GUILTY TX - Former Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger, indicted for Murder of Botham Shem Jean #6

[gitana1]

If you believe she thought it was her apartment then you must also believe Botham Jean was coming towards her in an aggressive manner while she stood on the threshold. And the trajectory of the bullet can be explained by him ducking when he saw the gun.

State alleges that he was shot while getting up from the couch. By this, state is basically saying he was not a threat to her at any point. No weapon, sitting on the couch. Also, they are alleging she walked all the way into the apt. She didn’t notice the smell of marijuana or the furnishings/mess, they also allege.

She’s lying about his aggressive posture and where she shot him. Why is she lying? Why didn’t she render aid?

No. You don't have to believe he was coming at her aggressively if you believe she thought it was her apartment.

The state is pretty clear that they understand she was mistaken. There's really nothing to indicate she knew where she was. The whole issue is that her mistake was not reasonable. It was due to all-consuming distraction according to the state. I think she could've been totally irate and thus not paying attention and recklessly lashed out angrily, without calling for back up, because she is hot-tempered and likes to be a cowboy.

It's really all about what the evidence will show or not show though. IMO the evidence does not show she knew it was NOT her place. I was open to that at first but I think if it did the state would've have allowed for that possibility in their opening and questioning. They did not. IMO, the evidence supports her contention that she was mistaken about where she was.

I think it also shows that her mistake was not a reasonable one, because she was dangerously distracted while carrying a loaded weapon. (Originally I thought maybe she was high or drunk and I still think exhaustion could have played a part, but the state is not going the exhaustion route).

IMO the evidence also shows that her conduct in immediately pulling her gun and shooting Botham Jean because she thought he was an intruder, was totally unreasonable. The forensics show he was shot at a downward angle somewhat, so either standing up or crouching. Not standing or running toward her. It appears he fell near his couch. The state is clear he was on his couch eating ice cream when she entered and she shot him in a second. He was not near her when he was shot.

The evidence showed that the police protocol is not to enter if you think an intruder is inside, but to call for back up first. The evidence showed that the police protocol is not to engage with and shoot an intruder, but to retreat and call for back up first. Had she done so, had she followed police protocol, she would have realized her mistake about her apartment and Bo Jean would still be alive. That's why her failure to follow protocol renders her mistake as to his identity (as an intruder), an wholly unreasonable one.

As the state said in their opening, she repeated 19 times on the 911 call, "I thought it was my apartment." She said this before she had a chance to think up a story. She said nothing in those first excited moments about him coming at her or her perceiving him as a threat. That came much later when she had time to embellish. That's why some of her statements are more credible than others.

 

[wary]

Ok so then you believe she just walked in and shot him for no reason?

This is my point - if you believe she genuinely thought it was a burglary and walked in to confront the threat then you have to believe she shot him only because he posed a threat. If you don’t believe her story about what happened when they confronted each other, then her whole story falls apart.

Hence, my belief, she knew she was at the wrong door to begin with.

BBM—and bolded section absolutely not true, in my opinion.

Here’s just one example of what could have happened. She could have genuinely believed that it was a burglar, and furiously wanted to harm the burglar, and believed that, since it was her home, she had a right to kill him.

I think that that scenario holds together quite well. And it’s murder.

 

[gitana1]

Ok so then you believe she just walked in and shot him for no reason?

This is my point - if you believe she genuinely thought it was a burglary and walked in to confront the threat then you have to believe she shot him only because he posed a threat. If you don’t believe her story about what happened when they confronted each other, then her whole story falls apart.

Hence, my belief, she knew she was at the wrong door to begin with.

ETA: Unless you believe she had a right to go in and shoot no questions asked. Which is not what she says. So she’s lying and you have to ask why. If she shot him and he posed no immediate threat even if she believed it was her apartment, then it’s murder too.

She shot him because she felt he was an intruder. And I guess yeah, any intruder is a threat to anyone who comes across them. But she saw him. It was clear he was unarmed. Initial statements are not that he came at her in an aggressive manner.

And the whole point is she failed to follow protocols which would have reduced any threat an intruder poses- retreat and call for back up. It's clear to me at least based in neighbor's testimony that she didn't even warn him. And now that I recall her testimony, she testified she realized the door was somewhat open, and so she pulled out her service revolver and then pushed open the door. That was not reasonable under the circumstances. I believe she instantly shot him when she saw him. Trigger happy. Totally unreasonable.

 

[Weki]

If she walked in believing it was her apartment and there was a burglar and she shot him even though he posed no immediate threat, that’s an execution. Straight up murder! No better than what I’m suggesting.

Anyway, thanks for the stimulating discussion all. Signing off for tonight. See you all back here on Monday!

 

[gitana1]

If she walked in believing it was her apartment and there was a burglar and she shot him even though he posed no immediate threat, that’s an execution. Straight up murder! No better than what I’m suggesting.

Anyway, thanks for the stimulating discussion all. Signing off for tonight. See you all back here on Monday!

On that I agree. I think that's why the grand jury Indicted her for murder.

ETA: In fact, I believe that's what the state sort of said- "Burglary doesnt merit the death penalty." Something like that.

