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

[gitana1]

The defense lawyer on WFAA explained this as well. Paraphrasing - based on the Texas statutes, based on the fact that she stated several times she intended to kill him when she fired her weapon, then murder is the appropriate charge. People are drawn to manslaughter because AG didn't plan to kill him but that is not the way the law is written.

Also because manslaughter is specifically about being reckless. And being reckless refutes the mistake of fact defense.

 

[blue22]

Thanks. How did today go? And what was excluded?

Just about everything. They tried again to include the expert saying they felt it was reasonable and what she might have felt. Obviously, that wasn't going to fly. It was 2 hours outside of the jury and about 5 minutes in front of.

 

[Weki]

Which in my opinion, it is always their fault. It’s almost like they love this game of cat and mouse. Listen, I get it there are a lot of people who can’t trust the police, but if anything it could be avoided if only they held the ones accountable that need to be held accountable. You cant expect for the community to trust or like officers at all when blatant **** like this continues to happen over and over again. Almost every time the ones who should not have got off and frankly, I sick of it.

Exactly. And in the end this mistrust of LE hurts LE. If LE wants to be the enemy of the community they police then they need to take responsibility for the consequences of that. Botham Jean is a member of their community who did nothing wrong. So by portraying him as a suspect and showing such contempt for him/his family and by extension all of us, they’re saying that no matter what they will back their own. So it’s us against them. That’s the attitude THEY always promote in these situations. There is no nuance, no understanding for the victims in these types of cases. That is fascism. They want to be above the law.

 

[gitana1]

I don’t know, I was hoping you could tell me lol.. is that even possible because court ended again on a very strange note. I mean the jury had to be in the court room for atleast 10 mins max today.

I just don’t understand why you would have court for only a few hours when the plan was to run until 9-4 today. Just weird, I thought maybe they were going to just rest but I haven’t heard about that happening yet and it was very abruptly after the 45sec cross examination on Armstrong.

Hmm. Some seem to think certain motions were occurring to preserve the record in appeal. That can take time. Maybe they had another witness coming that they couldn't get there in time. But that would likely be discussed in open court. The motions would occur in open court as well.

How exactly did court end? What was going on at the time? Maybe someone fell ill.

 

[blue22]

I don’t know, I was hoping you could tell me lol.. is that even possible because court ended again on a very strange note. I mean the jury had to be in the court room for atleast 10 mins max today.

I just don’t understand why you would have court for only a few hours when the plan was to run until 9-4 today. Just weird, I thought maybe they were going to just rest but I haven’t heard about that happening yet and it was very abruptly after the 45sec cross examination on Armstrong.

I'm watching on youtube and a reporter outside the courtroom said the defense chose to be done for the day. No one knows if the are done with testimony, though.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

The DA only upped the charges because there was a public outcry to have her charged with murder.

The DA did not "up the charges because there was a public outcry to have her charged with murder". That is patently false. She was originally brought in on a manslaughter charge decided by the Texas Rangers. When the grand jury reviewed the evidence they changed it to murder.

"The grand jury began hearing evidence in the case on Monday. Guyger was arrested on a manslaughter charge on Sept. 9, three days after the shooting. But it was up to the grand jury this week to decide what charge she would face, or if she would be indicted at all."

Sources: Fired cop Amber Guyger indicted on a murder charge in Botham Jean killing

 

[gitana1]

Agree, it's impossible to consider manslaughter or negligence when she admits she shot with the intent to kill. She admitted that to the prosecution when they asked her. That's the way police are trained in her department.

https://dallaspolice.net/reports/Shared Documents/General-Order-906.pdf

JMO

It's not impossible. Because her decision to kill him was based on recklessness or negligence.

 

[blue22]

I'm going back and re-watching. The ranger was giving testimony. His testimony ended and the defense requested to approach the stand. Then court was dismissed until Monday at 9:30.

At about 1 hour 57 minutes, they are discussing why this might have happened.

 

[angelainwi]

It appears that the judge ruled to severely limit what Craig Miller could testify to similar to what happened with Ranger Armstrong. Miller can testify to inattentional blindness but cannot testify that AG's actions were reasonable or to her state of mind. And no testimony will be allowed from him about the possible movement of BJ. I think that was a big blow to the defense. They may not even call him to the stand now it appears or they would have done it today imo. According to WFAA reporters that BJ's family lawyer says that he believes the defense case is over and they may be preparing for that. Not verified, but interesting if true.

The defense may have had a few more witnesses but they were supposed to testify about Amber's psychological state which the judge has said NO to...So the defense appears to have run out of witnesses. Again according to WFAA reporters on the live stream. My best guess is that the defense will rest their case first thing Monday morning. Their case was so weak that I do not think the state even needs to offer a rebuttal. We may get closing statements and jury instructions as soon as Monday imo

 

[angelainwi]

3) why are they meeting behind with the judge in her chambers. I’ve heard that it could be because of the charging conference but I thought the defense would have to rest before that could occur, maybe not.

I was unaware that they met with the judge in her chambers for long...Reporters on scene said that state attorneys left shortly after court recessed for the weekend.

 

[gitana1]

WHY? Have you read the statutes?

Maybe because murder carries much more potential time and although the TX statutory language is broad, we tend to charge and sentence in this nation based on levels of conduct.

In any other state in the nation this would not qualify as murder, except possibly in those areas that have second degree murder.

