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

[bernorange 8348]

Affidavit claims she shot the victim inside the apt (ie. across the room).  Anonymous reports say victim opened the door and she shot him at the door.  Wonder if we'll see any crime scene evidence (police pictures) of where the body was found.

[Brisketexan 104593]

1 minute ago, bernorange said:

Affidavit claims she shot the victim inside the apt (ie. across the room).  Anonymous reports say victim opened the door and she shot him at the door.  Wonder if we'll see any crime scene evidence (police pictures) of where the body was found.

Probably right next to the crack pipe and the throwdown gun.

[Deej 76560]

Just waiting for them to shift the narrative to "She thought the large, black man in his underwear was there to rape her."

[bernorange 8348]

Quote

...

Attorney Lee Merritt would not specify, but said the attorneys brought forward new evidence Sunday that could change the course of the investigation.

"We brought forward a witness and video evidence, and again we can't get into the content thereof, but the prevailing narrative is challenged by the evidence that was presented today," Merritt said.
...

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/Dallas-Police-Identify-Officer-Who-Shot-Botham-Jean-492784591.html

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This, I pretty much assume is what REALLY happened.  Did the fact that he was a black guy even register?  If, so, maybe had some influence.  Hard to say in a split second.  I tend to think a white guy is probably just as dead.

 

I disagree, and this is the sort of thing that I think the BLM movement is right about.  When a decision has to be made in the moment, the white guy gets the benefit of the doubt and the black guy doesn't.  Something has soaked into our brains that has caused that.

 

Here it was the worst version of that.  Instead of this stories (like all the stories on this thread) being resolved with a startled jump back and yell of "what the hell are you doing here?" the immediate reaction is bullets.

[Fudge Nuggets 19149]

48 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I see, because intruders usually commit burglary in their underwear.

And leave the door ajar (allegedly) and answer said door when they hear a commotion outside.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

Manslaughter requires "recklessly" killing someone.  There's a substantial chance, under these basic facts (wrong apartment, kills someone before figuring it out) that a jury finds she was reckless.  Could be a close call, though.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

2 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I disagree, and this is the sort of thing that I think the BLM movement is right about.  When a decision has to be made in the moment, the white guy gets the benefit of the doubt and the black guy doesn't.  Something has soaked into our brains that has caused that.

 

Here it was the worst version of that.  Instead of this stories (like all the stories on this thread) being resolved with a startled jump back and yell of "what the hell are you doing here?" the immediate reaction is bullets.

I don't disagree with the basic premise that black folks don't get the benefit of the doubt.  But it's impossible to know here whether she even knew he was black.

 

And I agree that the most prudent course of action, even for a cop, would be to back up out the door and then start issuing commands, even if it's "who the fuck are you? and what are you doing here?"

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I don't disagree with the basic premise that black folks don't get the benefit of the doubt.  But it's impossible to know here whether she even knew he was black.

You're right.  I'm not really trying this woman even though it sounds like it.  I'm just observing the universe in general and am sad that this story fits that general pattern, strict causation be damned.  

[bernorange 8348]

55 minutes ago, PilotsError said:

...

So I searched the intertron for "guyger believed jean who was wearing only underwear" and found several nbc(city).com copies of what I believe is the same report captured in that screen shot.  Only the copies now available don't have that text anymore (still in Google's cache of the pages though).  They now say:

Quote

Editor's Note: A previous version of this story included an account of events told by a Dallas police source. Due to conflicting reports of the incident from various sources, we've removed that account from the story.

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/Dallas-Officer-Fatally-Shoots-Man-492675981.html

Edited September 11, 2018 by bernorange

[TwiceHorn 31269]

3 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

You're right.  I'm not really trying this woman even though it sounds like it.  I'm just observing the universe in general and am sad that this story fits that general pattern, strict causation be damned.  

Yeah, that question underlies this, most certainly.  But I have real trouble equating this with  "racial profiling" "stop resisting" common or garden racist police brutality.

 

To the extent it is reflective of a police problem, it reflects poor judgment or poor mental makeup for someone wielding a weapon and authority in polite society.

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Steel Shank 9414]

54 minutes ago, PilotsError said:

...

"elite Crime Response Team"? Elite? Holy fucking shit! How bad are the cops who aren't 'elite'?