 

[10ofRods]

Wow. That's an interesting analysis. I never thought about it that way. She wants to be treated either like a cop or like a civilian depending on her conduct at a particular moment.

Depending on what gets her the best outcome, for herself. It's a common enough strategy. She also has two cop personas: Trained Cop and Ditzy Cop. Ditzy Cop is the one who has a hard time admitting she knows CPR and comes close to saying that despite her training and accepting a job as a policeman, she may not know basic first aid or CPR; Trained Cop is the one who remembers to double tap.

 

[bwt42]

You asked unreasonable mistake vs reasonable mistake. I said that is the crux of the whole case. The prosecution does not believe that she intentionally sought him out to kill him.

(Meaning, there was no relationship and she didn't get home saying she was going to go up there and kill him. I don't believe they have ever disputed she could have gone on that floor by accident. They even mention it in the opening statement. That was a reasonable mistake. Her reaction to that mistake was not. That's what they are trying to prove.)

No. my question was what was the prosecutions stance on whether she mistakenly entered the wrong apartment.

 

[angelainwi]

Actually none of them said they went into the apartments. They all said there was something that made them realize they were on the wrong floor. I think that really hurt the defense.

One man did go into the wrong apartment. He was a lawyer and lived in a corner apartment. It was a 2 BR 2 BA apartment

 

[MsFacetious]

One man did go into the wrong apartment. He was a lawyer and lived in a corner apartment. It was a 2 BR 2 BA apartment

Yes and the lady inside looked scared.
No one got shot.
Didn’t help the defense.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Hello,

First, Subscribing to new thread.

Second, Thank You ALL for the updates from today.

 

[BeachSky]

Depending on what gets her the best outcome, for herself. It's a common enough strategy. She also has two cop personas: Trained Cop and Ditzy Cop. Ditzy Cop is the one who has a hard time admitting she knows CPR and comes close to saying that despite her training and accepting a job as a policeman, she may not know basic first aid or CPR; Trained Cop is the one who remembers to double tap.

This!

 

[blue22]

One man did go into the wrong apartment. He was a lawyer and lived in a corner apartment. It was a 2 BR 2 BA apartment

I totally forgot about that guy! I just went and re-watched the testimony. The defense missed an opportunity to do more with him. It was pretty forgetful and not particularly impactful. IMO

 

[BeachSky]

Yes and the lady inside looked scared.
No one got shot.
Didn’t help the defense.

And didn’t another defense witness neighbor say she relized her mistake when she looked down at a doormat.
Can’t make this stuff up.

 

[mickey2942]

If Guyger did not follow police department procedures and protocol for retreating and calling for backup, when coming upon an intruder, what does that mean for the civil lawsuit against Dallas by Botham Jean's family?

 

[ReadyorNot]

I agree. AG does not come off as sympathetic. She comes across as arrogant, entitled, narcissistic, and not the least bit repentant.

AG is not a "likeable" person. More men on the jury probably would have helped.

I think they counted on other women being able to relate to being in fear of a man. Which I am sure they would understand, however, most women will not be able to relate to going in that apartment despite that fear.

 

[ReadyorNot]

Depending on what gets her the best outcome, for herself. It's a common enough strategy. She also has two cop personas: Trained Cop and Ditzy Cop. Ditzy Cop is the one who has a hard time admitting she knows CPR and comes close to saying that despite her training and accepting a job as a policeman, she may not know basic first aid or CPR; Trained Cop is the one who remembers to double tap.

I was particularly perturbed she claimed to not recall any of the de-escalation training. Not believable at all.

 

[mickey2942]

I think they counted on other women being able to relate to being in fear of a man. Which I am sure they would understand, however, most women will not be able to relate to going in that apartment despite that fear.

Normal women, like me, would have had the sense to leave immediately. And, yes, I do carry.

 

[MsFacetious]

Normal women, like me, would have had the sense to leave immediately. And, yes, I do carry.

The difference is:
You carry and hope you never have to shoot.
Amber was carrying hoping for the chance to shoot.

 

[gitana1]

The difference is:
You carry and hope you never have to shoot.
Amber was carrying hoping for the chance to shoot.

That's sadly the sense I have too. She wanted to be aggressive. She's not a good person IMO.

 

[Rocco]

I was particularly perturbed she claimed to not recall any of the de-escalation training. Not believable at all.

That was almost comical. The prosecutor asked her about taking the training, and she confirmed she did. Then he asked what she learned , and she couldn't remember. When he asked ''You don't remember what you learned?" She replied, ''well no, it was a couple of years ago.'' The prosecutor then said " Isn't the point of the training to learn about the subject matter, and then remember it so you can use the information while on the job????"

That wasn't exactly what was said but you get the idea.

She must not have remembered her CPR training either if she thought you could do it with one hand, every once in awhile, while doing other things.

Or what compression bandages are for since she 'didn't think of it', even though she had one in her bag.

Heck, she couldn't even remember that carrying on with a married man was morally wrong (her words), since she kept doing it.

And she was on the loose with a gun? Too bad she didn't forget how to use it.