TX - Former Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger, indicted for Murder of Botham Shem Jean #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Can someone help me understand Texas murder law? I thought it fit under Murder (so did the grand jury and DA) but someone is saying I'm not understanding it and it doesn't apply and so the jury will not convict on this charge. (something about not having culpability?)

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 9. JUSTIFICATION EXCLUDING CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

You commit murder when you intentionally and knowingly take someone else’s life, or when you intend to commit an act that is clearly extremely dangerous to human life and in effect, causes death to another person.

What she did qualified her for that murder charge. That doesn't mean the jury will convict her. She is a cop.

ETA: I copied that from a Texas law website. I can't get the link to paste correctly on my phone.
 
ITA. I know that every department has their own policies and procedures regarding how a medical emergency is managed while the 911 call is being answered and assessed.

Aren't there specific "scripts" that the operator follows, just to make sure the call is prioritized and all possible aid is delivered, onsite, to provide the best chance of sustaining life?

Any "talking heads" discuss this question during live testimony today?
JMO
I always thought the operator followed a script so they could, like you say, prioritize the call and also triage the victim.

I get the impression that the operator was doing a lot of data entry in order to get the information routed since they responded in about 2 minutes. But I don’t understand why no questions about his condition.

I know my concern about life saving measures is moot now, sadly. I just wish more had been done to save Mr. Jean. It’s bugging the hell out of me.
 
You commit murder when you intentionally and knowingly take someone else’s life, or when you intend to commit an act that is clearly extremely dangerous to human life and in effect, causes death to another person.

What she did qualified her for that murder charge. That doesn't mean the jury will convict her. She is a cop.

ETA: I copied that from a Texas law website. I can't get the link to paste correctly on my phone.

thank you. I'm trying to understand why one wouldn't think the murder charge doesn't apply.

Explain like I'm 5 please bc I thought I understood but am being told I don't lol :)

Sec. 19.02. MURDER. (a) In this section:

(1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly produce a degree of anger, rage, resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind incapable of cool reflection.

(2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by the individual killed or another acting with the person killed which passion arises at the time of the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation.

(b) A person commits an offense if he:

(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;

(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or

(3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, and in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commission or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.

(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a felony of the first degree.

(d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he caused the death under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second degree.
 
AG's tears are forced up, barely. She is hard as a rock, and if she cries, it is for herself.

So, I'm not a crier. Call it a defense mechanism from when I was a child, but horrible things can happen and I won't cry. However, I can express emotion without crying and it's real and believable. Forced emotion never comes across as authentic. I think there were times where her emotion was real, but it was for herself. Definitely
 
That the defense sucked.

You didn't have to be good to see how badly this could go!
Amber on the stand... other tenants who'd gone to the wrong apartment on the stand...
I hope you have time to go back and read today's posts or watch the testimony. I can't sum it up effectively. Reading it as it happened was it's own experience.
 
One thing keeps bugging me about the 911 call. AG reports that she shot someone, needs EMS. Dispatcher asks “ Do you need EMS AND police?” AG says “ Both”.

WHY was AG never asked what his condition is? Not judging the 911 operator, but I find it so odd that the caller ( AG ) is never asked “Is the victim conscious, are they breathing etc.”

Neither party discusses CPR. Seems like a lot of “down time “ on that call where dispatch is just saying “ they are on their way”.

Did the dispatcher assume he had expired ? Or did she assume that a police officer would know what to do? Maybe I’m crazy, but I have never heard a 911 call that didn’t address the victim’s condition. I can only surmise that it’s because AG said she was a cop ?
I think that was addressed when the prosecution examined the 911 dispatcher Denise Rivera. I think somewhere she explains that, and I think it had to do with her being the police dispatcher not the EMS dispatcher or something?
 
I haven’t watched much of the trial (only snippets), but from what Gardenista and others are saying here about her defense team, I am worried she will get an appeal based on her terrible defense. Ugh.
I don't think they are negligent or sleeping on the job such that she'd get a new trial. But they miss the boat alot. For example, they questioned a woman from the same apt complex who went to the wrong floor. But then the prosecution followed up with this woman and asked when she realized she was on the wrong floor and she said it was when she saw a floor mat she didn't recognize. I mean, come on, didn't the defense team think of that?
 
AG identified herself as a "police officer" in the 911 call. That made the context of the situation completely different, the 911 operator thought that this was an officer who shot a perpetrator. Different scenario. Instead, the officer was the perpetrator.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
1,948
Total visitors
2,125

Forum statistics

Threads
600,372
Messages
18,107,653
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top