TX - Botham Shem Jean, 26, killed when police officer entered wrong apartment, Dallas, Sept 2018 #2

[Rocco]

I disagree. Its not "stupid" to think it as murder. Murder has to do with intent. She shot twice. She fully intended for him to die.

Absolutely. If manslaughter is: 'unintentional killing that results from recklessness or criminal negligence' then that doesn't fit.

There was nothing unintentional about her shooting him. She didn't shoot hoping to graze him in the arm. She didn't shoot to scare him. She shot to kill him and she did. That's murder.

ETA: Even she is never going to say she shot him but she didn't intend to kill him.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

Needs to post the links to make it possible for another to assist if that's whats up? I thought the warrants were being requested.

Thank you. I see those and appreciate them. I think @Thora_Jay may be asking for help with something else?

 

[Gigglingtoes]

The duty to know who/what you are shooting at is imposed on lowly citizens and an Elite officer such as herself is held to no lower standard but, a reasonable jury will hold her to a higher standard.

You might get a wee bit of sympathy if you're residing in a mental institution now with no hurry to check out.

She (you) didn't know she was murdering an innocent man in his own home because because because because because because blah blah blah and allegedly it was too dark to see him but not too dark for her to see he allegedly wasn't complaint with her (your) orders.

Just a back illuminated silhouette not complying.

Yeah yeah yeah right.

 

[Jax49]

Needs to post the links to make it possible for another to assist if that's whats up? I thought the warrants were being requested.

I was asking for the warrants but looking back I think I misunderstood TJ's request. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[bluesneakers]

I disagree. Its not "stupid" to think it as murder. Murder has to do with intent. She shot twice. She fully intended for him to die.

Cops always shoot to kill.

 

[Rocco]

Cops always shoot to kill.

Yes they do. They don't shoot at someone's legs to stop them from running or shoot at someone's hand to get them to drop a weapon. They aim for center mass to kill them.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

post the links if ya gottum

Dear DisturbedConcerned,
Can you please help me with photos and videos please to post here?
Respectfully
Thora Jay

 

[kaen]

How do we know he was getting ready for bed? How do we know there were no ashtrays? Many here are inventing their own "facts" and that has been one reason why there is no clearness to this situation and so much misinformation.

I mentioned ready for bed based on this information we have been given.

1. He was in his underwear.
2. According to the killer, the lights in the living room were out.
3. His mother said she talked to him almost every night at 10 before going to bed.

This is information that has been published in mainstream media.

The ashtrays are new to me but I would say if there were ashtrays we would have probably seen them in the warrant-- something like ashtray and contents written to ensure that they could take them into custody.

 

[DisturbedConcerned]

Well you seem to know every other fact relevant to this intentional homicide so, how about was around his bedtime, SO DARK only a silhouette was allegedly discernible and he was in his underwear, or did she undress him when she was allegedly giving CPR or pacing out in the hallway on the phone not performing CPR?

I suspect she is lying about his lights being off and I hope they've pulled smart electric meter data to verify if or when lights were turned on or off.

How do we know he was getting ready for bed? How do we know there were no ashtrays? Many here are inventing their own "facts" and that has been one reason why there is no clearness to this situation and so much misinformation.

 

[VAgirlatheart]

I would ask posters to refrain from calling Amber "the killer." She is only charged with manslaughter. It is as offensive as if I were to call Botham "the doper." (Which I would never do)

Wait a minute, I'm baffled by this statement. Why do we have to refrain from calling her the killer? She killed him regardless of how, when, where, or why. I'm not sure if you understand what manslaughter is but it's the act of killing someone "unintentionally" due to recklessness or criminal negligence. She's the one who wasn't paying attention for whatever reason. If she didn't want to be called a killer then she should have paid better attention to what she was doing. No excuses. She committed the crime rather it was accident or not, he lost his life and she's responsible.

 

[VAgirlatheart]

Wait a minute, I'm baffled by this statement. Why do we have to refrain from calling her the killer? She killed him regardless of how, when, where, or why. I'm not sure if you understand what manslaughter is but it's the act of killing someone "unintentionally" due to recklessness or criminal negligence. She's the one who wasn't paying attention for whatever reason. If she didn't want to be called a killer then she should have paid better attention to what she was doing. No excuses. She committed the crime rather it was accident or not, he lost his life and she's responsible.

Also, the point has been proven to what his families lawyers said. It's a smear and that's exactly what they were trying to say. Had you not known that, you could have never brought that point up and we don't know that those drugs belong to him. As far as we know, she could have put them in there and before you say doubtful I'd refer you to several cases over these past years, where an officer had deliberately placed a gun because of something to cover up their behinds. So please don't act like that's an uncommon thing. We've seen it before and I'm sure planting a drugs wouldn't be that hard either

 

[VAgirlatheart]

I mentioned ready for bed based on this information we have been given.

