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

Judge says that Manslaughter is an optional lesser charge. No mention of Criminal Negligent Homicide as being available..

Judge seemed to describe "Castle Law" but didn't use the term "castle law". Maybe that's because it's a common nickname for that law but isn't used in jury instruction.

Judge did speak quite a bit about "mistake of fact" and used that term many times.
 
Bob001 said:
I hope the prosecution will pound the fact that she was not acting as a police officer, and ask the jury whether it would be reasonable and lawful for a civilian to enter someone else's home and kill him, even if she was tired.
Click to expand...

She wasn't tired she was horny and not paying any attention to her surroundings.
 
plague311 said:
Just trying to catch up, are these closing arguments?
Click to expand...

Yes. Prosecution is making their closing arguments now, I assume we'll see the defense's soon and they jury will probably be sent to deliberations this afternoon at the latest.

We'll see a verdict sometimes between tomorrow and Friday I figure.
 
Murder and Manslaughter are the only available charges/convictions.

My opinion is that she should be convicted of Manslaughter which carries a sentencing range of 2 to 20 years.
 
acbytesla said:
I don't understand your point. If she genuinely thought she was protecting herself killing an intruder in her home, I don't believe you can say it was murder. OTOH, her actions were so reckless and indifferent that you can't say it isn't an act of extreme negligence.
Click to expand...

But she was wrong, and failed to meet the standards for self defense. She certainly intended to kill him when she shot him so manslaughter doesn't make sense as that is killing with out intent, and she certainly had intent.

Really the reasonable verdicts are murder or self defense. That could come into the sentencing area not in the crime.
 
Any conviction is better then nothing, but anything short of actual murder is an insult to the victim.
 
acbytesla said:
That's what I was thinking.
Click to expand...

Except she really did intend to kill him when she fired. It isn't like she was shooting at the TV and missed.

Well you thought you were defending your self at the time so we are going to ignore the actual facts of the case and law?
 
Defense I'm not sure your "Yeah what's the big deal that she left him bleeding out on the carpet after shooting him? What does that have to do with this case?" strategy is a good idea there.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Defense I'm not sure your "Yeah what's the big deal that she left him bleeding out on the carpet after shooting him? What does that have to do with this case?" strategy is a good idea there.
Click to expand...

She has a Punisher patch on her vest as well. Too bad people aren't more familiar with comic book characters. It's pretty subtle but the fact cops use The Punisher has always cracked me up, considering he should not be a role model for them ever.
 
plague311 said:
She has a Punisher patch on her vest as well. Too bad people aren't more familiar with comic book characters. It's pretty subtle but the fact cops use The Punisher has always cracked me up, considering he should not be a role model for them ever.
Click to expand...

I love how in the comics Marvel has actually had the actual Punisher come down hard on the "No you shouldn't be using my symbol" side.
 
plague311 said:
She has a Punisher patch on her vest as well. Too bad people aren't more familiar with comic book characters. It's pretty subtle but the fact cops use The Punisher has always cracked me up, considering he should not be a role model for them ever.
Click to expand...

I mean, that's pretty mild for a cop. At least she didn't have any weird statements inscribed on her service weapon like some other killer cops:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Daniel_Shaver#Aftermath
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
She has a Punisher patch on her vest as well. Too bad people aren't more familiar with comic book characters. It's pretty subtle but the fact cops use The Punisher has always cracked me up, considering he should not be a role model for them ever.
Click to expand...

May I introduce you to the State of Texas, whence the jury is pooled?

From outside, her defense was indefensible. But she is inside Texas. Shoot the hookers running away and all. Still fearing her taking a walk. Which would suck beyond words
 
You guys did see the recovered social media posts she deleted I posted earlier?
 
Thermal said:
May I introduce you to the State of Texas, whence the jury is pooled?

From outside, her defense was indefensible. But she is inside Texas. Shoot the hookers running away and all. Still fearing her taking a walk. Which would suck beyond words
Click to expand...

I wouldnt be so sure. Texas really likes property rights, and Botham is aggrieved party here.

They have ruled in favor of citizens who shot cops executing no-knock warrants, because they respect both self-defense and property rights.

It's a toss up in Texas, could be a cop bootlicker jury, or a property rights jury.
 
A defense attorney is telling the jury that in order to convict "Amber," the jury must decide that it was unreasonable for "Amber" to believe that an intruder was in her apartment, and that it was unreasonable for her to believe that she was in mortal danger. I think it would be easy to decide that both were unreasonable. He's going on to claim that police training and standards shouldn't be applied here because she was not responding to a "dispatched call." I'm not sure her lawyer is helping her.
 
Does the prosecutor get to reply to the defense? I know they started with their closing statement, but do they get to rebut this nonsense?

Bob001 said:
A defense attorney is telling the jury that in order to convict "Amber," the jury must decide that it was unreasonable for "Amber" to believe that an intruder was in her apartment, and that it was unreasonable for her to believe that she was in mortal danger. I think it would be easy to decide that both were unreasonable. He's going on to claim that police training and standards shouldn't be applied here because she was not responding to a "dispatched call." I'm not sure her lawyer is helping her.
Click to expand...

They put her on the stand, and from what I can understand throughout this thread, that didn't help much either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom