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

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  Or her stash of drugs.  Or illegally seized cash.  Or child porn.

If the shooter was a black guy, his stuff would be searched for all of that.  Goose, gander.

Which we all know would now be long gone since there was no initial search or arrest of her.  That being said, protecting her own life would answer your original question, just as it would for any of us and our homes and families.

[hayden_horn 11374]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fuck you and fuck Huck and your act bullshit.

 

I have explained that just because you commit a crime outside your home, you don't automatically become subject to an invasive search in your home.  Authorities have to articulate something in the form of evidence that is in your home that they would expect to find.  They don't just get to go fishing because you shot someone somewhere else.

Is it possible, based on facts that we don't know, that the investigators have sought and obtained a warrant to search her home?  Sure.

But being a crime perpetrator doesn't automatically waive your fourth amendment rights.

My problem with a lot of the posters on this thread is that you are knee-jerking and not giving anything any thought other than how things ought to align with your predetermined outcome.  This is Exhibit A.

hey, i'm not going after your motivations or you personally. i'm just telling you how you come off. no big deal, keep doing you, dude.

[Brisketexan 105701]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Which we all know would now be long gone since there was no initial search or arrest of her.  That being said, protecting her own life would answer your original question, just as it would for any of us and our homes and families.

Which brings us back to the original problem -- her special treatment.  She was allowed to remove or destroy material evidence.  That courtesy was afforded to her because she is a cop.  The rest of us would not be afforded that courtesy.

One system of laws for us.  Another system of laws for them.

That's how you completely and finally destroy public trust.

[C-Man 27413]

I’d have wanted to see her apartment immediately after the shooting to make sure her story of going straight to the apartment from driving into the garage still was plausible. Would love to walk in there and see her TV on or something like that.

[TwiceHorn 31705]

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

hey, i'm not going after your motivations or you personally. i'm just telling you how you come off. no big deal, keep doing you, dude.

Ok fine.  Sorry for going off.  I am posting information here.  I'm trying to leave a particular viewpoint out of most of it.  I don't particularly like being accused of engaging in an "act" or trolling.

 

Like most in the thread, I have an anti-cop, anti-LEO mentality.  That's well-documented here and at the old place.  But, unlike most of our cop threads, this one is developing, not done, and there's enough weirdness here that maybe it isn't your standard rotten cop shooting and coverup.  And I am trying to look at everything critically.

Edited September 14, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Huckleberry 33676]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fuck you and fuck Huck and your act bullshit.

 

I have explained that just because you commit a crime outside your home, you don't automatically become subject to an invasive search in your home.  Authorities have to articulate something in the form of evidence that is in your home that they would expect to find.  They don't just get to go fishing because you shot someone somewhere else.

Is it possible, based on facts that we don't know, that the investigators have sought and obtained a warrant to search her home?  Sure.

But being a crime perpetrator doesn't automatically waive your fourth amendment rights.

My problem with a lot of the posters on this thread is that you are knee-jerking and not giving anything any thought other than how things ought to align with your predetermined outcome.  This is Exhibit A.

It's not even devils advocacy, it's presenting things that people may not have thought of in their headlong rush to judgment. 

I believe this is the first time I've been fucked and had nothing to do with the situation. Can I at least get a reach-around?

[VolenteHawk 495]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But being a crime perpetrator doesn't automatically waive your fourth amendment rights.

If being shot in your living room strips you of your fourth amendment rights, I think doing that shooting should lower the barrier to probable cause.  At a minimum.

Maybe we could even, I dunno, detain the shooter while we figure it out.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Which brings us back to the original problem -- her special treatment.  She was allowed to remove or destroy material evidence.  That courtesy was afforded to her because she is a cop.  The rest of us would not be afforded that courtesy.

One system of laws for us.  Another system of laws for them.

That's how you completely and finally destroy public trust.

Yeah we all get it, the cops fucked up AGAIN.  I don't think anyone here has been defending her or the cops, I certainly haven't.  Questions being asked are just that, questions about the case, circumstances and procedures.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Onboard 2.0

[relapse98 634]

16 minutes ago, C-Man said:

10 grams? That’s nothing more than a ticket in Dallas now, right?

