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

ponderingturtle said:
And when they realize someone is in their apartment before they enter it, the real question is of course WWLJD?(What Would Leeroy Jenkins Do) That is the basis for all reasonable police procedures after all.
Click to expand...

WWLJD should be an automatic substitute for all those stupid Punisher stickers and patches that cops love so much.
 
Thermal said:
Or it could have raised the minor nuisance thought that something was wrong with her key/lock.

We keep treating this as a person with impeccable reasonableness and objectivity using prudent judgement and being 'on the ball'. She was just bumbling down the hallway texting about how horny she was. You miss the significance of a lot of peripheral details when composing sexy textys.

And the jury didn't care. So yee hah, I propose a toast to Amber Guyger: may she rot in prison.
Click to expand...

And she needed to get laid, she wasn't going to waste time calling for backup when she could simply deal with it herself.
 
acbytesla said:
This reminds me of an incident that happened to me in Arizona where an argument broke out in a parking lot because someone "stole" a parking spot and three people (not me) pulled out guns.
Click to expand...

And clearly because the other maniacs pulled guns each would be right in defending themselves from those crazy criminals brandishing their weapons. No harm no foul.
 
ponderingturtle said:
And she needed to get laid, she wasn't going to waste time calling for backup when she could simply deal with it herself.
Click to expand...
Indeed. This despite the fact that if she was confronting a criminal she would be required to call it in no matter the result of the confrontation. The only way she would be able to skip this step is if she believed there was a possibility nothing criminal was occurring, in which case there's no excuse to unholster her gun.
 
Thermal said:
Not really personalizing. Using her as the embodiment of the abstraction of being allowed to murder with impunity under this weak-ass Mistake theory. Just glad that the spray-the-hooker's-car-with-rifle-fire State did not allow it.
Click to expand...

It didn't feel that way. It seemed as if it was the embodiment bloodlust and schadenfreude. I see too often in the trial forums this "get the suspect, they deserve it attitude". As if it is a football game or it's intensely personal.
 
William Parcher said:
There would be people who think that a Manslaughter conviction automatically gives lesser punishment than a Murder conviction. This could be true in a way with probation and parole.

People who wish to see tough punishment... what would they prefer?...

Murder for 5.
Manslaughter for 20.
Click to expand...

It's a false dichotomy. It can be murder for 20 very easily, that's my point.

Also, probation is instead of going to prison. Parole is to finish out a prison term.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Really theprestige, more or less boring than "what if they didn't believe the prosecution's case but said they did anyway?"
Click to expand...
Your post about police training.

Also you misrepsented my "argument" about jury nullification.

Which is: "What if they didn't think the prosecution carried its burden of proof, but gave them a pass because they wanted convict anyway; or what if they thought there was no crime in the law, but believed there should be, and so convicted anyway?"

The way I see it, the jury finding a crime where none exists in law is just the other side of the same nullification coin as not finding a crime where one does exist in law.

And this is, to me, much more interesting than the boring claim that police should get proper training.

And that itself is a misrepresentation of the actual complaint, which is that some police aren't receiving the proper training. My question is, which police are those, specifically.

We should want all police to get proper training, is perhaps the least useful reply possible to that question. Were you going for uselessness on purpose, or did you honestly believe that's what was being asked?
 
theprestige said:
Your post about police training.



The way I see it, the jury finding a crime where none exists in law is just the other side of the same nullification coin as not finding a crime where one does exist in law.
Click to expand...

Interesting hypothetical perhaps, but what evidence is there that is what happened with this jury? Why is this more likely than the jury not finding the "mistake of fact" defense persuasive and rendering a guilty verdict that is 100% consistent with the law as written?
 
ponderingturtle said:
And clearly because the other maniacs pulled guns each would be right in defending themselves from those crazy criminals brandishing their weapons. No harm no foul.
Click to expand...

What blew me away was this was three people in 3 different cars. I decided at that moment I wanted to get outof AZ as fast as I could. It is the Wild West down there.
 
I won't be surprised if the sentencing deliberations takes longer then the verdict deliberations.
 
theprestige said:
....
The way I see it, the jury finding a crime where none exists in law is just the other side of the same nullification coin as not finding a crime where one does exist in law.
....
Click to expand...

And you are reaching a conclusion that is contrary to the one reached by the police department, the district attorney's office, the judge and the jury. The judge, in particular, could have stopped the process at any moment and even before it started. You insist that they are all wrong, even corrupt, and you and "Amber" are right? You think maybe you're misinterpreting the law?
 
acbytesla said:
It didn't feel that way. It seemed as if it was the embodiment bloodlust and schadenfreude. I see too often in the trial forums this "get the suspect, they deserve it attitude". As if it is a football game or it's intensely personal.
Click to expand...

Conceded, I personified too much. My argument has been against excusing people for murder under these pretexts. She became my personal poster bitch for self-declared Reapers.

So I propose a toast to the People of Texas, as represented by the Jury: where reason has prevailed over Yosemite Sam excuses for shootings.
 
The porn plot would be, she was tired, walking home from work in her police uniform, and she accidentally went into the wrong apartment, things escalate from there.
 
Bob001 said:
And you are reaching a conclusion
Click to expand...
I have reached no conclusion, except that the concept of nullification includes both guilty and not guilty verdicts.

that is contrary to the one reached by the police department, the district attorney's office, the judge and the jury.
Click to expand...
Show me where I've reached a conclusion contrary to these entities.

The judge, in particular, could have stopped the process at any moment and even before it started.
Click to expand...
This doesn't seem relevant to any question I've asked, nor any conclusion I've reached.

You insist that they are all wrong,
Click to expand...
Where have I insisted this?

even corrupt,
Click to expand...
Or this?

and you and "Amber" are right?
Click to expand...
Or this?

You think maybe you're misinterpreting the law?
Click to expand...
Yes.

I also think you've very badly misread and misinterpreted what I've been saying in this thread.
 
Thermal said:
Conceded, I personified too much. My argument has been against excusing people for murder under these pretexts. She became my personal poster bitch for self-declared Reapers.
Click to expand...

She seems like a poor representative for self-declared Reapers. This wasn't a vigilante cop reaping criminals who have escaped due process. Or even reaping "criminals" who have "escaped" due process. This was a jackass cop committing a colossal and tragic **** up. There are probably much more apt faces to put on your point of concern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom