TX - Joshua Brown, 27, (witness in Amber Guyger trial), shot and killed, Dallas, 4 Oct 2019

[Seattle1]

Yes, because he already testified, his testimony at any retrial would come in via "hearsay exception." So if anybody really wanted to kill him to prevent him from testifying in Amber Guyger's trial, it would have made sense to do so before the trial and not after.

I don't believe you understand that "hearsay" is actually defined as "out of court statement," and not prior courtroom testimony of deceased witness.

I think if decedent's testimony required during 2nd trial, it would likely be read into the record of new trial, along with his cross examination. MOO

 

[Aydrianna523]

Deleted.

 

[LietKynes]

People definitely are afraid of police retaliation when testifying against police. I believe that's why people are also afraid to indict a policeman in the first. You want to stay on their good side.
Then there's others who think ALL policemen are good.
This murder at first glance looks extremely suspicious. Of course it could be one of those huge coincidences that he was killed just days after testifying against a policeperson.
Interesting to see this policewoman had her hair all fancied up. I felt like it had a bit of a Casey Anthony taste to it. (I'm too sweet looking to be a real murderer).

LBM

Wow. I didn't see her new 'do.
Tried to keep a distance from this woman as I doubt her true repentance.
My .02.

 

[Aydrianna523]

LBM

Wow. I didn't see her new 'do.
Tried to keep a distance from this woman as I doubt her true repentance.
My .02.

The highlight job...

 

[Aydrianna523]

LBM

Wow. I didn't see her new 'do.
Tried to keep a distance from this woman as I doubt her true repentance.
My .02.

And from what I've heard about her texting, she wasn't really as sweet as the personna she was trying to portray.

 

[Hope4More]

I don't believe you understand that "hearsay" is actually defined as "out of court statement," and not prior courtroom testimony of deceased witness.

I think if decedent's testimony required during 2nd trial, it would likely be read into the record of new trial, along with his cross examination. MOO

Seems like s/he understood hearsay perfectly well. Again. Yes, Brown's testimony would be allowed in if a retrial. The legal basis for admitting his testimony in does in fact relate to hearsay rules. Again, his testimony would be allowed in as an hearsay exception, because he "wasn't available" and because he had been cross examined at trial.

 

[LietKynes]

Surprised she didn't wear glasses and a granny outfit.

But back to JB; hoping if this was related to the past murder that LE are looking at those people, esp. the one out walking free on bond !

And were there sec. cams ?
Hopefully not just the eyewitness testimony.

 

[Seattle1]

Emph. mine

Except without JB's testimony it would be easier for her to get out much sooner or even be exonerated and the murder overturned.
JB's murder would possibly put her behind bars for the full ten years ?
Is this correct ?
So with JB gone she is in a much better position to be granted a re-trial and her conviction be overturned.
This death helps A. Guyger; it doesn't hurt her case.
MOO

Asking if this is correct, IMO NO!

I believe JB's testimony was more helpful to AG's defense than harmful -- and did not get her convicted on the face of his testimony:

I believe most found JB's testimony to be very honest as to what he witnessed, and his honesty made him a good witness for both sides.

1) AG testified that she went to wrong apartment -- and JB testified that he's made this same mistake himself.

2) AG testified that she made command to BJ prior to shooting to show his hands, and JB testified he heard words between AG and the victim.

The jury decided AG's punishment of 10 years based on the criminal statute, and naive to believe the lower end of punishment would be changed after JB's death!

While there have been reports that defense may file an appeal -- there's no evidence that AG defense will appeal her conviction, or has done so.

Again - I disagree with your assessment here.

MOO

 

[Aydrianna523]

Surprised she didn't wear glasses and a granny outfit.

You would think so, but Casey Anthony, and Debra LaFave seem to indicate otherwise.

 

[Gracie55]

It's such a powder keg in Dallas I wouldn't speculate what happened to JB. I'm not surprised at anything given the emotions at play.

 

[BellaVita]

People definitely are afraid of police retaliation when testifying against police. I believe that's why people are also afraid to indict a policeman in the first. You want to stay on their good side.
Then there's others who think ALL policemen are good.
This murder at first glance looks extremely suspicious. Of course it could be one of those huge coincidences that he was killed just days after testifying against a policeperson.
Interesting to see this policewoman had her hair all fancied up. I felt like it had a bit of a Casey Anthony taste to it. (I'm too sweet looking to be a real murderer).

BBM: Is this really a thing? I understand being apprehensive about giving testimony against someone no matter who they are. I'd rather testify against police than a random drug dealer/accused killer. Much more of a loose cannon with nothing to lose at all. Plenty of stories about retaliation in those instances. I'm not claiming there are no documented cases of police retaliation due to testimony but if that's a trend, I've yet to hear about it. I think it's fanciful thinking to believe that people connected to DPD either killed JB or contracted with others to do so. Given the circumstances of JB involvement with another case where he was shot and another man killed, it's very odd that the police are suspected more. The killing may have been completely random. Police involvement is way, way down the list. IMO.

 

[Aydrianna523]

Asking if this is correct, IMO NO!

I believe JB's testimony was more helpful to AG's defense than harmful -- and did not get her convicted on the face of his testimony:

I believe most found JB's testimony to be very honest as to what he witnessed, and his honesty made him a good witness for both sides.

1) AG testified that she went to wrong apartment -- and JB testified that he's made this same mistake himself.

2) AG testified that she made command to BJ prior to shooting to show his hands, and JB testified he heard words between AG and the victim.

The jury decided AG's punishment of 10 years based on the criminal statute, and naive to believe the lower end of punishment would be changed after JB's death!

While there have been reports that defense may file an appeal -- there's no evidence that AG defense will appeal her conviction, or has done so.

Again - I disagree with your assessment here.

MOO

I disagree. He helped the Prosecution more. He heard words, but NOT a command. If it was a loud police command he would have heard it.
And even if you went to the wrong apartment, no one shoots the occupant. You catch on very quickly when it's clearly not your own furnishings. Sexting or whatever.

 

[mister happy]

And from what I've heard about her texting, she wasn't really as sweet as the personna she was trying to portray.

Yes, and I didn't quite buy her "cute little girl" voice during her testimony.

 

[jjenny]

I disagree. He helped the Prosecution more. He heard words, but NOT a command. If it was a loud police command he would have heard it.
And even if you went to the wrong apartment, no one shoots the occupant. You catch on very quickly when it's clearly not your own furnishings. Sexting or whatever.

Regardless, he already testified, and if there is a re-trial, his testimony will still be allowed via hearsay exception. So it would make no sense to kill him to prevent him from testifying at a retrial.

 

[BellaVita]

I disagree. He helped the Prosecution more. He heard words, but NOT a command. If it was a loud police command he would have heard it.
And even if you went to the wrong apartment, no one shoots the occupant. You catch on very quickly when it's clearly not your own furnishings. Sexting or whatever.

Responding to BBM:
Marc Lipscomb, a private equity attorney in Dallas who was a resident at South Side Flats, said he mistakenly parked on the wrong garage level “on a number of occasions” – the same mistake Guyger testified she made. Lipscomb also told jurors about a harrowing instance in which he wandered into someone else’s apartment. Lipscomb testified that he left his apartment unlocked one day to walk his dog. He ended up on the wrong floor and went to what he thought was his apartment. The door was unlocked, like he had left his, so he went in. He told jurors that he walked all the way into the apartment, and even though there was a woman’s purse there, he thought it might have belonged to a guest of his roommate. It wasn’t until he saw a woman sitting on a couch who “looked like a deer in the headlights,” that he realized he was in the wrong apartment. “It was an embarrassing moment,” he told jurors. On cross examination, a prosecutor pointed out that he did not feel the need to shoot the woman, and she didn’t shoot at him.
Day-by-day breakdown of the murder trial of Amber Guyger
Seems like a matter of time only before someone was shot. About 25% of residents on the 3rd and 4th floors told investigators they had gone to the wrong apartment. That's incredible to me. It could have been reversed. An occupant may have shot someone making that mistake.

 

[LietKynes]

Asking if this is correct, IMO NO!

