Jump to content

Dallas officer kills man after mistaking apartment for her own, police say

'stache

By 'stache
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Constant
Constant

First off I’d like to say that I’m heartbroken for the Jean family. As a parent myself, I hope Mr. Jean’s father and mother find some peace in the outcome. They appear to be a wonderful family that ra

SubliminalHorn
SubliminalHorn

Just relax the throat and stay in rhythm 

4th&Five
4th&Five

Posted Images

Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3,160

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

Her whole story stinks and is full of shit. I am certain more is going to come out.

I was watching live but then had to take a conference call right before they recessed. The  defense wanted an ongoing objection to any texts between Amber and Officer Rivera. What was the judge's ruling on this? 

She allowed the text messages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Her boyfriend just confirmed they had a sexual relationship up until that day. Her defense attorney in his opening statement claimed they were just flirting that day and hadn't been intimate for months.

Liar liar pants on fire....

That is bad.  You don't want to sell something in your opening that you can't deliver.  Much less have it flat contradicted on the first day of trial.

Edit:  I think they just clarified/rehabilitated that.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
clapclapclap

clapclapclap 9,000

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TXSooner518 said:

Defense argument contradicts itself. It can’t simultaneously be impossible to tell what floor you’re on and also reasonable to not take .8 seconds to look at the elevator or apt numbers before walking past 16 doors just to find out you’re on the wrong floor. Wouldn’t that suck to walk all that way when you’re OMG SO EXHAUSTED YOU GUYS FORTY HOURS IN ONLY FOUR DAYS ALSO SHE WOKE UP EARLY TO WALK HER DOG.

Actually it is very believable, especially for some personality types (though those personality types should have been screened out for law enforcement jobs that require instantaneous 'Sensing' skills that 'Intuitives' are weakest at.  I'd be curious if the defense might go down that road.)  But it can happen to many with the right combo of circumstances.

Last week I tried to enter the wrong hotel room.  Hit the 16th floor button, was the only one on the elevator, so when the doors opened I exited while reading my phone.  Some goof must have accidentally pressed the up button on floor 14.  I instinctively went to where my room would be, even after just a few days able to subconsciously recognizing my room was 3 doors from the end window.  Luckily the key didn't work, and then a dog started barking inside the room (perhaps the only time I've been happy that hotel allows pets....)

But I'd like to think that if I did enter the wrong hotel room/apartment, even if dark, and a guy started heading towards me, that the first instinct would be to immediately back up into the relatively safer hallway, where people could more likely hear shouting, easier escape, etc.  Especially if a smaller female.  That even if I drew a gun my first reaction would be to yell commands like halt, rather than immediately firing.  And again, retreating would have bought her more time to assess the situation.  She seemed trigger happy.

I think this would be a slam dunk conviction if this were a manslaughter case.  If there is a mistrial, I bet upping it to murder will be what made the difference.

Edited by clapclapclap
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted
Just now, clapclapclap said:

Actually it is very believable, especially for some personality types (though those personality types should have been screened out for law enforcement jobs that require instantaneous 'Sensing' skills that Intuitives are weakest at.)  Last week I tried to enter the wrong hotel room.  Hit the 16th floor button, was the only one on the elevator, so when the doors opened I exited while reading my phone.  Some goof must have accidentally pressed the up button on floor 14.  I instinctively went to where my room would be, even after just a few days able to subconsciously recognizing my room was 3 doors from the end window.  Luckily the key didn't work, and then a dog started barking inside the room (perhaps the only time I've been happy that hotel allows pets....)

But I'd like to think that if I did enter the wrong hotel room/apartment, even if dark, and a guy started heading towards me, that the first instinct would be to immediately back up into the relatively safer hallway, where people could more likely hear shouting, easier escape, etc.  Especially if a smaller female.  That even if I drew a gun my first reaction would be to yell commands like halt, rather than immediately firing.  And again, retreating would have bought her more time to assess the situation.  She seemed trigger happy.

I think this would be a slam dunk conviction if this were a manslaughter case.  If there is a mistrial, I bet upping it to murder will be what made the difference.