 

Depends. Sometimes you get the instant death penalty.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I’d have wanted to see her apartment immediately after the shooting to make sure her story of going straight to the apartment from driving into the garage still was plausible. Would love to walk in there and see her TV on or something like that.

This is one of THE most relevant piece of evidence in the case.  And if there was gonna be a search of her apt. it would have needed to be then.

[TwiceHorn 31705]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I believe this is the first time I've been fucked and had nothing to do with the situation. Can I at least get a reach-around?

Sorry man.  Sure.  Although I withdraw from the fucking part.

[hayden_horn 11374]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Ok fine.  Sorry for going off.  I am posting information here.  I'm trying to leave a particular viewpoint out of most of it.  I don't particularly like being accused of engaging in an "act" or trolling.

my whole point is that you engage in similar assumptions that many in this thread do, just all in one direction - to the cop's defense. that's the way it seems. suggesting that it would not be a common act to search a killer's apartment, especially if it is in the same building as the person she killed seemed to be a bit offside to me. there's no way probable cause cannot be conceived for that after she killed another human being in the building on the premise that she mistakenly went to the wrong apartment. the facts are all wrong for her. if it was a layperson, they would've been arrested immediately, and their apartment searched for any evidence. you can't convince me otherwise.

[conVINCEd 21474]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fuck you and fuck Huck and your act bullshit.

 

I have explained that just because you commit a crime outside your home, you don't automatically become subject to an invasive search in your home.  Authorities have to articulate something in the form of evidence that is in your home that they would expect to find.  They don't just get to go fishing because you shot someone somewhere else.

Is it possible, based on facts that we don't know, that the investigators have sought and obtained a warrant to search her home?  Sure.

But being a crime perpetrator doesn't automatically waive your fourth amendment rights.

My problem with a lot of the posters on this thread is that you are knee-jerking and not giving anything any thought other than how things ought to align with your predetermined outcome.  This is Exhibit A.

I think one of the primary questions that needs to be answered here is was there any motive.  In my late 20's I was fucking an older lady who lived 2 doors down in my apt complex.  We both arrived home at the same time late one evening, we were both hammered, and one thing lead to another.  Went on like that for several months until she had to move.  I doubt anyone knew about it but the two of us.  If you searched either of our places, it is likely you would have found some sort of evidence of the other' presence.  If she turned up dead, and my DNA was in a condom in the trash, or the credit card receipt that fell out of my wallet was under the couch, that would be useful information.  There was a dead body and a known shooter, they had plenty of reason to look.

[gyroprotagonist 2595]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

This is one of THE most relevant piece of evidence in the case.  And if there was gonna be a search of her apt. it would have needed to be then.

maybe already discussed, but maybe there is a log file or something that keeps track of when those RFID door are opened by the keycard?

 

[TwiceHorn 31705]

2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

my whole point is that you engage in similar assumptions that many in this thread do, just all in one direction - to the cop's defense. that's the way it seems. suggesting that it would not be a common act to search a killer's apartment, especially if it is in the same building as the person she killed seemed to be a bit offside to me. there's no way probable cause cannot be conceived for that after she killed another human being in the building on the premise that she mistakenly went to the wrong apartment. the facts are all wrong for her. if it was a layperson, they would've been arrested immediately, and their apartment searched for any evidence. you can't convince me otherwise.

No, just countering the conventional wisdom when there is an explanation for it.  The explanation may not even hold up, but there is one.

 

And yeah, can't argue that it isn't off that she wasn't immediately detained. 

 

And now I have questions about crime scenes and why this wasn't handled at the time (the search).  And I don't have answers for that.  Seems SOP is to cordon off a place and get the crime scene investigators going, which would seem to obviate the need for a search warrant for things like cartidge casings and what's lying around in plain sight.  In other words, everything seized by the warrant.  Maybe because it was a private home? 

Edited September 14, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[irishtexan 11602]

30 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

As has been mentioned several times, the police didn't "let it leak that he had marijuana". The police found marijuana in the apartment during a normal search and included it in their warrant because, no matter the relevance to this case, marijuana is still illegal and that is normal procedure. The media then got a hold of the list of items taken and the media then reported it. That's a far cry the "cops are leaking about the marijuana".

An absurd amount of personal information about the victim is being included in official documents that "have to be released to the public" but absolutely nothing about the defendant has been released, including the 911 call, the blood test, the results of the warrant from searching her car and apartment (oh wait, they didn't do that!), etc.

[hayden_horn 11374]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

No, just countering the conventional wisdom when there is an explanation for it.  The explanation may not even hold up, but there is one.

 

And yeah, can't argue that it isn't off that she wasn't immediately detained. 

 

And now I have questions about crime scenes and why this wasn't handled at the time (the search).  And I don't have answers for that.  Seems SOP is to cordon off a place and get the crime scene investigators going, which would seem to obviate the need for a search warrant for things like cartidge casings and what's lying around in plain sight.  In other words, everything seized by the warrant.  Maybe because it was a private home? 

i'm saying that the whole thing is fucked, despite your "explanation" explanation. 

yes, they should have cataloged the crime scene immediately. you would think that would be normal. i'm no cop, but i know some. i think that it was an officer doing the shooting completely fucked up the typical procedure with paralysis. is it an officer involved shooting? she was off-duty, but still in her uniform. does she still represent DPD? etc etc. CYA mode kicked in over proper procedure, it seems. whereas if it were you or me, we would have been arraigned the next day and come home to our home tossed looking for evidence. and how was the apartment not searched after the body was carted off? they waited days to pick up and catalog the shell casings? is that normal?

that's the point i was making. all your points seem to try and explain why the cops fucked up. who cares? they clearly fucked up. it's okay to say it out loud.

@Huckleberry sorry to involve you in this. my bad.

[hayden_horn 11374]

2 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

An absurd amount of personal information about the victim is being included in official documents that "have to be released to the public" but absolutely nothing about the defendant has been released, including the 911 call, the blood test, the results of the warrant from searching her car and apartment (oh wait, they didn't do that!), etc.

and exactly this. if the shooter was not a cop, how much more would we know about her? what if the victim was a cop in a mistaken apartment shooting? would the cops be publishing public documents in the other direction? we've all seen this show before. we would already know the results of the toxicology, we would've heard the 911 tape, and we'd know all about the unprescribed xanax/ambien in the shooter's apartment.

[Huckleberry 33676]

No worries, but the next time you two fuck me I'm going to have to insist on drinks first.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

No worries, but the next time you two fuck me I'm going to have to insist on drinks first.

and pics...... wait.....

Edited September 14, 2018 by Onboard 2.0

[TwiceHorn 31705]

21 minutes ago, VolenteHawk said:

If being shot in your living room strips you of your fourth amendment rights, I think doing that shooting should lower the barrier to probable cause.  At a minimum.

Maybe we could even, I dunno, detain the shooter while we figure it out.

 

It doesn't.  A search warrant was obtained for the premises.  Although I question why such a warrant was needed as it seems that should have been done at the time.

[TwiceHorn 31705]

11 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

An absurd amount of personal information about the victim is being included in official documents that "have to be released to the public" but absolutely nothing about the defendant has been released, including the 911 call, the blood test, the results of the warrant from searching her car and apartment (oh wait, they didn't do that!), etc.

As far as I know, the personal information you refer to is the information from the warrant.

By way of explanation, and not advocacy, I think it is fairly standard to seal an application for a search warrant and the warrant itself, to prevent someone from destroying evidence or interfering with the search.  Once the search has been executed and a "return" filed, the entire warrant paperwork is unsealed unless there is a need to hide even the executed search from the public eye (as in not to tip off someone under investigation).

It appears that the Jean apartment warrant, among several search warrants still under seal, was executed and returned first, thus resulting in it's unsealing.  The press then reported it.

Still part of a sly campaign to malign the victim?  Possibly.  Is there another plausible explanation? Yes.