I believe JB's testimony was more helpful to AG's defense than harmful -- and did not get her convicted on the face of his testimony:

I believe most found JB's testimony to be very honest as to what he witnessed, and his honesty made him a good witness for both sides.

1) AG testified that she went to wrong apartment -- and JB testified that he's made this same mistake himself.

2) AG testified that she made command to BJ prior to shooting to show his hands, and JB testified he heard words between AG and the victim.

The jury decided AG's punishment of 10 years based on the criminal statute, and naive to believe the lower end of punishment would be changed after JB's death!

While there have been reports that defense may file an appeal -- there's no evidence that AG defense will appeal her conviction, or has done so.

Again - I disagree with your assessment here.

MOO

LBM

We can agree to disagree

About the apartment furnishings --wouldn't the general layout of BJ's home be different enough that AG would notice ?
The general appearance of the building does look somewhat similar, as in the occupant's front doors look like they're all the same color.

I keep having to think back about JB since this is his thread.... did LE follow up on the perp and clear him yet ?
It would seem a likely place to start. Imo.

 

[Seattle1]

Ita.
One wouldn't think so.
In cases like this it's easier to assume JB was in the wrong.
And the msm articles listed JB as "complainant" ; and NOT "victim".
Now that is really odd.
Hello... he was ambushed and murdered.
He (JB) was not in a drug deal that went south or breaking into a home-- he was getting out of his car by his residence.
(Or a friend's residence.)

Difficult to tell what MSN articles are citing JB as the "complainant" without a link to these articles.

This would be highly unusual reference for JB as a witness in AG's trial, and/or a murder victim.

A complainant is a plaintiff in a lawsuit, and/or the party who makes the complaint in a legal action or proceeding. To my knowledge -- he filed no suit against anybody here.

MOO

 

[Aydrianna523]

BBM: Is this really a thing? I understand being apprehensive about giving testimony against someone no matter who they are. I'd rather testify against police than a random drug dealer/accused killer. Much more of a loose cannon with nothing to lose at all. Plenty of stories about retaliation in those instances. I'm not claiming there are no documented cases of police retaliation due to testimony but if that's a trend, I've yet to hear about it. I think it's fanciful thinking to believe that people connected to DPD either killed JB or contracted with others to do so. Given the circumstances of JB involvement with another case where he was shot and another man killed, it's very odd that the police are suspected more. The killing may have been completely random. Police involvement is way, way down the list. IMO.

Deleted by me.

 

[Hope4More]

Asking if this is correct, IMO NO!

I believe JB's testimony was more helpful to AG's defense than harmful -- and did not get her convicted on the face of his testimony:

I believe most found JB's testimony to be very honest as to what he witnessed, and his honesty made him a good witness for both sides.

1) AG testified that she went to wrong apartment -- and JB testified that he's made this same mistake himself.

2) AG testified that she made command to BJ prior to shooting to show his hands, and JB testified he heard words between AG and the victim.

The jury decided AG's punishment of 10 years based on the criminal statute, and naive to believe the lower end of punishment would be changed after JB's death!

While there have been reports that defense may file an appeal -- there's no evidence that AG defense will appeal her conviction, or has done so.

Again - I disagree with your assessment here.

MOO

Mostly agree. .

1. Amber was convicted of murder based on her own testimony, that she chose to shoot, and to shoot to kill. Brown's testimony therefore had little to no bearing on the outcome of the guilt phase.

2. There is zero possibility Brown's murder will affect the length of Amber's sentence. One has nothing to do with the other. Unless it turns out Amber ordered a hit on Brown (being facetious), but even then her 10 year sentence already imposed would stand.

3. It's entirely likely Amber will file an appeal, imo. It's early on, and she still has weeks before a filing deadline.

 

[LietKynes]

Difficult to tell what MSN articles are citing JB as the "complainant" without a link to these articles.

This would be highly unusual reference for JB as a witness in AG's trial, and/or a murder victim.

A complainant is a plaintiff in a lawsuit, and/or the party who makes the complaint in a legal action or proceeding. To my knowledge -- he filed no suit against anybody here.

MOO

My post was in response to earlier posts here in this thread.
The links are in the OP's comments.