I tend to agree with your analysis of the "confusion" factors.  Only if Guyger had been previously confused would it potentially trigger heightened alertness.  Or if the complex had somehow said "be careful what floor you're on and what unit you're entering."

The problem with manslaughter is that it just flat doesn't fit the crime.  It's like indicting for armed robbery when you mean unarmed theft.  Manslaughter requires recklessness in the act of shooting, rather than recklessness in ascertaining the circumstances that lead to the act of shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33,096

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

Actually it is very believable, especially for some personality types (though those personality types should have been screened out for law enforcement jobs that require instantaneous 'Sensing' skills that Intuitives are weakest at.)  Last week I tried to enter the wrong hotel room.  Hit the 16th floor button, was the only one on the elevator, so when the doors opened I exited while reading my phone.  Some goof must have accidentally pressed the up button on floor 14.  I instinctively went to where my room would be, even after just a few days able to subconsciously recognizing my room was 3 doors from the end window.  Luckily the key didn't work, and then a dog started barking inside the room (perhaps the only time I've been happy that hotel allows pets....)

But I'd like to think that if I did enter the wrong hotel room/apartment, even if dark, and a guy started heading towards me, that the first instinct would be to immediately back up into the relatively safer hallway, where people could more likely hear shouting, easier escape, etc.  Especially if a smaller female.  That even if I drew a gun my first reaction would be to yell commands like halt, rather than immediately firing.  And again, retreating would have bought her more time to assess the situation.  She seemed trigger happy.

I think this would be a slam dunk conviction if this were a manslaughter case.  If there is a mistrial, I bet upping it to murder will be what made the difference.

Your example is irrelevant. You're painting a picture of a situation where it's certainly reasonable for you to think that's your room when it's not. The clearly marked floor numbers in the elevators are key to that scenario. 

But the issue is that the defense already told us that you can never be sure if you're on the right floor in this complex. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

The clearly marked floor numbers in the elevators are key to that scenario. 

 

They were clearly marked, he punched one, presumably it illuminated, and he still got off on the wrong floor and then went to the wrong room, when presumably all of them were marked, and probably better than than horrid sign depicted above.  Just because there's a sign doesn't mean anyone's paying attention.

Also, I don't think they said everyone's confused all the time.  Just that some residents had made the same mistake.  That's a simple point that makes sense.  Trying to turn it into all residents should be on red alert may make some kind of sense, but it's hard to convey to a jury.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, housious said:

Let's say I'm a Sales executive at a high growth software company that's trying to go public and someone decides that they want me on this jury. It's going to cause me to miss an end of quarter, which could be devastating to my company's growth goals. 

How bad are the consequences if I tell them thanks, but no thanks, I have other shit to attend to? 

Unless you fail to show up for jury duty, you have no option to say "thanks but no thanks."

Although work issues are not a legally sufficient grounds for avoiding jury duty, most counties will let you reschedule your appearance as a potential juror, and if they don't, and you get to a courtroom, most judges will let you off when it's a big issue affecting your livelihood.  No one is interested in having a distracted juror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:


Can you briefly rehash it for me? I think she’s gonna walk on murder.
 

See bolded above.  Murder in Texas is broad, it's intentionally killing someone, or intentionally engaging in deadly conduct that kills someone.  It doesn't require "malice aforethought" or "premeditation" or any of that.  It doesn't even require that you intend to kill, just that you intend to do serious bodily harm.

The lesser offenses, manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, involve a lesser state of mind when engaging in the act that kills someone.

Here, the act was knowing, willful, and intentional, it is only the circumstances that tend to excuse or lessen it.  Texas takes into account the circumstances by sentence, not by crime.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MAROON

MAROON 445

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Helobious said:

What an unbelievably shitty apartment number display design. What the fuck. FWIW I think this bitch murdered the guy and should rot in prison for many years at least. But damn.

I still don't see an apartment # in that picture....I feel like Mr. Pitt

 

mr-pitt-the-pledge-drive-seinfeld-3d-art

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted

I missed Rivera's (sex cop) original testimony on the nature and duration of their relationship.  

On what appeared to be re-direct examination, I believe he said their relationship ended on the day of the murder, but the sexual aspect had ended prior.  But I'm not 100% sure on that.

It would be fascinating for a lawyer to advertise something in opening that was almost immediately flat contradicted.  These lawyers should be above that, or maybe they took her word for it, who knows. 

It would be interesting to know what the actual testimony was, if anyone knows.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105,335

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I missed Rivera's (sex cop) original testimony on the nature and duration of their relationship.  

On what appeared to be re-direct examination, I believe he said their relationship ended on the day of the murder, but the sexual aspect had ended prior.  But I'm not 100% sure on that.

It would be fascinating for a lawyer to advertise something in opening that was almost immediately flat contradicted.  These lawyers should be above that, or maybe they took her word for it, who knows. 

It would be interesting to know what the actual testimony was, if anyone knows.

 

I saw Sex Cop at Emo's back in 93.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted

Also, Toby Shook is the biggest name on the defense team, and the chonker bald guy is an appellate specialist (meaning you might expect him to argue motions, but not examine witnesses).  Rogers is fairly well known, but not Shook's caliber, at least by reputation.

It appears, though, that Shook hasn't done any of the witnesses?  Yes? No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

He said he thought they stopped having sex by end of 2017. Pros showed him a text that he then agreed indicated they were still having sex in Feb 2018. Did not say they were still having sex in Sept. A contradiction/misstatement but not a glowing smoking gun.

Thank you.  Yes, fairly minor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigup2dahorns

bigup2dahorns 3,343

Posted
Posted
He said he thought they stopped having sex by end of 2017. Pros showed him a text that he then agreed indicated they were still having sex in Feb 2018. Did not say they were still having sex in Sept. A contradiction/misstatement but not a glowing smoking gun.


I missed some earlier testimony but I thought the defense originally made the point that the relationship had not been sexual for months. If that is correct, that that text message validated the original defense claim I believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSooner518

TXSooner518 2,438

Posted
Posted

The text said it was still happening in Feb but there was no evidence as to when it stopped.

Also I think the conduct meets the elements of murder but also could meet the elements of manslaughter. The act of discharging the firearm there could be reckless. She may have taken an intentional act while recklessly believing she had a defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11,823

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Wow...so her boyfriend deleted the text messages too. Unfreakingbelievable...

 

its snapchat, not texts,  snapchat tends to delete all conversation unless you specifically pick the settings to keep the messaging, which your snapchat partner can see that its been saved, so its entirely possible that the app itself deleted most of the conversation, and not some half-assed attempt to destroy evidence. 

42 minutes ago, BBQ2Bayou said:

So that would have to be Amber telling her attorney they hadn't been fucking for months, right? 

yep, never ask a woman to tell the truth on when she last fucked the ugly slumpbuster (or FWB), shes gonna always say it was months ago when they were drunk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105,335

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Wait.. If they hadn't been banging for months who was she texting/snapchatting on her way home on the night of the incident?  Was that a different Sex Cop?

Same Sex Cop.  She was looking to re-start said banging.  That night.

Good cross-exam question: "y'all say you hadn't been banging for months, but that night, you were sure thirsty for the D, weren't you?"

I mean, you might want to polish that a little bit to make it courtroom-ready, but it's a good working draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21,865

Posted
  • Author
Posted
37 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

Some was Snapchat but some was texts. Cop deleted it all. He also said that their sexting was just flirting, not planning to fuck that night.

 

54 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Same Sex Cop.  She was looking to re-start said banging.  That night.

Good cross-exam question: "y'all say you hadn't been banging for months, but that night, you were sure thirsty for the D, weren't you?"

I mean, you might want to polish that a little bit to make it courtroom-ready, but it's a good working draft.

Is this the prosecutor?

 

2C1B025E-10E7-40AA-AB60-DB43856ABA61.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted (edited)

Schulte is an ex-cop, but the burden of proof thing is legit.

It seems that there ought to be a threshold burden of proof for the defendant to assert mistake of fact, and once met, it's the state's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.  But it doesn't seem to work that way.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,536

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Lou said:

What does it cost to hire a defense team like she has?

 

Probably 100k+ per lawyer.  Higher for Shook.  The police union is paying, though.  And there may be some discounting involved due to the notoriety and novelty of the case.  Reputations might be made here.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...