1. He was in his underwear.
2. According to the killer, the lights in the living room were out.
3. His mother said she talked to him almost every night at 10 before going to bed.

This is information that has been published in mainstream media.

The ashtrays are new to me but I would say if there were ashtrays we would have probably seen them in the warrant-- something like ashtray and contents written to ensure that they could take them into custody.

Which reminds me, if all her police gear was there because she "walked in" why was her gun not part of the search warrant .. it was only 2am whenever they got the search warrant. I'm hoping she wasn't allowed to keep that firearm. I'm praying that the investigators weren't that stupid.

 

[Indy Anna]

Well you seem to know every other fact relevant to this intentional homicide so, how about was around his bedtime, SO DARK only a silhouette was allegedly discernible and he was in his underwear, or did she undress him when she was allegedly giving CPR or pacing out in the hallway on the phone not performing CPR?

I suspect she is lying about his lights being off and I hope they've pulled smart electric meter data to verify if or when lights were turned on or off.

BBM I agree. There was the half-eaten bowl of cereal on the ottoman. I doubt he left it sitting there since breakfast. Cockroaches infest multi-resident dwellings very quickly and any food left out would attract them. I think he was in the midst of eating the cereal -- a bedtime snack -- when AG came to the door. And I doubt he was eating in the dark. JMO

 

[VAgirlatheart]

There is not only one logical reason. There are numerous:

She was exhausted and misjudged the whole situation. (didn't need to know him)

She was impaired with a substance and misjudged the whole situation. (didn't need to know him)

She did not adhere to her deadly force training. (didn't need to know him)


These scenarios are not only logical but extremely possible.

I don't think anyone is denying the fact that those are possible scenarios. Most of us know that it's a possible situation but it does not mean she still gets off for walking into someone's house and killing them. If she is telling the truth than not only is it an unfortunate for the victim but for her as well and by her not paying attention, it caused his life and mostly likely a few years of hers and her job.

 

[Indy Anna]

Absolutely. If manslaughter is: 'unintentional killing that results from recklessness or criminal negligence' then that doesn't fit.

There was nothing unintentional about her shooting him. She didn't shoot hoping to graze him in the arm. She didn't shoot to scare him. She shot to kill him and she did. That's murder.

ETA: Even she is never going to say she shot him but she didn't intend to kill him.

The shot that missed him was aimed at his head! It struck more than 6' up the wall. I think then he ducked low and that's when she shot him through the heart.

 

[VAgirlatheart]

I disagree. Its not "stupid" to think it as murder. Murder has to do with intent. She shot twice. She fully intended for him to die.

Listen I go back and forth on what I think happened.. please don't take it as offensive because I'm not sold on saying it was just manslaughter either. My comment was based on the fact that I personally feel like with the current information we know, I don't think there is enough evidence to prove what needs to be proven. We all have seen how these cases have played out. I just think as of now - it should be a manslaughter case because of her being reckless in not seeing the signs before hand that it's not her apartment. That's all I'm trying to say. Once I get that small piece of information that I need than I more than likely will believe there is more to this story. I go back and forth but based on my experiences and case studies I have done, personally - I need that aha moment. Trust me - I'm following this very closely - and this is what I majored in for my bachelors with a specific concentration in criminal investigations. Maybe I should have used the word stupid. lol I probably could rewrote that sentence.

 

[Jim G]

And I would kindly would remind you that we do not have the facts to if the door was opened or not.. both statement contradict each other. 2) the search warrant didn't mention who's drugs, they were. She's the one that didn't know where her apartment was, as far as I'm concerned it could have been hers. And lastly, that area is not really bad on crime maybe a few blocks over but there are bars and restaurants and hotels a 4 star hotel all on that street and not to mention the police department is literally a few buildings down.

The door was unlocked. She could not have gotten in otherwise. <modsnip: personalizing>

 

[Gigglingtoes]

The door was unlocked. She could not have gotten in otherwise. <modsnip: personalizing>

MR G, If Mr Jean opened the door for Amber G, she could of entered that way as well.

<modsnip: personalizing>

 

[Jim G]

MR G, If Mr Jean opened the door for Amber G, she could of entered that way as well.

<modsnip: personalizing>

Ahem...gentlemen do not answer, let alone open, the front door dressed in their underwear, especially to young attractive females.

 

[Gigglingtoes]

Ahem...gentlemen do not answer, let alone open, the front door dressed in their underwear, especially to young attractive females.

They do if someone keeps trying to get into their apartment or is saying “let me in!”