GUILTY TX - Former Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger, indicted for Murder of Botham Shem Jean #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is also easy to be critical. What is hard is actually taking action to make a difference. Posters who are unhappy with what they see going on in their communities should research ways that they can make a difference. As my mother always said to me, "Talk's cheap." ;)

I'd be more than a billionaire if I found a way to turn all racists into loving people who never/ever use race to make any decisions whether it's to pull a trigger, hire someone, give a ticket, rent an apartment or so on.

I can't even think of a way to change that kind of generational ingrained thought for one person, let alone what is more than likely millions.

My time, and probably others with a "permanent tan" is best spent being observant and teaching my children what to expect and how to react in certain situations to avoid getting shot, being 10x better than the best to even get a shot at getting some jobs, and avoiding circumstances where a ticket is even a question (a ticket could mean a funeral instead for someone my color).

If you could tell me how to change it for just a couple of people then I'm all ears. People have been fighting that fight for more than a couple centuries with some change in policy, but not a lot of change in heart I'm positive.
 
Obviously none of us can know what was in her head. And I agree I don't believe anything she said either. She's not credible. I'm certain he didn't come towards her in a threatening manner. That I'm sure of. But that's what cops always say to justify an illegal shooting. But I don't buy that she didn't know he was black. I don't buy that at all.

Anyway, I'm going to stop commenting on this thread. I think today was just about mourning the light sentence and re-examining the judge's actions for me. I don't feel it's productive to go back and forth about any of it at this point. It's over. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I will miss you :)
 
Obviously none of us can know what was in her head. And I agree I don't believe anything she said either. She's not credible. I'm certain he didn't come towards her in a threatening manner. That I'm sure of. But that's what cops always say to justify an illegal shooting. But I don't buy that she didn't know he was black. I don't buy that at all.

Anyway, I'm going to stop commenting on this thread. I think today was just about mourning the light sentence and re-examining the judge's actions for me. I don't feel it's productive to go back and forth about any of it at this point. It's over. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Knowing he was black does not mean she shot him because of his color.
 
It was in a courtroom and not during the trial or the proceedings. I see nothing wrong with it. Trial was over and she was sentenced.

The judge, in her robes, in open court, in front of cameras still recording what had been a very high profile trial , with tensions still high enough that shouts of anger at 10 years were echoing in that courthouse, hugged the person who had shortly before been convicted of first degree murder.

Then told the convicted murderer that she blamed herself too much, that what she had done wasn't as bad as it seemed to her, and that she hadn't done anything she couldn't be forgiven for.

Can you truthfully say you are perfectly OK with judges dispensing hugs and redemption to any and all murderers immediately following sentencing?
 
Do any of you who are so clinched over the judge hugging Amber aware that before that “gasp” act she hugged every one of BJ’s family. In the open....in the courtroom?? I’m amused at the pearl clutching going on.
 
“These proseletyzing actions overstepped judicial authority, were inappropriate and were unconstitutional,” said a judicial conduct complaint that the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed Thursday with the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct.

“They are not the actions of an impartial judge,” Hardwick said.

Hardwick said judicial canons require a judge to maintain decorum in proceedings, never show bias or prejudice, always remain impartial, and promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. She said the rules specifically prohibit a judge from performing duties in a way that manifests bias or prejudice based on religion.

“I’m a very religious person but I do not think it’s ok for a judge to do this,” said a tweet by Jason Steed, counsel at Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton in Dallas.

In a reply tweet, Jared Cook, an attorney at Adams Leclair in Rochester, New York, wrote, “Not in open court like that. I wouldn’t be as concerned if the judge met with her in private later.”

Methfessel & Werbel associate Jason Dominguez of Edison, New Jersey, added in a tweet, “Christian. Lawyer. This was completely inappropriate and very likely against the judicial canon and most definitely violates the First Amendment.”

“It wasn’t a legal or ethical violation in my opinion. She is human and responded in a very human way. I do not believe it will have any bearing on her impartiality or become an issue for post-trial motions,” said Creuzot.

