TX - Former Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger, indicted for Murder of Botham Shem Jean #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #441
Found this interesting and informative on how civilized western countries have historically viewed the role of law enforcement. Policing by consent

Peelian principles - Wikipedia

The Peelian principles summarise the ideas that Sir Robert Peel developed to define an ethical police force. The approach expressed in these principles is commonly known as policing by consent in the United Kingdom and other countries such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.[1][2][3][4]

The nine principles were as follows:

  1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
  2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
  3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
  4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
  5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
  6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
  7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
  8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
  9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
 
  • #442
Well, it does say Guyger's attorney is working on another big federal case, that will go to trial around that time, so I suppose that's a good excuse. If she is acquitted, it confirms the beliefs most people hold these days about law enforcement in many areas of the US. A while back I was talking with a man from Ireland, talking current events like this. He said he was baffled at how Americans put their law enforcement officers up on pedestals and worship them. They don't do that in Ireland or most of western Europe. They have a more realistic view of law enforcement - they're there to do a job that is sometimes dangerous, but they're no better than anyone else and their authority and honesty should certainly be questioned when necessary.

Ever since 911, Americans go overboard on worshiping LE, military and other authority figures. That's a dangerous thing to do in a free society.

Time to start holding these people accountable and not putting them above the law. LE has changed these days, standards for recruitment and training have changed and not for the better. Time to clean it up and get the bad actors, violence-lovers and psychos out.

I agree. Fantastic post
 
  • #443
  • #444
  • At least nine cases which were investigated by a Dallas cop who shot an unarmed black man in his own home are dropped by prosecutors after she is indicted for his murder
    In one instance, a county prosecutor asked that their case be dismissed because Guyger had been accused of 'murdering an innocent man in his own home'
Prosecutors have dropped nine cases investigated by Dallas cop who shot unarmed man in his home | Daily Mail Online
A side note: AG seemed to be very active busting drugs, as an officer. Her specialty perhaps.
 
  • #445
  • #446
  • #447
  • #448
This is disgusting! She's audibly upset in the 911 call, but she tells the dispatcher, "I'm going to lose my job." That's what she was worried about?!

As Daryl Washington (the Jeans' attorney) also points out, she never tells the dispatcher that she was in fear of her life. She also mentions that she was tired, and tells the dispatcher that she thought it was her apartment 19 times.

Officer calls 911 after shooting man in his home: 'I thought it was my apartment'

BTW, her appearance sure has changed.
 
  • #449
  • #450
I never really understood how the parking situation was that they park on the same level as their apartment. So I googled and I see now:

upload_2019-4-30_13-12-11.png

Google Maps
 
  • #451
Wow, after listening to the 911 call this was not what they said it is. They need to drop down the charges.
 
  • #452
No she was more concerned about her job than the Man dying in front of her , Did she even try to render aid? I didn't see any blood on her she only sounds concerned for herself I, I, I, I, No plea for please help him just a small I'm sorry , NOPE she was dangerous and trigger happy!!!
 
  • #453
  • #454
No she was more concerned about her job than the Man dying in front of her , Did she even try to render aid? I didn't see any blood on her she only sounds concerned for herself I, I, I, I, No plea for please help him just a small I'm sorry , NOPE she was dangerous and trigger happy!!!
I was also wondering if she tried to render aid to him. It didn't sound like it. It's quite alarming to hear a police officer completely lose their s#!t like that. I don't know what the legal code says about murder vs. manslaughter. But I am pretty sure if the tables were turned and it was Mr. Jean who went into her apartment and killed her, there would be no question of a murder charge.
 
  • #455
Wow, after listening to the 911 call this was not what they said it is. They need to drop down the charges.

Who knows? Did she call an attorney or union before she called 911? Or did she have the call carefully scripted before she shot Mr. Jean? I am not buying it.
 
  • #456
Who knows? Did she call an attorney or union before she called 911? Or did she have the call carefully scripted before she shot Mr. Jean? I am not buying it.
That's a good question. Listening to the call it sounds to me like she called 911 right away after she realized what she had done - i.e. shoot someone in their own apartment. I say that because she sounds completely unhinged, and I doubt she would have had her wits to call someone else first. She'd be up for an academy award if so.

I have no knowledge of the law but it seems pretty clear she had intent to kill him. Texas has laws about being able to use deadly force if someone is in your home. Does it apply if you *think* you are in your own home when you kill someone?
 
  • #457
That's a good question. Listening to the call it sounds to me like she called 911 right away after she realized what she had done - i.e. shoot someone in their own apartment. I say that because she sounds completely unhinged, and I doubt she would have had her wits to call someone else first. She'd be up for an academy award if so.

I have no knowledge of the law but it seems pretty clear she had intent to kill him. Texas has laws about being able to use deadly force if someone is in your home. Does it apply if you only *think* you are in your own home when you kill someone?

If she is not convicted, every single police department needs to cut ALL overtime to nothing. And that includes those side jobs, that pay police officers for security.
 
  • #458
That's a good question. Listening to the call it sounds to me like she called 911 right away after she realized what she had done - i.e. shoot someone in their own apartment. I say that because she sounds completely unhinged, and I doubt she would have had her wits to call someone else first. She'd be up for an academy award if so.

I have no knowledge of the law but it seems pretty clear she had intent to kill him. Texas has laws about being able to use deadly force if someone is in your home. Does it apply if you *think* you are in your own home when you kill someone?

I agree, but I feel like it should be manslaughter or negligent homicide or something like that.
 
  • #459
If she is not convicted, every single police department needs to cut ALL overtime to nothing. And that includes those side jobs, that pay police officers for security.

She needs to be convicted of something. I have a feeling she'll take a plea deal. I sure would.
 
  • #460
She needs to be convicted of something. I have a feeling she'll take a plea deal. I sure would.

I agree. I have worked a lot of jobs, sometimes going from one job, directly to the next one, 24 hours, back to back. I have never walked into the wrong apartment.

We still have not had the toxicology results...now, I can see going into the wrong apartment after a 14 hour shift, and a few hours of drinking on top of that...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
56
Guests online
12,444
Total visitors
12,500

Forum statistics

Threads
633,384
Messages
18,640,992
Members
243,513
Latest member
casscom88
Back
Top