 

[Chuckie Finster 22599]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't disagree with the basic premise that black folks don't get the benefit of the doubt.  But it's impossible to know here whether she even knew he was black.

 

And I agree that the most prudent course of action, even for a cop, would be to back up out the door and then start issuing commands, even if it's "who the fuck are you? and what are you doing here?"

Not that it will matter, but it's going to be neat to watch them simultaneously claim that it was too dark for her to know what race he was, but light enough that she was absolutely sure he was not following commands.

[Brisketexan 104593]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, that question underlies this, most certainly.  But I have real trouble equating this with  "racial profiling" "stop resisting" common or garden racist police brutality.

It's not garden-variety racist police brutality.

It is/is becoming garden-variety police "circle the wagons, concoct a story, and blame the victim" response, though.  That's it's own problem.

[Brisketexan 104593]

1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Not that it will matter, but it's going to be neat to watch them simultaneously claim that it was too dark for her to know what race he was, but light enough that she was absolutely sure he was not following commands.

She can do both, because of her years of elite police training.  She can recognize things that mere mortal civilians can't.  Except when she can't, and why do you expect cops to be any less human than you are?  They just want to go home safely to their families.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Brisketexan

[Guest]

What I was saying pages back and what I think I would agree with TwiceHorn about is, this lady's intent was not to be a big bully, power-tripping butthole to what she considered an inferior. Did she subconsciously/indirectly have racial bias (e.g. not give benefit of doubt like would with white)? Sure. But by all accounts, this is not the typical police brutality we have seen, but a different flavor, one in which the woman by all accounts was torn up about this and did not mean to actively hurt this innocent POC. 

A whole host of issues are unearthed though and a lot of things can be said to be at fault, from training to should she have even been a person with the authority of a cop with a deadly weapon due to past shootings and if she is so fearful as to behave as she did, but regardless, this lady's life is ruined and she ruined countless of other lives and horribly even took one.

That said, if she would just show some of that humility and accountability and be brave enough to own it, legally, I think she gets more sympathy and compassion. To immediately retreat behind the blue line and try to find each and every cubby hole of defense is a bad look, though I get it. It's scary and she's looking out for numero uno, so the fact people are pissed is justifiable to an extent.

[Gene Parmesan 3993]

I don't believe the door was ajar.  Is it confirmed that these apartments have electronic locks as in if the door is closed it's locked?

[TwiceHorn 31269]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's not garden-variety racist police brutality.

It is/is becoming garden-variety police "circle the wagons, concoct a story, and blame the victim" response, though.  That's it's own problem.

I assume that you are concluding that the DPS/Rangers are part of this conspiracy?  I do tend to hold them to a higher standard than your average department.

 

Also, she's a criminal defendant.  There aren't many that don't either fabricate a story from whole cloth, or shade adrenaline-soaked events into something more favorable.  It doesn't require a conspiracy of blue to get there.

Plus/minus for DPD:

+Wanted to indict immediately.

-Wanted to indict for manslaughter when magistrate inidicated otherwise

+Brought in Rangers

-Did not detain immediately

-Indicted for manslaughter (realizing this isn't strictly DPD's call, or the Rangers)

 

I have zero doubt that there is a tendency toward a thin blue line.  None whatsoever.  I just don't think this should be Exhibit A in anyone's proof of same.

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Deej 76560]

11 minutes ago, bernorange said:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/Dallas-Police-Identify-Officer-Who-Shot-Botham-Jean-492784591.html

"The police have manufactured new evidence that could change the course of the investigation."

[Brisketexan 104593]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I assume that you are concluding that the DPS/Rangers are part of this conspiracy?  I do tend to hold them to a higher standard than your average department.

Many years ago, I spent an odd window of my career representing DPS troopers in internal disciplinary proceedings (not related to shootings or stuff like that).  If you hold those guys to a higher standard....you are mistaken.  Juvenile chickenshittery abounds.  They're hopped-up teenage boys with badges.

If you have a badge, you toe the blue line.  Period.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Many years ago, I spent an odd window of my career representing DPS troopers in internal disciplinary proceedings (not related to shootings or stuff like that).  If you hold those guys to a higher standard....you are mistaken.  Juvenile chickenshittery abounds.  They're hopped-up teenage boys with badges.

