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

[Bambina]

CourtTV guest presenting the scenario in an interesting way....if we take out the last action, that she shot an unarmed innocent man, and just take all her actions going to the wrong parking level, going to the wrong door, not seeing the apartment numbers or the different doormat, would we still say she was unreasonable in believing that she was going to her apartment?

This morning I drove my daughter to work with me, because I don't usually do school drop off. I always feared the "auto pilot" possibility of accidentally leaving a child in the car such that I was hyper vigilant about it, especially with schedule changes. I do believe she could have walked to his apartment door on auto pilot (like others in the building). But at some point you realize your mistake. When does that occur? The red carpet is a big one for me. But excluding that, her hearing noises/movement in "her" apartment should have snapped her out of auto pilot. And by her own admission it did. She then made a conscious choice to enter and KILL. How do you do choose to pull out a gun, and open a door and intend to kill WITHOUT a hyper awareness of your surroundings. And if you do go in on "autopilot" how is that not reckless, unreasonable and ultimately, in this case, murder.

 

[10ofRods]

I would go in. My family & pets could be in danger.

And by going in, you do not increase the odds (statistically) of them remaining safe. If you are already armed, you will need to hesitate in low light situations to make sure you are not about to shoot family and pets (more common than being shot by a stranger during the commission of a crime).

If you are not already armed, you’ll be leading the intruder to where you keep your weapons.

At any rate, adding in pets and family does change most people’s sense of what they would do. I’m glad our dogs know to retreat from strangers and have good hiding places. There are only two of us in my household, and we have an agreement that calling 911 is our first response, not going to get a weapon (we have something useful hidden near doors, our house has been broken into 3 times, and home invasions are not unheard of).

But my chance of being killed by an intruder already present in the house, if my husband comes in without police back-up are higher than if he didn’t come in, given the way I read the crime literature in the area where I live. Yours could be a different subculture.

But we also have cameras and silent alarms, so the police would have been there quickly enough in any case. My husband would be able to see, from outside, where I was in the house and if I was in our “safe room” or not. He would be able to see the intruder (unless they were in the bathroom).

 

[gitana1]

Etc
From my limited understanding it came across as they have a few options which could be good or bad! Would love to hear your thoughts on them xx

I'm troubled by them. The Castle Doctrine wording is far too loose. Self-defense wouldn't apply here but the Castle Doctrine could.

However, Cryptic pointed out that the doctrine creates a presumption only. True. Presumptions can be rebutted by the evidence.

I just don't think the instructions explained that. I don't think the state explained that either.

 

[Cryptic]

That's good information. (Can you link it?) And scary. So the homeowner got off after forcing the teen intrude to kneel and shooting them from behind? That's an execution.

I just hope the jury feels as strongly about the right of an innocent man not to b executed in his home by the actual intruder.

I"ll try to find the case and post a link.

As a side note, the the incident occurred to a "perfect storm": rural Texas, and by the Mexican border and during a time of increased fears regarding spreading narco violence.

 

[gitana1]

No it wouldn’t be the same. If an officer stopped at a neighbors house he would have no idea who the neighbor might have invited in, what guests or relatives might be there, or even a repairman. Officer Amber knew damn well that there should be no one in her apartment because it was hers.

That's funny. Because she expected a repairman that day.

 

[gitana1]

But what would her reason be to believe that? Would it be because she thought it was her apartment?

Yes.

 

[Amster]

Conservatives won’t know or care about the laws regarding marijuana. They consider it evil and illegal (no matter what state, but especially TX ). I’m a liberal Texan and an old hippie from way back. On the day of Botham Jean’s memorial a warrant was issued to specifically look for drugs. An unsealed warrant, I might add and that information was reported in the media.

Let’s make a deal. You stop claiming what conservative Texans will or won’t care about & I will not claim to know what liberal Texans will or won’t care about. Deal?

 

[wyome]

Conservatives won’t know or care about the laws regarding marijuana. They consider it evil and illegal (no matter what state, but especially TX ). I’m a liberal Texan and an old hippie from way back. On the day of Botham Jean’s memorial a warrant was issued to specifically look for drugs. An unsealed warrant, I might add and that information was reported in the media.