 

[C-Man 27413]

i'm saying that the whole thing is fucked, despite your "explanation" explanation. 
yes, they should have cataloged the crime scene immediately. you would think that would be normal. i'm no cop, but i know some. i think that it was an officer doing the shooting completely fucked up the typical procedure with paralysis. is it an officer involved shooting? she was off-duty, but still in her uniform. does she still represent DPD? etc etc. CYA mode kicked in over proper procedure, it seems. whereas if it were you or me, we would have been arraigned the next day and come home to our home tossed looking for evidence. and how was the apartment not searched after the body was carted off? they waited days to pick up and catalog the shell casings? is that normal?
that's the point i was making. all your points seem to try and explain why the cops fucked up. who cares? they clearly fucked up. it's okay to say it out loud.
[mention=1821]Huckleberry[/mention] sorry to involve you in this. my bad.

I highly doubt days elapsed before investigation began. For all we know, the initial investigation occurred that first night after Jean was taken away by paramedics. I’m sure it was noted where the shell casings were, etc. even if nothing was removed until the Rangers got involved. What DPD chooses to do with that info is where the skeptic in me kicks in.

[crash_davis 23176]

17 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

No worries, but the next time you two fuck me I'm going to have to insist on drinks first.

No lube? 

[irockalltherocks 55]

35 minutes ago, gyroprotagonist said:

maybe already discussed, but maybe there is a log file or something that keeps track of when those RFID door are opened by the keycard?

 

Definitely will be a log file of when and whose key cards were used. Depending on the system, there may also be a file of when the door was opened and closed.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, irockalltherocks said:

Definitely will be a log file of when and whose key cards were used. Depending on the system, there may also be a file of when the door was opened and closed.

Can't say I like that Big Brother like info gathering.

[TwiceHorn 31705]

6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

I highly doubt days elapsed before investigation began. For all we know, the initial investigation occurred that first night after Jean was taken away by paramedics. I’m sure it was noted where the shell casings were, etc. even if nothing was removed until the Rangers got involved. What DPD chooses to do with that info is where the skeptic in me kicks in.

I don't know.  From what is visible, it does seem like there were significant delays in various investigation steps.  But there's quite a bit that remains invisible.  Reports are that DPD immediately sought a manslaughter warrant, but that got delayed by a magistrate and then the involvement of the Rangers.  We have little idea what happened between the shooting and her "arrest."

[Gene Parmesan 4027]

I doubt whatever system they use has much tracking.  It's an apartment complex so it wouldn't be necessary for them to know any of that.

[Steel Shank 9440]

I heard one of the Jean family lawyers (pictured below) on the radio yesterday. It sure sounded like he was saying "Botham Jones". 

 

[TwiceHorn 31705]

Also, in these thin blue line coverups, to me none of it happens without the complicity of the DA.  So I am keeping my eyes peeled for DA shenanigans as much or more than cop shenanigans.

[irockalltherocks 55]

4 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

I doubt whatever system they use has much tracking.  It's an apartment complex so it wouldn't be necessary for them to know any of that.

I disagree, apartment management would need to know when maintenance workers enter an apartment for liability purposes. Basically to cover their ass.

[4th and 5 4928]

Gentlemen:

An important point .....the shooting was Sept. 6 at 10pm. THE SEARCH WARRANT was signed on Sept. 7 and the search was conducted. Prolly as fast as they could find a judge to sign it at that hour, which in a metro area would be pretty quick.

The RETURN was recently filed, and the items found became a public record.

The search of his residence took place shortly after the shooting, not in the last few days.

I agree that her place should have been searched at a minimum to show the layout of the place to confirm or negate the reasonableness of her beliefs then existing.

NOTE: if she did give consent, there would be no need for a warrant and hence no public record of it, so to assume, from the lack of a public record, that a search did not take place is an assumption that this lawyer, who is deathly allergic to speculation and assumptions, will not make at the present time. 

 

[Gene Parmesan 4027]

Just now, irockalltherocks said:

I disagree, apartment management would need to know when maintenance workers enter an apartment for liability purposes. Basically to cover their ass.

That may be.  I wasn't really thinking of that, but apartments existed well before electronic locks so it's not like apartment management has to reinvent the wheel.  Either way I doubt the system was as sophisticated as something you'd see in other commercial applications.

