Cont: Man shot, killed by off-duty Dallas police officer who walked into wrong apartment p2

[Thermal]

How about this?

If Botham Jean had opened the door to Guyger's apartment by mistake and shot her dead, would this thread even exist? Or would he already be in prison?

No way. He would have broken his own neck and died during transport.

 

[Distracted1]

I ask again, if Guyger was a nurse, a bartender, a taxi driver or anyone other than a cop who entered someone else's home "by mistake" and shot them dead, would "oh, I was so tired!" be considered a shred of justification for one single second?

I accept that she made the mistake honestly, and that it was a reasonable mistake, wether overly fatigued or not. The element of possibly being sleep deprived is moot.

I really don't think what she does for a living makes a difference in how reasonable it was to make that error, however, you will find several posts throughout this thread wherein the posters express the opposite sentiment- that she should not be given the benefit of making an honest mistake because she is an LEO.

 

[quadraginta]

I accept that she made the mistake honestly, and that it was a reasonable mistake, wether overly fatigued or not. The element of possibly being sleep deprived is moot.

I really don't think what she does for a living makes a difference in how reasonable it was to make that error, however, you will find several posts throughout this thread wherein the posters express the opposite sentiment- that she should not be given the benefit of making an honest mistake because she is an LEO.

You don't think that the training she is supposed to have had as a cop is at all relevant to the way she handed the situation?

Is it as likely she would have been armed at the time if she hadn't been a cop?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I accept that she made the mistake honestly, and that it was a reasonable mistake, wether overly fatigued or not.

No you don't. You don't "accept" something and spend 80 pages writing a fan fiction of arguing against it.

The element of possibly being sleep deprived is moot.

THEN STOP BRINGING IT UP!

 

[Distracted1]

You don't think that the training she is supposed to have had as a cop is at all relevant to the way she handed the situation?

Is it as likely she would have been armed at the time if she hadn't been a cop?

My hope is that anyone would react better to that situation. My belief is that very few would.

I don't think civilians (or off duty LEOs) should be running around armed.

 

[Distracted1]

No you don't. You don't "accept" something and spend 80 pages writing a fan fiction of arguing against it.



THEN STOP BRINGING IT UP!

Well, since you have chosen to ALL CAPS your demand, perhaps you can point to one of the hundred or so posts in this discussion where I did "bring it up".

 

[Distracted1]

How about this?

If Botham Jean had opened the door to Guyger's apartment by mistake and shot her dead, would this thread even exist? Or would he already be in prison?

Interesting thought experiment. Had Mr. Jean made the same error, I would still find it a reasonable one.

 

[Hungry81]

Interesting thought experiment. Had Mr. Jean made the same error, I would still find it a reasonable one.

Just as you would if someone opened your door and shot you or your spouse or your children.

 

[The Norseman]

I accept that she made the mistake honestly, and that it was a reasonable mistake, wether overly fatigued or not. The element of possibly being sleep deprived is moot.

If it's moot, why have you been defending it for quite some time now?

I really don't think what she does for a living makes a difference in how reasonable it was to make that error, however, you will find several posts throughout this thread wherein the posters express the opposite sentiment- that she should not be given the benefit of making an honest mistake because she is an LEO.

Two points: First, regarding your last statement, do you seriously not see the massive double-standard applied to non-police versus police when these things occur? Just because a cop is off the official time clock (though still in full uniform, gun and all) suddenly they're to be treated precisely the same as a regular citizen?

Second, you keep saying it was a reasonable mistake. To what? To have gone into an apartment that wasn't hers? And the fact of her drawing her pistol and firing a few shots is therefore a-okay?

This is the whole point of contention. Just as I posted earlier, many states are wanting to pass laws which will punish people with a felony for driving drowsy and, through that negligence, killing someone else. If people think that causing the death of another is reasonable because of being fatigued, then why the desire to pass more strict laws when it does happen with driving?

Interesting thought experiment. Had Mr. Jean made the same error, I would still find it a reasonable one.

I guess I'm confused. Have you stated she should go to jail or are you saying that because the one error of her entering the wrong apartment is reasonable, therefore she should not go to jail?

 

[Distracted1]

If it's moot, why have you been defending it for quite some time now?



Two points: First, regarding your last statement, do you seriously not see the massive double-standard applied to non-police versus police when these things occur? Just because a cop is off the official time clock (though still in full uniform, gun and all) suddenly they're to be treated precisely the same as a regular citizen?

Second, you keep saying it was a reasonable mistake. To what? To have gone into an apartment that wasn't hers? And the fact of her drawing her pistol and firing a few shots is therefore a-okay?

This is the whole point of contention. Just as I posted earlier, many states are wanting to pass laws which will punish people with a felony for driving drowsy and, through that negligence, killing someone else. If people think that causing the death of another is reasonable because of being fatigued, then why the desire to pass more strict laws when it does happen with driving?



I guess I'm confused. Have you stated she should go to jail or are you saying that because the one error of her entering the wrong apartment is reasonable, therefore she should not go to jail?

As to your first statement, I believe you are conflicting me with some other poster. My opinion on wether she was tired or not has been consistent throughout. I find it an error (going to the wrong door) that pretty much anyone could make tired or not.

WRT your next statement regarding wether an LEO may be allowed to be a "regular person" when not on duty. Largely they should, as an example, I would never accept an LEO doing their job while drunk- but certainly have no issue if they wish to be when not working.

WRT your "which mistake" query. Specifically in this instance, the mistake of believing she was entering her own apartment. From there there is a previously discussed "Mistake of fact" principle in Texas law which modifies the concept of criminal intent necessary for conviction of certain crimes.

WRT comparisons to "while driving". Driving already has certain standards of attention that are legally codified (and perhaps a "no doing it while sleepy" one would be a good addition) but there is no minimum legal amount of attention that is legally codified for walking to ones' front door- so the comparison is unconvincing.

The act of shooting Mr.Jean if she were not mistaken of where she was seems to be a legal action in Texas. There are allowances for "mistake of fact" intended to differentiate between making a tragic mistake, and committing a crime.

Based only on information available thus far it seems to me that a combination of a human mistake, a faulty door latch, and a couple of bad laws, not a criminal act, are why Mr.Jean is dead.
Ms.Guyer should be sued in civil court- she made an error that cost a man his life.

 

[Distracted1]

Just as you would if someone opened your door and shot you or your spouse or your children.

Stipulate first the near identical nature of the locations in question, the unlatched door lock, amount of light and near identical layout of the homes, the shooter immediately attempting to render first aid- and calling 911, living in a "castle doctrine" state. And numerous other details making your hypothetical attempted "gotcha" nearly identical to the situation in question, and

Yes. I could accept such an accident as an accident.

 

[Darat]

Just as you would if someone opened your door and shot you or your spouse or your children.

Where I think distracted keeps making the mistake is that the "mistake of fact" only gets her to the wrong door. It does not cover her deliberate killing of Jean, there was no mistake of fact involved in her decision to kill him. The type of "mistake of fact" to excuse the killing would have to be something like she had a reasonable reason to think her gun was loaded with blanks.

 

[jimbob]

Goddamn, but the National Review has gotten retarded over the past few years.

Do you care to enlighten us as to were you disagree with that?

That seems a perfectly reasonable application of conservative principles concerning the tmrights of the individual relative to agents of the state acting beyond their powers .

 

[TurkeysGhost]

This case isn't as novel as people are making out. Mistake of fact killings occur. Shooting a housemate that is mistaken for a home invader occur. Generally speaking, it is a crime, even if the shooter honestly believed they were in the lawful right to shoot. A parent that shoots their teenage kid who's up late at night is guilty of a crime, even if they think it's a home invader.

It is pretty well understood that using a gun to defend yourself comes with tremendous legal risk. A split second decision will be reexamined in excruciating detail after the fact. For ordinary citizens, this legal risk is well understood and usually appreciated. Someone using deadly force must be sure or face the consequences. The US recognizes the right to use deadly force in self defense, but we do not make generous allowances for errors in judgement. Law enforcement has long enjoyed an absurdly wide latitude when it comes to improperly using force, but the culture is slowly turning (hopefully).

Guyger's killing of Botham is criminal negligence at the very least. I don't care how tired she was, or how much the apartments looked alike. Someone carrying a gun is assuming tremendous liability and must use proper diligence. She undoubtedly failed to do so. Using the reasonable person standard, she was criminally negligent in the killing of Jean.

As others pointed out, if Guyger were just some ordinary lady with a lawfully carried gun that shot a man dead in his own apartment, there would be nothing noteworthy about this case. She'd be facing certain conviction. It wouldn't have taken three days for a charge to come down, she would have been arrested on the spot. No one would be talking about "lawful orders" (absurd on its face).

Being a cop has complicated things as there is a strong culture of police worship and boot licking, and there's no guarantee that such temperaments won't influence the jury.

 

[Drewbot]

The fatigue will be used to justify the initial mistake of entering the wrong apartment.

Once they can establish that a mistake happened due to sleep deprivation, then the whole part about the shooting becomes: She shot who she thought was an intruder in her apartment.

I've posted several articles and studies showing that police departments know about the problems with sleep deprivation. Mistakes such as: Car Accidents, Being more aggressive when not necessary, sleeping while on duty, are all found to be more prevalent after 12 hours awake. In your expert opinion, would you place: entering the wrong apartment, as an equivalent action to the other mistakes that were found to happen at higher frequency after 12 hours of working?

This article summarizes what will be the basis of the establishment of mistake of fact:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health...-sleep-deprived-raising-risks-for-them-and-us

Sleep-deprived officers had 51 percent greater odds of falling asleep while driving on duty

One in four of the total study group reported falling asleep at the wheel once or twice a month. They also reported a higher rate of falling asleep while stopped in traffic, talking on the phone or in meetings.

Uber Drivers get their app shut down after 12 hours of driving, for 6 hours.

The police department threw her under the bus. I truly hope the department gets the bulk of the punishment.

 

[Darat]

The fatigue will be used to justify the initial mistake of entering the wrong apartment.

Once they can establish that a mistake happened due to sleep deprivation, then the whole part about the shooting becomes: She shot who she thought was an intruder in her apartment.

I've posted several articles and studies showing that police departments know about the problems with sleep deprivation. Mistakes such as: Car Accidents, Being more aggressive when not necessary, sleeping while on duty, are all found to be more prevalent after 12 hours awake. In your expert opinion, would you place: entering the wrong apartment, as an equivalent action to the other mistakes that were found to happen at higher frequency after 12 hours of working?

This article summarizes what will be the basis of the establishment of mistake of fact:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health...-sleep-deprived-raising-risks-for-them-and-us



Uber Drivers get their app shut down after 12 hours of driving, for 6 hours.

The police department threw her under the bus. I truly hope the department gets the bulk of the punishment.

Again she did not accidentally shoot Jean. Her mistake of fact (if we accept it) only covers her entering the wrong apartment by mistake.

There is zero evidence she shot Jean by accident.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

In regards to sleep deprivation:

Guyger has lawful duty to not kill her neighbors, she does not have a lawful duty to obey her employer or remain at a job that makes her unsafe to be around.

Bad employment policies do not ameliorate her duty to obey the law. If her job his straining her past the point of proper functioning, it is her duty to mitigate that. That may mean she quits her job, or refuses to work these shifts and gets fired.

We wouldn't accept a shooting because someone had to work a double shifts at Denny's all week. We wouldn't accept someone falling asleep at the wheel just because their job made them exhausted. Florida is at-will employment, she can say no whenever she decides to. That may be heartless, because we all have to make a living, but there's no "my boss made me do it" exemption in the law.

 

[jimbob]

This case isn't as novel as people are making out. Mistake of fact killings occur. Shooting a housemate that is mistaken for a home invader occur. Generally speaking, it is a crime, even if the shooter honestly believed they were in the lawful right to shoot. A parent that shoots their teenage kid who's up late at night is guilty of a crime, even if they think it's a home invader.

It is pretty well understood that using a gun to defend yourself comes with tremendous legal risk. A split second decision will be reexamined in excruciating detail after the fact. For ordinary citizens, this legal risk is well understood and usually appreciated. Someone using deadly force must be sure or face the consequences. The US recognizes the right to use deadly force in self defense, but we do not make generous allowances for errors in judgement. Law enforcement has long enjoyed an absurdly wide latitude when it comes to improperly using force, but the culture is slowly turning (hopefully).

Guyger's killing of Botham is criminal negligence at the very least. I don't care how tired she was, or how much the apartments looked alike. Someone carrying a gun is assuming tremendous liability and must use proper diligence. She undoubtedly failed to do so. Using the reasonable person standard, she was criminally negligent in the killing of Jean.

As others pointed out, if Guyger were just some ordinary lady with a lawfully carried gun that shot a man dead in his own apartment, there would be nothing noteworthy about this case. She'd be facing certain conviction. It wouldn't have taken three days for a charge to come down, she would have been arrested on the spot. No one would be talking about "lawful orders" (absurd on its face).

Being a cop has complicated things as there is a strong culture of police worship and boot licking, and there's no guarantee that such temperaments won't influence the jury.

And Texas has negligence homicide as a specific offence. At the least, she's guilty of that.

 

[Drewbot]

Again she did not accidentally shoot Jean. Her mistake of fact (if we accept it) only covers her entering the wrong apartment by mistake.

There is zero evidence she shot Jean by accident.

The intent to shoot was to stop an intruder in her apartment, this however was only able to happen because of the mistake of fact, of entering the wrong apartment.

An example: A driver of an armored vehicle is told that anything on Hill 225 is a hostile enemy. But due to lack of sleep, the armored vehicle crew has placed their sights on a nearby hill 221, a vehicle appears, the first vehicle fires a round striking what they thought was an enemy vehicle. They intended to blow up the vehicle, but made a mistake of fact on the target area.

This would still be an accident, despite the intent of shooting the vehicle.

 

[Distracted1]

This case isn't as novel as people are making out. Mistake of fact killings occur. Shooting a housemate that is mistaken for a home invader occur. Generally speaking, it is a crime, even if the shooter honestly believed they were in the lawful right to shoot. A parent that shoots their teenage kid who's up late at night is guilty of a crime, even if they think it's a home invader.

It is pretty well understood that using a gun to defend yourself comes with tremendous legal risk. A split second decision will be reexamined in excruciating detail after the fact. For ordinary citizens, this legal risk is well understood and usually appreciated. Someone using deadly force must be sure or face the consequences. The US recognizes the right to use deadly force in self defense, but we do not make generous allowances for errors in judgement. Law enforcement has long enjoyed an absurdly wide latitude when it comes to improperly using force, but the culture is slowly turning (hopefully).

Guyger's killing of Botham is criminal negligence at the very least. I don't care how tired she was, or how much the apartments looked alike. Someone carrying a gun is assuming tremendous liability and must use proper diligence. She undoubtedly failed to do so. Using the reasonable person standard, she was criminally negligent in the killing of Jean.

As others pointed out, if Guyger were just some ordinary lady with a lawfully carried gun that shot a man dead in his own apartment, there would be nothing noteworthy about this case. She'd be facing certain conviction. It wouldn't have taken three days for a charge to come down, she would have been arrested on the spot. No one would be talking about "lawful orders" (absurd on its face).

Being a cop has complicated things as there is a strong culture of police worship and boot licking, and there's no guarantee that such temperaments won't influence the jury.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/michigan-man-shoots-wife-mistaking-intruder-sheriff/story?id=64317617

"Investigators are saying the incident is being treated as an accident, and no charges are being filed"

So, no.