I'm conservative and could care less about marijuana smokers and base no judgement on those that do, medically or otherwise. I'm also pro-choice. I think we all need to be a little more self-thinkers, and not take to heart the propaganda that's out there shaping certain views.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

I can’t find the post to quote right now but I remember seeing discussion of the level she parked on being the roof level? I’d take that to mean she would have had to not notice the fact she was outside when she got out her car. Was this ever confirmed that she parked on the roof level? Was she in a confused state at work that day or did this confusion come on suddenly as she was parking her car? Yet she was in a calm enough state to text and be nonchalant minutes later. I’m getting Jodi Arias ‘fog’ vibes, JMO

 

[bwt42]

Let’s make a deal. You stop claiming what conservative Texans will or won’t care about & I will not claim to know what liberal Texans will or won’t care about. Deal?

Best post of the day.

 

[gitana1]

I can’t find the post to quote right now but I remember seeing discussion of the level she parked on being the roof level? I’d take that to mean she would have had to not notice the fact she was outside when she got out her car. Was this ever confirmed that she parked on the roof level? Was she in a confused state at work that day or did this confusion come on suddenly as she was parking her car? Yet she was in a calm enough state to text and be nonchalant minutes later. I’m getting Jodi Arias ‘fog’ vibes, JMO

She was on the roof level. She killed him less than 4 minutes after pulling over to have a 16 minute call with her affair partner. The state asserted she was unreasonably distracted by that call.

 

[sloane7777]

That's funny. Because she expected a repairman that day.

Boom ! I'm telling you I think she thought BF would leave wife and come "save her " if she had to kill a big bad intruder , it was a split second opportunity for her !

 

[MsFacetious]

I hear ya. I agree she's probably sociopathic too.

But one thing- the mistake has to be a reasonable one. Hold on to that.

I am. Tightly.

I wish he had been at the door and had knocked the intruder out with it. He would still be alive.

Yes and likely in prison.

No it wouldn’t be the same. If an officer stopped at a neighbors house he would have no idea who the neighbor might have invited in, what guests or relatives might be there, or even a repairman. Officer Amber knew damn well that there should be no one in her apartment because it was hers.

Maintenance was expected at Amber's, that's why her dog was not there. What if it had been maintenance?

It's very distinctive. Unless she herself was a smoker...

Even IF she was smoker there is a difference between a room that has been smoked in and a room that is currently being smoked in. Huge difference.

 

[wyome]

Boom ! I'm telling you I think she thought BF would leave wife and come "save her " if she had to kill a big bad intruder , it was a split second opportunity for her !

She definitely seems to have daddy issues.

 

[iluvmua]

She is flawed for sure, and now very damaged due to her own recklessness.

Did she have family, officers, friends or anyone in court supporting her?

Family and friends were seated behind her

 

[iluvmua]

She definitely seems to have daddy issues.

How can you say that?

None of us here know her personally

 

[Falcon500]

This is my opinion - that this whole trial was just to appease the public. I don't think there was any real intent to convict Amber Guyger by this Prosecution.

You are correct. The Texas Ranger in charge of the investigation said that in his opinion that crime had been committed.

 

[wyome]

I am a Texan. There is not a Texan I have yet met that I cannot find common ground with. When you get the opportunity to sit down and speak to each other, you realize you have far more in common than you do differences. This case has nothing to do with politics and all to do with common sense IMO.

I love that Texans fly the state flag as often as the American flag. Hard-pressed to find a prouder group of people. Love that about them.

 

[Betty P]

Yes and likely in prison.

Unfortunately Mr. Jean was in trouble the second she let herself into his apartment, no matter what happened. Yes, the outcome could have been better than losing his life, but he still would have been "put through the wringer", so to speak.

It makes you rethink how you need to protect yourself and your rights these days when a law enforcement officer enters your home or pulls you over when you're driving. Scary times.

 

[iluvmua]

You are correct. The Texas Ranger in charge of the investigation said that in his opinion that crime had been committed.

You mean no crime.