If you have a badge, you toe the blue line.  Period.

Fair enough.  Of course, Rangers are supposed to be the best of the best.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

I'm not sure I understand why there's a debate about whether it's garden-variety police brutality.  Obviously this mistaken apartment scenario is atypical.    But there are several elements of the more common problem still in play until we get more facts:   Cop quick to draw a weapon and fire rather than deescalate.   Unarmed black male victim.   Special treatment for cop perpetrator.

We need more facts to assess what actually happened, but the people minimizing the broader implications of this event are jumping to as many conclusions as the people maximizing them. 

[DaysOff 7851]

Bingo. If I'm the prosecutor, I'm making this the cornerstone of my case. This was not an arrest. This was B&E. If the shoe was on the other foot, the defendant would be facing the death penalty.

The prosecutor? They're all in cahoots with these motherfuckers. That won't be the cornerstone of any case because it's not going to trial.

[Brisketexan 104593]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fair enough.  Of course, Rangers are supposed to be the best of the best.

They are generally damned fine investigators -- particularly of matters that don't involve a fellow cop.

But they're still cops.

[TornACL 7675]

The door was slightly ajar because it was opened by the resident. It's another of these clever turns of a phrase that is factually true (like repeatedly mentioning she just got off a 12 hour shift) but that are used to bias the reader.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I'm not sure I understand why there's a debate about whether it's garden-variety police brutality.  Obviously this mistaken apartment scenario is atypical.    But there are several elements of the more common problem still in play until we get more facts:   Cop quick to draw a weapon and fire rather than deescalate.   Unarmed black male victim.   Special treatment for cop perpetrator.

We need more facts to assess what actually happened, but the people minimizing the broader implications of this event are jumping to as many conclusions as the people maximizing them. 

You pretty much answered your own question there.  This wasn't an ordinary encounter between citizens of color and the police.  The end result was all too typical, but the initial facts take it out of the realm of ordinary police brutality.

 

We probably aren't going to get many more facts.  I remain anxious to hear the 911 tape.

[Chuckie Finster 22599]

If I'm a burgler, the next time I rob a house and stumble upon a resident, I'm going to start barking police orders at them because apparently they are required to listen to them on the off-chance I'm an actual member of the police.

[Huckleberry 32699]

42 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This, I pretty much assume is what REALLY happened.  Did the fact that he was a black guy even register?  If, so, maybe had some influence.  Hard to say in a split second.  I tend to think a white guy is probably just as dead.

So you're going to take issue with every single post on this thread that makes assumptions about what really happened if it doesn't agree with the killer's statements but then go ahead and make your own assumptions? I mean I know that you like to play the role of OBJECTIVE MAN WHO IS ABOVE IT ALL but this thread has gone a bit too far.

[AbeFroman 2112]

54 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

No I haven't concluded anything.  It's the rest of you that have got the jump to conclusions mat out.  I'm waiting for facts to emerge.

The facts according to whom?  Only one side is telling the story, they're controlling the narrative.

This whole thing makes me feel sick to my stomach.  I honestly think she is going to walk, and it makes me feel fucking sick.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

6 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So you're going to take issue with every single post on this thread that makes assumptions about what really happened if it doesn't agree with the killer's statements but then go ahead and make your own assumptions? I mean I know that you like to play the role of OBJECTIVE MAN WHO IS ABOVE IT ALL but this thread has gone a bit too far.

I like to stimulate debate.  By most accounts, I seem to succeed.  And it tends to stay pointed.  I tend to call my assumptions assumptions instead of stating them as plain fact as many do.  I make "counter-assumptions" that are equally plausible, if not as popular with the hive mind.

I also tend to do it without calling people morons or racists or other things because I am more interested in the debate than people's ultimate conclusions.

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[DaysOff 7851]

1 -- she is absolutely going to make up a story (that is, LIE) about telling him to put his hands up and he "refused her verbal commands."  She will indeed say that.  I'm here to say that is a lie, and it never happened.
2 -- that is going to be the basis of her defense. "Based on her years of training in assessing and responding to threats, she followed all proper protocols and procedures.  If only the deceased had done what everyone should do -- obey the lawful commands of a law officer who reasonably believed that a crime was being committed -- he could have avoided causing this awful tragedy."
3 -- the cop defenders will be on this like flies on shit.  I'm sure they are already, but you and I don't read their posts/see their comments on newspaper articles.
Those three things are fact.  She's lying about giving verbal commands.  That lie will be the cornerstone of her legal defense.  It will be the cornerstone of her public defense.

Point 3 is what I don't get. This thin blue line bullshit. We all know incompetent people in our careers. I don't want them protected; I want them outed and fired to protect my profession. There are awful pilots out there flying your families. Awful surgeons cutting. These types of people seem to drift through life with no consequences.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

She can do both, because of her years of elite police training.  She can recognize things that mere mortal civilians can't.  Except when she can't, and why do you expect cops to be any less human than you are?  They just want to go home safely to their families.

That "Predator Vision" really pays off.

[South Austin 52142]

2 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

1 -- she is absolutely going to make up a story (that is, LIE) about telling him to put his hands up and he "refused her verbal commands."  She will indeed say that.  I'm here to say that is a lie, and it never happened.
2 -- that is going to be the basis of her defense. "Based on her years of training in assessing and responding to threats, she followed all proper protocols and procedures.  If only the deceased had done what everyone should do -- obey the lawful commands of a law officer who reasonably believed that a crime was being committed -- he could have avoided causing this awful tragedy."
3 -- the cop defenders will be on this like flies on shit.  I'm sure they are already, but you and I don't read their posts/see their comments on newspaper articles.
Those three things are fact.  She's lying about giving verbal commands.  That lie will be the cornerstone of her legal defense.  It will be the cornerstone of her public defense.

Point 3 is what I don't get. This thin blue line bullshit. We all know incompetent people in our careers. I don't want them protected; I want them outed and fired to protect my profession. There are awful pilots out there flying your families. Awful surgeons cutting. These types of people seem to drift through life with no consequences.

I get it.  I don't agree with it, but I get it.  You adopt a strict mentality of protecting your own, even in what might be clear cases of police misconduct, because if you don't, then you open the door to accepting more criticism and fault in the grayer areas.  At least that's my view of the mentality. 

[South Austin 52142]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

That "Predator Vision" really pays off.

So what's our take-away?  Cover ourselves in mud before answering the door in the dark?

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

So what's our take-away?  Cover ourselves in mud before answering the door in the dark?

Booby trap your home and yell "COME ON. COME GET ME!" when you hear someone fiddling with the door.

['stache 21770]

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

I see, because intruders usually commit burglary in their underwear.

She also reasonably believed he had a gun hidden in his underwear.  She seen the bulge and all.

[Huckleberry 32699]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I like to stimulate debate.  By most accounts, I seem to succeed.  And it tends to stay pointed.  I tend to call my assumptions assumptions instead of stating them as plain fact as many do.  I make "counter-assumptions" that are equally plausible, if not as popular with the hive mind.

I also tend to do it without calling people morons or racists or other things because I am more interested in the debate than people's ultimate conclusions.

Well you seem pretty proud of yourself. Most other people just find it annoying, though, fair warning. You also just gave one definition of trolling.

You apparently have an inflated sense of your own impartiality and it causes you to play contrarian on every thread regardless of what you believe. That's not thought-provoking or stimulating, it's just being an ass.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Huckleberry

[Brisketexan 104593]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Booby trap your home and yell "COME ON. COME GET ME!" when you hear someone fiddling with the door.

Here's the thing -- had she entered his apartment, in the dark, and he'd responded to the noise and shot the shadowy intruder dead.....he would be 100% in the right, legally.  It would be a legally justified shooting, and he should face ZERO criminal consequences (see: castle doctrine).  Yes, that would be a sad tragedy, and yes, I would be critical of anyone who shoots first and asks questions later.  BUT, he would have a perfect legal defense -- unidentified intruder in the night, shadowy figure, shot dead to defend yourself and your home.

If that is how it had gone down....anyone wanna bet that he would have received WORSE treatment than the cop here, who has NO legal justification for what she did?  He'd have been arrested immediately (and I'm sure they would have found him to be "resisting," and had to subdue him with force).  He'd have been interrogated at length (no chance to visit with his union rep to concoct a story).  He'd be charged with murder, because he killed a cop.