[bigup2dahorns 3343]

Also, in these thin blue line coverups, to me none of it happens without the complicity of the DA.  So I am keeping my eyes peeled for DA shenanigans as much or more than cop shenanigans.

I don’t know anything about this DA other than what I briefly saw on the news the other day when she was speaking about the case in third person.

She was talking and says something like Faith Johnson has this case and Faith Johnson will determine where it goes. I remember thinking who the fuck is Faith Johnson? So already she isn’t inspiring much confidence.

[TwiceHorn 31705]

Just now, 4th and 5 said:

Gentlemen:

An important point .....the shooting was Sept. 6 at 10pm. THE SEARCH WARRANT was signed on Sept. 7 and the search was conducted. Prolly as fast as they could find a judge to sign it at that hour, which in a metro area would be pretty quick.

The RETURN was recently filed, and the items found became a public record.

The search of his residence took place shortly after the shooting, not in the last few days.

I agree that her place should have been searched at a minimum to show the layout of the place to confirm or negate the reasonableness of her beliefs then existing.

NOTE: if she did give consent, there would be no need for a warrant and hence no public record of it, so to assume, from the lack of a public record, that a search did not take place is an assumption that this lawyer, who is deathly allergic to speculation and assumptions, will not make at the present time. 

 

Ah excellent points.  I neglected to look at the dates.

Am I correct that most warrants are sealed until executed and returned?  An article mentioned that there were several remaining under seal.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, in these thin blue line coverups, to me none of it happens without the complicity of the DA.  So I am keeping my eyes peeled for DA shenanigans as much or more than cop shenanigans.

I actually think the PD is ready to bury her on this one to protect itself.  Its why the thin blue line seems primarily focused on maintaining her "off duty" status rather than covering up her actions.

[Gene Parmesan 4027]

If you subscribe to cops planting evidence and coverups, they could have saved a lot of time by just making it look like he attacked her.

[gyroprotagonist 2595]

3 minutes ago, irockalltherocks said:

I disagree, apartment management would need to know when maintenance workers enter an apartment for liability purposes. Basically to cover their ass.

we have a simple key card entry system at work for a few secured areas.  It is just hooked up to a PC that logs all activity.  Door open, what RFID key was used, did the door stay open longer than specified time, etc... Thinking on it more, all that data should be available or at least was available at one point in time.  the whole door ajar vs locked should be easy to clear up.

Is there a list of all the shit she was lugging around and that was left in his apartment?  I heard on the radio that her vest and an equipment bag was left at his apt.  That would seem to suggest she had not been to her apt yet and came straight from the outside.  Unless she was thinking 2 steps ahead ...

[TwiceHorn 31705]

5 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

I actually think the PD is ready to bury her on this one to protect itself.  Its why the thin blue line seems primarily focused on maintaining her "off duty" status rather than covering up her actions.

I had the same thought when I heard they were seeking an "indictment" that night.  But I am not so sure anymore.  I see some things that could be consistent with shenanigans, or not.  Really unclear to me at present.

Also, Faith Johnson is black and female, but she was also appointed by Abbott to fill the term of the depressed Susan Hawk.  I don't think she has enough of a record to figure her out, really.  Her office did go to the mat on the Balch Springs deal.  For those unaware, that was a suburban cop that shot into a vehicle containing a 17 year old black kid leaving a party at 11PM. Indicted, tried, and convicted of murder, straight up.  Horrible facts for the cop, but you should have heard some of the pearl-clutchers talking about the verdict.

Edited September 14, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[4th and 5 4928]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Ah excellent points.  I neglected to look at the dates.

Am I correct that most warrants are sealed until executed and returned?  An article mentioned that there were several remaining under seal.

They are not public record until executed, with the exception being: sealed by motion and order of the court. See CCP 18.01(b) and 18.011.

Edited September 14, 2018 by 4th and 5

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I had the same thought when I heard they were seeking an "indictment" that night.  But I am not so sure anymore.  I see some things that could be consistent with shenanigans, or not.  Really unclear to me at present.

