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

[Jax49]

Thinking about the fact he was wearing white shorts with no pockets, and wondering why it would be important. Two thoughts, as mentioned earlier no pockets means he wasn't hiding a weapon there.

Also, white shorts would be more visible than black clothing. Maybe prosecution will use that in closing? moo

 

[gitana1]

If the DA thought she was out for him, they would have charged her with capital murder.

I don't think that's accurate based on my reading of the code? PENAL CODE CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

But they haven't said one thing or introduced any evidence to indicate they believe she has it out for him.

 

[gitana1]

The DA did not "up the charges because there was a public outcry to have her charged with murder". That is patently false. She was originally brought in on a manslaughter charge decided by the Texas Rangers. When the grand jury reviewed the evidence they changed it to murder.

"The grand jury began hearing evidence in the case on Monday. Guyger was arrested on a manslaughter charge on Sept. 9, three days after the shooting. But it was up to the grand jury this week to decide what charge she would face, or if she would be indicted at all."

Sources: Fired cop Amber Guyger indicted on a murder charge in Botham Jean killing

This is why links are important. Bias can color how we view the facts.

 

[mickey2942]

Hmm. Some seem to think certain motions were occurring to preserve the record in appeal. That can take time. Maybe they had another witness coming that they couldn't get there in time. But that would likely be discussed in open court. The motions would occur in open court as well.

How exactly did court end? What was going on at the time? Maybe someone fell ill.

In the end, I think that the end game for the defense was to set this whole "Dog and Pony show", trial, was to get it out of the way, and get the judgement set aside on appeal. That could be why their entire defense so far has been pretty lame.

 

[blue22]

I don't think that's accurate based on my reading of the code? PENAL CODE CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

But they haven't said one thing or introduced any evidence to indicate they believe she has it out for him.

I was meaning that id it was premeditated and she went there to kill him, I would think the charges would be different. I'm not an attorney, so I may be way off. (But yeah...they haven't suggested that, because they don't believe that happened. It's silly for anyone to suggest that's what they are doing.)

 

[HongKongPhooey]

She's charged with murder which in TX doesn't necessitate pre-planning or premeditation or a depraved heart.

Manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide are both what are called "lesser included" crimes of murder. So the elements of those crimes are within murder. And that means that a jury can convict a defendant of a lesser included while finding them not guilty of the more serious charges.

Jury instructions will explain all of that in great detail.

Thanks

 

[gitana1]

A defense lawyer on ABC is the one that said that the lesser included charges could be dropped based on her testimony. I don’t think it was speculation on this board. We were regurgitating what Texas criminal defense attorneys were saying on the news stations. Just wanted to clarify for the verified attorneys on the board.

I understand. To clarify, she has not been charged with lesser includeds. So those charges would not be "dropped".

But yeah. Her testimony indicates that her conduct fits murder. Except that she has a defense. Mistake of fact is a pure defense against murder. That's what this case is entirely about. If her mistake was reasonable, it's not murder.

If she was reckless or negligent, that negates reasonableness.

And it also allows for a conviction of a lesser included if the jury finds those more properly fit.

But refuting the mistake of fact defense also does allow the murder charge to stand.

It will be interesting to see what happens here.

 

[Weki]

I don’t think anyone can argue with a straight face that this was some planned execution. Someone died by homicide. Was it murder or self-defense is the question. I think intimating that this is some kind of witch hunt against AG is disingenuous! A man lost his life inside his own home eating ice cream and watching TV - something many Americans do on a regular basis. We don’t just wrap up the body and go home.

 

[gitana1]

It's ludicrous. If they wanted someone on stand to testify about her psychological state, why on earth didn't they get a psychologist?

She got on the stand to speak for herself, there is no way a judge is going to let random experts get up and testify to how they think she felt. How could they not know that?

Right. It would have to be a psych expert who examined her specifically.

 

[gitana1]

They had just finished like 2 minutes of testimony with Ranger Armstrong. He was excused from the stand and court went into a short break. After that break court was adjourned. I do not think anyone fell ill. IMO the defense had put too much of their case on these experts and it fell apart when they could not get them qualified for what they wanted. I think they will rest first thing on Monday.

Oh. So maybe they had decided to present more testimony but couldn't. So they're regrouping to make sure but likely going to rest soon? That makes a lot of sense.

They had the time today but didn't end up being able to use it. And maybe don't want to rest on a Saturday.

 

[blue22]

In the end, I think that the end game for the defense was to set this whole "Dog and Pony show", trial, was to get it out of the way, and get the judgement set aside on appeal. That could be why their entire defense so far has been pretty lame.

This would be an incredible risk. Actually getting an appeal is not very easy. I think even awful lawyers want to win in court, because an appeal is even more difficult. That said, anything is possible.

 

[Jax49]

I don't think that's accurate based on my reading of the code? PENAL CODE CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

But they haven't said one thing or introduced any evidence to indicate they believe she has it out for him.

Thanks G. As a Floridian, I'm surprised how restrictive it is.

 

[kodi]

The defense lawyer on WFAA explained this as well. Paraphrasing - based on the Texas statutes, based on the fact that she stated several times she intended to kill him when she fired her weapon, then murder is the appropriate charge. People are drawn to manslaughter because AG didn't plan to kill him but that is not the way the law is written.

Honestly, this is how I feel and I am so conflicted about it. I understand Texas Law and that she is guilty of murder by her own admission. But I also can’t set aside the circumstances that led to her arrival at the wrong apartment. And if she hadn’t made this tragic mistake, which could have happened to anyone and did per court testimony, then we wouldn’t be here and Mr. Jean would be alive. JMO

I definitely believe she was negligent in what transpired once she entered the apartment but I don’t feel she is a murderer. Furthermore, I think it’s a stretch to say that she had animosity for MR that night and that fueled this somehow, but that’s also just my opinion.

These are just my thoughts and feelings as of this post. They are ever evolving and bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball. Like I said, I’m glad I’m not on this jury.

All JMO.

 

[gitana1]

I was meaning that id it was premeditated and she went there to kill him, I would think the charges would be different. I'm not an attorney, so I may be way off. (But yeah...they haven't suggested that, because they don't believe that happened. It's silly for anyone to suggest that's what they are doing.)

Yeah it's weird in TX. But it appears to me that capital murder isn't about premeditation. It's sort of specific. Like killing LE, killing while committing a felony like burglary, killing a child under 10. Stuff like that.

Premeditated murder appears to be the exact same charge as what AG was charged with.

But others have pointed out that the possible sentencing range is super big so maybe that's how they deal with that?

But it's 100% true that at no time has the state suggested AG went to that apartment with the intent to kill this innocent man.

I feel that comes from pre-trial propaganda and speculation and I'm thinking that at this stage anyone bringing that up maybe hasn't had the time to follow this case.

 

[blue22]

Honestly, this is how I feel and I am so conflicted about it. I understand Texas Law and that she is guilty of murder by her own admission. But I also can’t set aside the circumstances that led to her arrival at the wrong apartment. And if she hadn’t made this tragic mistake, which could have happened to anyone and did per court testimony, then we wouldn’t be here and Mr. Jean would be alive. JMO

I definitely believe she was negligent in what transpired once she entered the apartment but I don’t feel she is a murderer. Furthermore, I think it’s a stretch to say that she had animosity for MR that night and that fueled this somehow, but that’s also just my opinion.

These are just my thoughts and feelings as of this post. They are ever evolving and bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball. Like I said, I’m glad I’m not on this jury.

All JMO.

I imagine the jury will be thinking these same things. There might be some with a strong feeling, but I think there will be a lot of this going back and forth and evolving. I think they will ping pong just like this. The jury instructions will prove to be very important in this case, IMO.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

If we take away the fact she’s LE, stick a pin in that for a moment.
You think if any of us ‘public’ who did this would be up there on anything less than a murder charge? Unlawful discharge of a weapon too imo. Shooting someone supposedly in the dark who is posing no immediate threat is NOT what she was trained to do. Plus the fact she was so cold and indifferent when Botham was dying on the floor at her own hand. Now take the pin out, this woman was a police officer. She was in a position of power and that power went to her head. Which makes this case all the more shocking imo, she had an attitude that it’s ok just to fire shots off with a millisecond thought before hand. If she wasn’t LE she’d be a lunatic with a gun. JMO.

 

[gitana1]

Honestly, this is how I feel and I am so conflicted about it. I understand Texas Law and that she is guilty of murder by her own admission. But I also can’t set aside the circumstances that led to her arrival at the wrong apartment. And if she hadn’t made this tragic mistake, which could have happened to anyone and did per court testimony, then we wouldn’t be here and Mr. Jean would be alive. JMO

I definitely believe she was negligent in what transpired once she entered the apartment but I don’t feel she is a murderer. Furthermore, I think it’s a stretch to say that she had animosity for MR that night and that fueled this somehow, but that’s also just my opinion.

These are just my thoughts and feelings as of this post. They are ever evolving and bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball. Like I said, I’m glad I’m not on this jury.

All JMO.

I get you. But I don't think this mistake could've happened to anyone and I don't think it has. Because mistakenly going to and/or even trying to enter someone else's home is not the same as immediately shooting someone to death when doing so. You know what I mean?

The fact that she is LE and had a loaded gun that she used contrary to department protocol is what sets her apart I think. What do you think?

 

[blue22]

Yeah it's weird in TX. But it appears to me that capital murder isn't about premeditation. It's sort of specific. Like killing LE, killing while committing a felony like burglary, killing a child under 10. Stuff like that.

Premeditated murder appears to be the exact same charge as what AG was charged with.

But others have pointed out that the possible sentencing range is super big so maybe that's how they deal with that?

But it's 100% true that at no time has the state suggested AG went to that apartment with the intent to kill this innocent man.

I feel that comes from pre-trial propaganda and speculation and I'm thinking that at this stage anyone bringing that up maybe hasn't had the time to follow this case.

This must be why capital murder cases aren't terribly common here.

 

[angelainwi]

Oh. So maybe they had decided to present more testimony but couldn't. So they're regrouping to make sure but likely going to rest soon? That makes a lot of sense.

They had the time today but didn't end up being able to use it. And maybe don't want to rest on a Saturday.

I believe that is exactly what happened. They wanted Craig Miller to give some decent testimony and that was rejected. I think they are totally regrouping and realizing that their ship basically sank.

 

[Weki]

On a larger scale, I have a big problem with someone who instigates a confrontation, kills someone, and then claims self-defense. The self-defense argument in these instances assaults the conscience. There have been many high profile cases like this. Curtis Reeves comes to mind at the moment. I’m specifically quoting that case bc both shooter and victim are white. Reeves is a former officer and elderly. Reeves instigated an altercation, shot the guy, then claimed he was in fear for his life.

In this case, of course, she’s claiming mistake of fact but the underlying argument is the same from the perspective of the victim. She entered his home, claimed she was in fear for her life, and killed him. I can’t stomach it and I never will.