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

I could certainly be wrong, but I believe the jury will be deliberating for a long time. Though I find her guilty of murder, I am not on the jury and have not looked at all of the evidence. It seems they have a great deal to deliberate. If she is acquitted of all charges, I will lose all respect for the justice system, which is already fractured.
 
Thermal said:
My issue comes with immediately resorting to lethal force.
Click to expand...
She wasn't wearing her ballistic vest. That could be a reason to retreat or a reason to use rapid lethal force. She is vulnerable to gunshots in ways that she is not as vulnerable when on-duty and wearing that vest.
 
Dave Rogers said:
If I were on the jury, I would consider the prosecution to have proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that the belief that the deceased was an intruder was not reasonable, by pointing out that he could have been carrying out maintenance work on behalf of the building manager.

Dave
Click to expand...

I believe I was the first to bring that up in part one of this thread, and I of course agree. No one should ever shoot in a multi family dwelling that they do not own. But that goes back to the wrong (although more sane) argument about shooting at all. That does not seem to enter into the argument. Because, Texas.

The instructions seem to say that if the jury believes that she reasonably walked to the wrong door and believed Jean was an intruder, she must be found not guilty. Not that the psycho shouldn't have been shooting at anyone, at any time, for any reason in those circumstances, which is my primary argument. Texas takes that as a given, evidently.
 
William Parcher said:
She wasn't wearing her ballistic vest. That could be a reason to retreat or a reason to use rapid lethal force. She is vulnerable to gunshots in ways that she is not as vulnerable when on-duty and wearing that vest.
Click to expand...

Only if she saw a gun, or had reason to believe she was in danger of being shot. She didn't. If the Lone Star State accepts 'well, ya never know, he coulda had a gun' as a defense, the whole State is screwed.
 
William Parcher said:
I read that his earbuds were found on the floor near his body. I didn't see that part of the trial so I don't know details. Were the buds wired or wireless? I presume that they were wired but possibly not because a fall to the ground could dislodge wireless buds.

Was testimony given that the (wired) buds were pulled from his ears as he got up from the couch, or what?
Click to expand...

From everything I can tell they are the new iPhone earbuds, wireless. They were laying in some of the crime scene pictures at links scattered throughout this thread. I don't want to find them again, but I'm 98% positive they were the wireless earbuds.

William Parcher said:
There are two witnesses who testified about Jean saying things.

1) His immediate neighbor testified that he heard two different voices. He could not tell the gender of the speakers or what was said but he testified that it was two different people. Then came two gunshots. He also said that the tone of the voices indicated that both parties were surprised with each other.

2) Amber Guyger testified that Jean aggressively shouted, "Hey! Hey! Hey!"
Click to expand...

I don't trust Guyger as far as I can throw her. The prosecution showed she was consistently wrong about every point she tried to make. She was wrong about him standing, because he couldn't have been. She was wrong about the apartment. She was wrong about being burglarized. She was wrong about absolutely everything she had said. I have no reason to believe her now.

As far as the neighbor, it's possible that she did hear a few different voices. I'd think if Jean was "aggressively shouting" that she would be able to hear with a bit more clarity than just being able to tell there were two people talking.
 
William Parcher said:
She wasn't wearing her ballistic vest. That could be a reason to retreat or a reason to use rapid lethal force. She is vulnerable to gunshots in ways that she is not as vulnerable when on-duty and wearing that vest.
Click to expand...

The vest/no vest question has never been settled either way.

There have been instances where the wearing of a vest has been cited as a mitigating factor against a LEO in a use of lethal force incident - "He didn't need to shoot the suspect, he was wearing a bullet-proof vest."

Never successfully afaik.

I'm not aware of any cases where not wearing a vest has been cited as a factor in the use of force.
 
Thermal said:
Only if she saw a gun, or had reason to believe she was in danger of being shot. She didn't. If the Lone Star State accepts 'well, ya never know, he coulda had a gun' as a defense, the whole State is screwed.
Click to expand...



CBS News said:
She testified that she returned to what she thought was her own apartment to find the door ajar and heard "shuffling," and felt "pure fear" because she thought an intruder was inside. She said she opened the door and saw a "silhouette" approaching her. She said she yelled, "Show me your hands" twice and opened fire because the figure was "coming at me" and she couldn't see his hands.

"I was scared he was going to kill me," Guyger said.
Click to expand...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amber-...bor-testifies-in-own-defense-today-2019-09-27
 
YES!!! An appropriate verdict.

When will her sentence be announced? What and how long is she facing in prison?
 
Verdict in. Guilty of murder. Details as soon as I can find a stable article to link to.
 
plague311 said:
As far as the neighbor, it's possible that she did hear a few different voices. I'd think if Jean was "aggressively shouting" that she would be able to hear with a bit more clarity than just being able to tell there were two people talking.
Click to expand...
Look again at my post which you quoted. That neighbor is a he, not a she.
 
William Parcher said:
"Let me see your hands! Let me see your hands!"

That has got to be somewhere in the police training.
Click to expand...

Probably, but maybe not the best choice in a dark room where you can't see the subject's hands. And witnesses dispute that she ever said that. And if he was wearing earbuds he would only have seen a silhouette barging into his house without hearing anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom