Man shot, killed by off-duty Dallas police officer who walked into wrong apartment p3

[acbytesla]

A murder conviction in Texas.

OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Let's talk about application of the castle doctrine. To Botham.

He was sitting in his apartment keeping to himself. An intruder pushes open his door and starts screaming at him.

1) Her claim is that she yelled to "Show me your hands" and when he didn't, she shot him. Then again, he had no obligation to show her anything. He was peacefully sitting in his apartment, and an intruder burst in and started shouting commands. If the "castle doctrine" has any meaning, it has to mean that someone in their home does not have to follow the commands of an intruder.

2) I don't know about whether she claims he was coming at him or not (can't keep up with it), but even if he did, so what? He had the right to defend his home, yes? If we can't put her in jail for defending what she thought was her home, why is it ok for him to be killed for defending his actual home?

The Guyger apologists have already succeeded in proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that Jean had every right to kill Guyger.

Problem is Jean is the dead one in this scenario.

As you say Guyger's alternative universe seems to outweigh Jean's real one because simply because Guyger is alive to make up fan fiction about the scenario.

 

[quadraginta]

Here, the words "prison" and "jail" are used essentially synonymously. I had no idea there was a distinction in America.

Context, as usual, is important.

In colloquial usage "jail" is often used as a common term describing incarceration in general (along with a whole raft of other terms). This can and often does include "prison".

The opposite is not true. "Prison" is usually taken as a much more specific case than "jail".

In conversations where detail is important then the distinction between the two is generally recognized.

 

[quadraginta]

We're talking around each other as in:

- Did Amber Guyger, prior to the events in question (say prior to opening the door to Jean's apartment give or take a step in sequence of events or so) have any intention of killing Botham Jean. No, probably not. I don't think anyone here is seriously advancing the notion that this murder was premeditated or planned out on a long time frame.

- Did Amber Guyger have enough time during the sequence of events to go, on some level or in some context, "I now have to decide to or not to kill this human being in front of me." Many here would argue yes.

- Does this moment of decision making count as "premeditation." This is debatable, with points to be made either way.

I don't see what's debatable about it. She already told us she had made that decision.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

It's enough for what?

To distinguish a murder charge from a manslaughter charge in Texas.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.

Sure about what? Guyger herself said she intended to kill, on the stand under oath.

 

[quadraginta]

She stated under oath in court that she intended to kill him.

How long it took her to make that decision is irrelevant. When she made it is. She made that decision before she shot him. Hence intended.

That's not premeditation, that's training. If she walked into the room intending to kill that's premeditation.

You're just explaining why it was premeditated.

When isn't important. Whether it was when she walked through the door, or when she pulled out her gun.

That doesn't change the fact that it was.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I don't see what's debatable about it. She already told us she had made that decision.

Some people are obviously using the term "premeditated" to only describe decisions made well in advance of the actual actions.

To what degree that is true is another matter.

I've long been opposed to characterizing the events as Guyger shooting Jean "by accident." It was an intentional act.

"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.

 

[whoanellie]

OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.

Do you disbelieve Guyger when she says she pulled the trigger intending to kill Jean?

 

[acbytesla]

Do you disbelieve Guyger when she says she pulled the trigger intending to kill Jean?

I believe that when an officer pulls their gun and squeezes the trigger, their intent is to kill. Not wound, not slow someone down but to stop the suspect in their tracks. That winging someone is for the movies. This is part of their training

 

[Elagabalus]

Some people are obviously using the term "premeditated" to only describe decisions made well in advance of the actual actions.

To what degree that is true is another matter.

I've long been opposed to characterizing the events as Guyger shooting Jean "by accident." It was an intentional act.
"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.

I would argue that it is a question for the lawyers to haggle over since it is part of the job of being a lawyer.

 

[Elagabalus]

To distinguish a murder charge from a manslaughter charge in Texas.

Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.

 

[acbytesla]

Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.

Do the jurors have options in this case? I would be troubled with a stiff sentence and no sentence.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.

I agree with that, but I think properly understanding how intent and negligence factor in to this crime will affect sentencing no matter which crime she gets convicted of so I think it's still important to understand intent.

Prior to the trial I would have been happy with her getting some minimum prison time. But after learning some things for the trial about how she acted while Jean was dying I want more than the minimum time.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.

I would argue that it is a question for the lawyers to haggle over since it is part of the job of being a lawyer.

Well, the lawyers and judges seem to have thought about it and seem to agree that the time spent premeditating isn't the issue, it's the quality of the thought.

For example:
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Premeditation.aspx

The process of premeditation and deliberation does not require any extended period of time. The true test is not the duration of time as much as it is the extent of the reflection. Thoughts may follow each other with great rapidity and cold, calculated judgment may be arrived at quickly."

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

To repeat, in Texas criminally negligent homicide and manslaughter are about doing something that you knew or should have known causes a risk to others who are killed as a result, but without intending that result.

That last bit is not correct. Lack of intent is not an element of manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. It is commonly described that way because if there were intent then it would be murder. Intent is not exclusionary of those lesser charges.

But we have not heard from the judge on whether lesser included charges will be an option for the jury.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Imperfect self-defense^WP. Texas actually originated this doctrine. Which would reduce it to manslaughter, for a sentence of 2-20.

The only thing I have been able to find on imperfect self-defense originating in Texas is the issue where someone provokes somebody and uses self-defense against them when they attack. Provocation in regards to self-defense has since been codified into the Texas Penal Code.

I can't find anything about murder being considered manslaughter in Texas if there is an imperfect self-defense as a result of a determination that a person truly held a belief that force was necessary but that belief was not reasonable.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Premeditation is not an element of murder in Texas. Similarly, it has nothing to do with manslaughter.

It only exists to a partial degree in that at the punishment phase for a murder conviction, if a person proves that the murder occurred as a result of sudden passion rising out of provocation then it is a second degree felony instead of a first degree felony. But this type of lack of premeditation specially requires provocation.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

See above, she created a scenario in her head and acted as if it was real. It is really the only explanation that makes sense.

It totally makes sense but like all the options, it has a flaw. It doesn't explain her not noticing the 4th floor parking was open to air (in some way) and not noticing the door rug which would have occurred before she had time to imagine a burglar in her apartment.

 

[whoanellie]

It's enough for what?

She's not charged with "premeditation." Let's try this once again.

https://www.versustexas.com/criminal/homicide/

She intended to kill him. She said so herself. Then she did. That's enough.

OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.

I believe that when an officer pulls their gun and squeezes the trigger, their intent is to kill. Not wound, not slow someone down but to stop the suspect in their tracks. That winging someone is for the movies. This is part of their training

ac, I'm not following you. If you acknowledge that she intended to kill then surely the standard I'll quote here:
Sec. 19.02. MURDER.

(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;

has been met. The question of whether Guyger was justified by acting in self-defense is a separate. What brought her to the door is also a separate question. She may have gotten to the door by accident, but once there her actions were intentional and deliberate. If it a lesser charge is available to them the jury may compromise on a lesser verdict but I believe that would be contrary to the law and the facts of the case. Guyger intended to kill Jean. She either legitimately did it in self-defense or not. I believe she did not legitimately act in self-defense.