too much ego, she might not have brought herself to forthrightly disclosing over the air that SHE, not a security guard, shot a man that laid there dying while she vigorously paced around nearly stomping holes in the floor.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

I searched and did not find the article you cite.

Maybe you can and should; not that many will likely believe the opinion.

News | Dallas News

How To Access the Historical Dallas Morning News Archive

Reporting from Dallas Morning News Sept 15 by writer Sheryl Avrill shoots down a lot of the discussion on this thread. 1. The forensic evidence supports Amber's version of events. 2. Amber's story has always been the same: she was in the doorway, Jean was inside the apartment (10-12 ft away). The DPD affidavit was written BEFORE they interviewed her.
3. The earwitnesses made no mention of knocking or "let me in" when they were interviewed.

 

[Gigglingtoes]

This was actually a Dallas city councilman who posted this.

Philip T. Kingston for Dallas

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

I can't say I agree her asserting her relationship with him was that of drug dealer-client would be any defense that would result in anything favorable to her. The court of public opinion would have already strung her up and maybe after tarring and feathering.

As a cop she couldn't admit she was his drug dealer & thats why she was there, even though that is her best defense, so she came up with the wrong apartment story.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

I'm ok with the list of on-point questions being viewed as hypothetical or even rhetorical for anyone not apprised of the poster's clear position as champion and biased advocate for the defendant.

I searched well trying to find the alleged article and found ZILCH. Now if the poster is presenting fraudulent and fabricated evidence any here can verify easily, then you know exactly what that poster is and the agenda.

Now that I reread what you came close to writing, I see your position isn't specific and is contextually confusing. I may have misinterpreted what appears to be a point of contention you have with a post I made in not directly addressing your premises that I wasn't speaking to per a snippet from my post you quoted?

My apologies for my lack of knowledge on how to post/ reply, but I don't feel they you have addressed the context of my post in your response.

 

[BTL1]

I'm ok with the list of on-point questions being viewed as hypothetical or even rhetorical for anyone not apprised of the poster's clear position as champion and biased advocate for the defendant.

I searched well trying to find the alleged article and found ZILCH. Now if the poster is presenting fraudulent and fabricated evidence any here can verify easily, then you know exactly what that poster is and the agenda.

I an not a champion or asvicat

I'm ok with the list of on-point questions being viewed as hypothetical or even rhetorical for anyone not apprised of the poster's clear position as champion and biased advocate for the defendant.

I searched well trying to find the alleged article and found ZILCH. Now if the poster is presenting fraudulent and fabricated evidence any here can verify easily, then you know exactly what that poster is and the agenda.

I am not a champion or advocate of the defendant & I don't know what "alleged article" you speak of.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

How about a link???

Easier to archive, share and verify.

Excellent find and spot on with this:

“When you have no idea whatsoever what your intended target is, you take the responsibility legally – you have now murdered someone.”
“Had this not been a reckless act, there probably would not have been a second-degree murder charge, or any charge for that matter,"

This was actually a Dallas city councilman who posted this.

Philip T. Kingston for Dallas