Also, Faith Johnson is black and female, but she was also appointed by Abbott to fill the term of the depressed Susan Hawk.  I don't think she has enough of a record to figure her out, really.  Her office did go to the mat on the Balch Springs deal.

For one thing, if both the noise complaint and the gruelingly long shift are true, she seems to go back and forth between work and home while still on the clock and "on duty".

[TwiceHorn 31705]

5 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

For one thing, if both the noise complaint and the gruelingly long shift are true, she seems to go back and forth between work and home while still on the clock and "on duty".

Could be yes.  Constant said she does not work at HQ (the nearby building).  That doesn't foreclose her going back and forth, but it's not as easy as walking across the street.

Edited September 14, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[hayden_horn 11374]

42 minutes ago, 4th and 5 said:

Gentlemen:

An important point .....the shooting was Sept. 6 at 10pm. THE SEARCH WARRANT was signed on Sept. 7 and the search was conducted. Prolly as fast as they could find a judge to sign it at that hour, which in a metro area would be pretty quick.

The RETURN was recently filed, and the items found became a public record.

The search of his residence took place shortly after the shooting, not in the last few days.

I agree that her place should have been searched at a minimum to show the layout of the place to confirm or negate the reasonableness of her beliefs then existing.

NOTE: if she did give consent, there would be no need for a warrant and hence no public record of it, so to assume, from the lack of a public record, that a search did not take place is an assumption that this lawyer, who is deathly allergic to speculation and assumptions, will not make at the present time. 

 

important facts are important. thanks for the timelines - that makes sense. but i would bet they could get a dui blood draw warrant signed quicker.

i still stand by my statement earlier that it always seems to happen that bad details always seem to come out about the unarmed victims of a police shooting way before we find any bad details out about the cop.

Edited September 14, 2018 by hayden_horn

[DigglerontheHoof 21337]

This cunt will walk.  Hell, she’ll probably keep her job.

[conVINCEd 21474]

Don't forget the medal and promotion.

[77horn 216]

I'm late to the discussion, but based upon the last couple of pages, I felt this article was interesting

1. Cop (Guyger) had filed a noise complaint about Jean a few days prior.
2.  Apartment # are displayed w/ illuminated sign next to door.
3.  Door are fire doors with automatically close.
4.  When key is inserted red light flashes if it is the wrong key
5. Jean had a half circle welcome mat outside his door.  Cop had no such welcome mat.

Cop's story is full of holes.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, 77horn said:

I'm late to the discussion, but based upon the last couple of pages, I felt this article was interesting

1. Cop (Guyger) had filed a noise complaint about Jean a few days prior.
2.  Apartment # are displayed w/ illuminated sign next to door.
3.  Door are fire doors with automatically close.
4.  When key is inserted red light flashes if it is the wrong key
5. Jean had a half circle welcome mat outside his door.  Cop had no such welcome mat.

Cop's story is full of holes.

How did she open the door then ?  Was it ajar as she stated ?

[77horn 216]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

How did she open the door then ?  Was it ajar as she stated ?

If the article is correct and the door did not malfunction, or Jean intentional propping it open, it could not have been ajar.  Given the half eaten bowl of cereal and book, the most likely thing in my mind is that she knocked and he opened the door.

[Huckleberry 33676]

5 minutes ago, 77horn said:

I'm late to the discussion, but based upon the last couple of pages, I felt this article was interesting

1. Cop (Guyger) had filed a noise complaint about Jean a few days prior.
2.  Apartment # are displayed w/ illuminated sign next to door.
3.  Door are fire doors with automatically close.
4.  When key is inserted red light flashes if it is the wrong key
5. Jean had a half circle welcome mat outside his door.  Cop had no such welcome mat.

Cop's story is full of holes.

Ouch, that information on the apartment numbers being lit up right next to the door seems pretty damning to me. And this video of the door automatically closing is more damning than the first I saw as well. In this one it's let go when only open 6 inches or so, the first one had it being let go when it was fully open. Also a good look at the red light versus green light upon inserting your key.

[Cousin Strawberry 1263]

5 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

How did she open the door then ?  Was it ajar as she stated ?

When is a door not a door?