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

[ReckoningDay]

(That was meant as a reply to PP by the way)

 

[gitana1]

This was a terrible accident, she lost her job. I say time served and call it a day!

Happily, the law values life more than that.

This is similar to texting while driving and ramming into a bunch of kids on a sidewalk. No consequences because it was an accident?

Accidents based on reckless behavior - like being so unreasonably distracted by sex that a trained officer fails to pay attention to where they are and who is before them, while carrying a loaded weapon and in uniform, and like being so aggressive and impulsive that one takes out and uses that weaponry against clear department protocol - Those aren't mistakes.

Yes although she intended to kill him, it was an accident that she killed someone innocent, who was not an intruder in her home. And just like someone speeding, or drunk driving, or texting, who didn't intend to cause harm to an innocent person, those kind of actions are unreasonable and render the conduct criminal, accidental or not.

In TX that conduct falls under their broad murder statute. I note that the statute also has a broad sentencing range, however, which accounts for the broader circumstances that allow for a murder charge.

 

[gitana1]

This was a terrible accident, she lost her job. I say time served and call it a day!

Happily, the law values life more than that.

This is similar to texting while driving and ramming into a bunch of kids on a sidewalk. No consequences because it was an accident?

Accidents based on reckless behavior - like being so unreasonably distracted by sex that a trained officer fails to pay attention to where they are and who is before them, while carrying a loaded weapon and in uniform, and like being so aggressive and impulsive that one takes out and uses that weaponry against clear department protocol - Those aren't mistakes.

Yes although she intended to kill him, it was an accident that she killed someone innocent, who was not an intruder in her home. And just like someone speeding, or drunk driving, or texting, who didn't intend to cause harm to an innocent person, those kind of actions are unreasonable and render the conduct criminal, accidental or not.

In TX that conduct falls under their broad murder statute. I note that the statute also has a broad sentencing range, however, which accounts for the broader circumstances that allow for a murder charge.

 

[Medstudies]

Let her rebuild her life, she lost her job, that is enough punishment.

This is disgustingly insulting.

Thankfully the state gets to decide what is appropriate.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Can you see Judge Kemp’s mind, body, heart and soul sprinkling out of her very being in view of the world?

Human strength, control and power.

Imagine.

 

[gitana1]

They can introduce the information but it won't be considered a mitigating factor. The judge/jury are well aware that police officers work long, exhausting shifts all the time and it doesn't result in them murdering someone.

Hmm. I think it could be a mitigator.

 

[Bennettfit]

Maybe she felt there was no time to retreat from the perceived threat!

The same paranoia that put her in this situation should serve her well in prison.

 

[gitana1]

There was an Indiana mom who was sentenced yesterday to 41 years for the death of her six year old while drunk driving. She didn’t intend to kill her child. She was actually struck in the head by her boyfriend while she was driving, which caused the accident. I’m all in for punishing drunk drivers. But 41 years?

And then we have AG who stated she “intended to kill him” and she should get time served? How much time did she actually serve? Besides on the cruise ship?
Wtah?

I’m just going to reiterate: She INTENDED to kill him. This wasn’t an “accident”.

Mind. Blown.

Yes ma'am. It is similar in terms of decision making. IMO.

 

[Hraefn]

Maybe she felt there was no time to retreat from the perceived threat!

The jury decided those were not the facts of the case. And if that was her perception, it was unreasonable and therefore not legally justified.

 

[Bennettfit]

Probably in shock!

I believe the murder verdict is the first "shock" she has ever experienced.

 

[gitana1]

The Texas Rangers called for the manslaughter charge. They moved forward with the warrant based upon that. The DA called for the murder charge after investigated deeper.

Actually, that was the grand jury's decision after hearing the evidence. This jury clearly agreed!!!

 

[stargazer17]

This poor Momma having to go through this, so sad. This must be so hard for her to do this yet she is so composed. I know I would be bawling.

 

[grammieto5]

Is this the victim's Mom speaking now, in the red dress?

 

[Hatfield]

The shooting and its aftermath in September 2018 ignited protests and calls for justice, with demonstrations outside Police Headquarters and inside City Hall. Activists complained that Ms. Guyger was not immediately arrested at the scene but charged with manslaughter several days later. After weeks of community tensions and accusations of preferential treatment for the police, a grand jury came back with the charge of murder.
Amber Guyger, Ex-Dallas Police Officer, Is Guilty of Murder for Killing Her Neighbor

Thank you. I think that explains the question I had.

 

[gitana1]

The judge is going to allow AG's Pinterest account to be presented during sentencing.

Holy smokes.

 

[blue22]

His mother is so beautiful and wonderfully spoken

 

[LilahFae]

Judge has allowed photos of Botham to be displayed as his mother is on the stand. Mrs. Jean is telling the court of Botham's achievement - of which there are many. He was a top student, president of student council.

 

[MassGuy]

This poor Momma having to go through this, so sad. This must be so hard for her to do this yet she is so composed. I know I would be bawling.

She got the verdict she wanted, hopefully she also gets the sentence she wants too.

 

[10ofRods]

I’m going to share an opinion many here may not agree with, but I genuinely believe AG. I believe she thought she parked on her floor, she thought she was at her apartment, she thought there was an intruder, and she thought she had every right to use deadly force to protect her home (I do not think self defense applied to her decision personally) under TX law. After watching the trial I believe she made a huge mistake and completely realizes it and feels awful about it. Whether it’s for herself, for Jean, or both, I sincerely believe she feels awful and parts of me have pity for her. While I don’t carry a firearm, there are definitely times in my own life that I have made huge mistakes that could have ended horribly.

I also think, even assuming the above, that she could legally be found guilty of murder under TX statutes. Her beliefs and mistakes have been found by the jury to be unreasonable, and she admitted she intended to kill Jean when she fired her weapon. That makes her guilty of murder under TX law. Period.

IMO she will get short time, 5-10 with probably half or more being probation/parole.

All JMO.

I agree with you. At least, insofar as she was thinking about such matters at all. She wasn't doing a lot of upper level cognitive functioning, or she'd have noticed she was not at her apartment when she saw the red carpet and then stood on it. That, combined with hearing someone inside, should have alerted her (if she was in fact in an alert and mentally performing higher level reasoning - but she was tired, and wasn 't thinking clearly).

The trial really spun on the issue of whether she (still outside what she presumed to be her apartment) had the right to enter, gun blazing. Castle doctrine seems clear enough if one is already inside one's house. The other issue was "was she acting as an ordinary citizen or as a policeperson?" Since she was in uniform and used her service weapon, I think the jury determined she was not acting as an ordinary, reasonable citizen would and then the police training (and options) became important (not Castle Doctrine).

All gun carriers need to be prepared to do the right thing and retreat when that's safer (shooting through apartment walls is an issue too - one of Guyger's bullets did not hit her target and it could have been an even more serious circumstance if that bullet had gone into someone else, in another apartment).

It was a complex case for the jury, for sure. Texas law is indeed strict and clear (and they have a lower overall homicide rate than some nearby states).

I do think she won't serve more than 5 years. It is the conviction that matters to me (I agree with it, and more juries and states should take this stance, including with ordinary citizens - we ought not to be shooting each other so quickly). Long, harsh sentences should be reserved for people with a high potential for recidivism.

Thank you, @Hraefn for all your help in understanding this trial and Texas law. WS is better at analysis than what I see on TV.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Is this the victim's Mom speaking now, in the red dress?

Yes