 

[Weki]

A defense lawyer on ABC is the one that said that the lesser included charges could be dropped based on her testimony. I don’t think it was speculation on this board. We were regurgitating what Texas criminal defense attorneys were saying on the news stations. Just wanted to clarify for the verified attorneys on the board.

 

[blue22]

It appears that the judge ruled to severely limit what Craig Miller could testify to similar to what happened with Ranger Armstrong. Miller can testify to inattentional blindness but cannot testify that AG's actions were reasonable or to her state of mind. And no testimony will be allowed from him about the possible movement of BJ. I think that was a big blow to the defense. They may not even call him to the stand now it appears or they would have done it today imo. According to WFAA reporters that BJ's family lawyer says that he believes the defense case is over and they may be preparing for that. Not verified, but interesting if true.

The defense may have had a few more witnesses but they were supposed to testify about Amber's psychological state which the judge has said NO to...So the defense appears to have run out of witnesses. Again according to WFAA reporters on the live stream. My best guess is that the defense will rest their case first thing Monday morning. Their case was so weak that I do not think the state even needs to offer a rebuttal. We may get closing statements and jury instructions as soon as Monday imo

It's ludicrous. If they wanted someone on stand to testify about her psychological state, why on earth didn't they get a psychologist?

She got on the stand to speak for herself, there is no way a judge is going to let random experts get up and testify to how they think she felt. How could they not know that?

 

[angelainwi]

Hmm. Some seem to think certain motions were occurring to preserve the record in appeal. That can take time. Maybe they had another witness coming that they couldn't get there in time. But that would likely be discussed in open court. The motions would occur in open court as well.

How exactly did court end? What was going on at the time? Maybe someone fell ill.

They had just finished like 2 minutes of testimony with Ranger Armstrong. He was excused from the stand and court went into a short break. After that break court was adjourned. I do not think anyone fell ill. IMO the defense had put too much of their case on these experts and it fell apart when they could not get them qualified for what they wanted. I think they will rest first thing on Monday.

 

[VAgirlatheart]

I was watching lawyers discuss this and they said it probably has to do with the expert witness testimony. They judge has to make sure she meets all the legal requirements so that it doesn't come back at the appellate level. They don't think it has to do with a plea. They think it's technical court stuff, crossing I's and dotting T's.

Done for the day. It seemed abrupt and the lawyers seemed to go into chambers.

However, it seemed like they were wanting to file something about the excluded evidence, should they need appeal. From what I'm reading, they have a top appellate attorney on their team who wants to address protocol for the excluded evidence.

Okay, now that makes sense lol. I was just confused because again it was so just random. They brought the jury in for like 2 mins, they listened to Armstrong, the DA asked a few questions and right back out they went. Sidebar immediately. Then they released the jury for the day. Just so pointless, so that’s why I thought something else happened. I guess I thought it was going to four or atleast that the jurors would hear more than 2 mins of testimony. In my mind, the judge wanted to have court today so they could get those jurors back to their families.

 

[blue22]

I was unaware that they met with the judge in her chambers for long...Reporters on scene said that state attorneys left shortly after court recessed for the weekend.

So on youtube a reporter said they were requesting to speak to her and they misinterpreted that as requesting to speak in chambers. (I forgot to clarify that. I apologize for any confusion.) They only requested to approach her stand. Then the day was done.

 

[angelainwi]

It's ludicrous. If they wanted someone on stand to testify about her psychological state, why on earth didn't they get a psychologist?

She got on the stand to speak for herself, there is no way a judge is going to let random experts get up and testify to how they think she felt. How could they not know that?

I have been pretty unimpressed with her defense team. I think putting Amber on the stand hurt their case big time and for whatever reasons based on her testimony their case just fell apart.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

LE is purposely trying to influence public opinion about this case by putting it out there that they are ready for riots and having all this security at the courthouse. And today they put out to the media that one of the defense witnesses received a death threat. LE is the one making this a racial issue. The community is rightly outraged that a man got shot in his home by a police officer while minding his own business. That should concern EVERYONE, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American. Society should not allow LE to get away with murder and treat them like they are above the law. They will be prosecuted just like everyone else. THEY are the ones trying to fan the flames with this whole act outside the courtroom.

In fact, the only one in this trial who has even alluded to a racial issue had been AG herself. "This is not about hate". Well AG, no one has said it was.

Amber Guyger testifies at murder trial after killing neighbor: 'I hate myself every single day'

 

[gitana1]

The DA overcharged.

The DA is trying to get people to believe that she purposely had it out for Mr. Jean.

Not once did the state appear to infer that she set out to kill an innocent man because she had it out for him. In the opening they acknowledged that she says she thought it was her apartment. Their argument is that her "mistake" was unreasonable. So they're attacking her defense but not claiming she simply wanted to go up there and kill him because she didn't like him or whatever. They never said that. I'm not sure where you're getting that.

Everyone has explained to you over and over why the TX murder charge is unique. Technically her intent means she committed murder. So they did not overcharge. However, mistake of fact is a direct defense to that so that is what the two sides are really debating.

 

[VAgirlatheart]

I'm going back and re-watching. The ranger was giving testimony. His testimony ended and the defense requested to approach the stand. Then court was dismissed until Monday at 9:30.

At about 1 hour 57 minutes, they are discussing why this might have happened.

Thank you for this. I’ve been watching court tv but I feel sometimes it’s a little bias due to a lot of defense attorneys.