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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m so proud of this judge for not allowing this pseudoscience. Defense attys love that stuff bc it gives those jurors that are biased for LE a basis to be lenient.

I don’t think her attys are bad I just think there’s no defense in this case. They’re hamstrung. AG has said she intended to kill him - it’s murder. Self defense is unreasonable in this case so it’s murder. Not manslaughter or criminal negligence.
 
It’s like the defense is running to the practical magic recipe book in the back.
Let’s try this spell...


MOO

The defense would have done better by having had a full psychological evaluation on AG, and identified some sort of Attention Deficit Disorder diagnosis, or delayed processing disorder. To actually have a name and diagnosis for the jury to have some sort of "reason" to give AG a pass.

That would have definitely been allowed by the judge. And prosecution couldn't poke holes in that.
 
The defense would have done better by having had a full psychological evaluation on AG, and identified some sort of Attention Deficit Disorder diagnosis, or delayed processing disorder. To actually have a name and diagnosis for the jury to have some sort of "reason" to give AG a pass.

Maybe they had a full evaluation and there was nothing that could be clearly diagnosed. Or...maybe that evaluation was unfavorable for her defense. I would love to know if they got one. I figured it would be standard.
 
Maybe they had a full evaluation and there was nothing that could be clearly diagnosed. Or...maybe that evaluation was unfavorable for her defense. I would love to know if they got one. I figured it would be standard.

Believe me, if you pay for something, there are many psychologists who will write up almost anything. Depending on the amount paid for the evaluation and write up. And a testimony in court, to back the findings, no problem.

The problem is when the prosecution does a cross, and finds out the psychologist routinely testifies for defense attorneys.
 
Believe me, if you pay for something, there are many psychologists who will write up almost anything. Depending on the amount paid for the evaluation and write up. And a testimony in court, to back the findings, no problem.

The problem is when the prosecution does a cross, and finds out the psychologist routinely testifies for defense attorneys.

Very true and agreed!
 
I don't understand what just happened. Did anyone hear the prosecution?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
1,865
Total visitors
2,073

Forum statistics

Threads
600,354
Messages
18,107,319
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top