“Those people didn’t live this trial. This trial is a one-in-a-billion circumstance, that had extreme emotions throughout it, and there was good on both sides. The judge lived through it. She saw this as a unique circumstance. She hugged the Jean family. She was crying when the father was testifying. The judge was just experiencing the emotions of a human being,” said Rogers, of counsel at Lyon, Gorsky & Gilbert in Dallas. “For anyone to say it has any bearing on her ability to be fair is taking a cold, narrow, cynical view of a judge’s role.”

“It was the most humbling and gracious action that I’ve ever seen in my legal career. For him to have the courage to get up there, and exemplify what he truly believes, was one of the bravest examples of grace I’ve ever seen in my life, and definitely one of the most amazing moments I’ve ever witnessed in the courtroom,” Rogers recalled. “I lost it. I’ve never lost it like that. There wasn’t a dry eye on the defense team.”
Ethics Complaint Filed Against Judge Who Gave Bible to Amber Guyger After Murder Trial | Texas Lawyer
 
Playing along too. Two (hypothetical) scenarios:

1. An off duty cop goes to the wrong apt thinking it's hers, the door opens enough for the hall lights to shine on in, she sees a black man and shoots him because he's not just an intruder, but a black intruder. So...she shoots him for being black first, and an intruder second, or maybe that's a tie for her.

(An overtly racial choice, one I don't believe she made).

2. Same scenario, except this. The light shines into his apartment. She didn't in fact catch any of the clues she was going to the wrong apt, up to and including the doormat and slightly ajar door.

The hallway light (absolutely) is strong enough for her to SEE that everything about this apartment is different, and to SMELL weed wafting around her. But, in the same nano second, she sees someone in the apt, and he's black.

Her choices IMO were both conscious and unconscious. By the time she pulled out her gun, she absolutely did have information enough to realize her mistake. By the time she pulled out the her gun, she had determined there was an intruder in "her" apt.

Would someone who didn't see race first see a black man in that situation and be positive enough he was an intruder to shoot him dead?

Or would that person see a black man, but at the same time see that black man near a sofa and ottoman she didn't own, with a kitchen counter between them cluttered with nothing that belonged to her? And pause for long enough to process the mistake she had made?
I would see my door open and either shout hello or who's in there; if no answer call police. If answer, realize it's not my apartment and I am an idiot.
 
The judge, in her robes, in open court, in front of cameras still recording what had been a very high profile trial , with tensions still high enough that shouts of anger at 10 years were echoing in that courthouse, hugged the person who had shortly before been convicted of first degree murder.

Then told the convicted murderer that she blamed herself too much, that what she had done wasn't as bad as it seemed to her, and that she hadn't done anything she couldn't be forgiven for.

Can you truthfully say you are perfectly OK with judges dispensing hugs and redemption to any and all murderers immediately following sentencing?

Yes, I can perfectly say I am OK with judge dispensing hugs and redemption of any sort.
 
The judge, in her robes, in open court, in front of cameras still recording what had been a very high profile trial , with tensions still high enough that shouts of anger at 10 years were echoing in that courthouse, hugged the person who had shortly before been convicted of first degree murder.

Then told the convicted murderer that she blamed herself too much, that what she had done wasn't as bad as it seemed to her, and that she hadn't done anything she couldn't be forgiven for.

Can you truthfully say you are perfectly OK with judges dispensing hugs and redemption to any and all murderers immediately following sentencing?

BBM:OMG this lady does not need to sit in Judgment in a Court of Law!!!!!
 
The judge, in her robes, in open court, in front of cameras still recording what had been a very high profile trial , with tensions still high enough that shouts of anger at 10 years were echoing in that courthouse, hugged the person who had shortly before been convicted of first degree murder.

Then told the convicted murderer that she blamed herself too much, that what she had done wasn't as bad as it seemed to her, and that she hadn't done anything she couldn't be forgiven for.

Can you truthfully say you are perfectly OK with judges dispensing hugs and redemption to any and all murderers immediately following sentencing?

Hugs for all murdeters? Nope. Definitely not for cop killers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
145
Guests online
2,358
Total visitors
2,503

Forum statistics

Threads
601,188
Messages
18,120,115
Members
230,995
Latest member
MiaCarmela
Back
Top