We all KNOW that's the disparate treatment he'd have gotten if the shooting was reversed.  That's what pisses people off here -- and it damned well should.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

22 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

You pretty much answered your own question there.  This wasn't an ordinary encounter between citizens of color and the police.  The end result was all too typical, but the initial facts take it out of the realm of ordinary police brutality.

 

We probably aren't going to get many more facts.  I remain anxious to hear the 911 tape.

No, the initial facts have not taken it out of that realm yet.   There is still a very plausible storyline, that fits what we know, under which the door opens, she sees a black man who she thinks is a threat in part because of racial bias, and she hastily kills him to protect herself from that perceived threat.    That she may have thought he was committing a crime by intruding in her house, rather than committing a crime in some other way we've already seen in comparable situations, doesn't eliminate the possibility that this is just a different flavor of the same core problem. 

Edited September 11, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[TwiceHorn 31269]

 

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Well you seem pretty proud of yourself. Most other people just find it annoying, though, fair warning. You also just gave one definition of trolling.

Whatever.  The word troll is getting tossed around here for people with unpopular viewpoints entirely too often.

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[El Diablo 4232]

I don't live in the Dallas area so don't follow/know all the news sources there. Have there been any confirmed statements made by neighbors or witnesses? Or have the popo worked the Jedi mind trick on them and they're all convinced now that nothing happened at all? It's been a few days now and it seems to me that folks would be talking to the media at some point. Unless they're afraid to speak.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, the initial facts have not taken it out of that realm yet.   There is still a very plausible storyline that fits what we know under which the door opens, she sees a black man who she thinks is a threat in part because of racial bias, and she hastily kills him to protect herself from that perceived threat.    That she may have thought he was committing a crime by intruding in her house, rather than committing a crime in some other way we've already seen in comparable situations, doesn't eliminate the possibility that this is just a different flavor of the same core problem. 

We kind of just said the same thing?

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

One thing that continues to confuse/frustrate me. They show the medics coming in and performing CPR. I'll assume she was CPR trained--why wasn't she doing any CPR when she realized what she had done?

[South Austin 52142]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Here's the thing -- had she entered his apartment, in the dark, and he'd responded to the noise and shot the shadowy intruder dead.....he would be 100% in the right, legally.  It would be a legally justified shooting, and he should face ZERO criminal consequences (see: castle doctrine).  Yes, that would be a sad tragedy, and yes, I would be critical of anyone who shoots first and asks questions later.  BUT, he would have a perfect legal defense -- unidentified intruder in the night, shadowy figure, shot dead to defend yourself and your home.

If that is how it had gone down....anyone wanna bet that he would have received WORSE treatment than the cop here, who has NO legal justification for what she did?  He'd have been arrested immediately (and I'm sure they would have found him to be "resisting," and had to subdue him with force).  He'd have been interrogated at length (no chance to visit with his union rep to concoct a story).  He'd be charged with murder, because he killed a cop.

We all KNOW that's the disparate treatment he'd have gotten if the shooting was reversed.  That's what pisses people off here -- and it damned well should.

Hmm . . . trying to figure out the connection between that response and Predator.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

We kind of just said the same thing?

Well, I don't think so.  You have concluded that "the initial facts take it out of the realm of ordinary police brutality."  I don't think they have.   Her thinking he was an intruder in her apartment is a different fact than we've seen, but so is "I though he was the guy who just robbed that store" or "I thought that cell phone was a gun."  Every event has different facts to it.   But the ordinary police brutality story is still very much in play as a potential explanation.  Cop sees black man as threat, shoots unarmed black man, turns out he was not a threat and cop acted too hastily. 

Again, we need more facts to reach a conclusion.   But you are reaching all sorts of unjustified conclusions, like she didn't even see that he was black when she shot, without sufficient evidence at this point.  You seem hellbent on clearing her of a racist bad shoot at a really early stage for some reason. 

[TwiceHorn 31269]

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

One thing that continues to confuse/frustrate me. They show the medics coming in and performing CPR. I'll assume she was CPR trained--why wasn't she doing any CPR when she realized what she had done?

Is there a video? I saw something from Twitter or some other bullshit, but nothing credible. 

[AUS-97HORN 11673]

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

One thing that continues to confuse/frustrate me. They show the medics coming in and performing CPR. I'll assume she was CPR trained--why wasn't she doing any CPR when she realized what she had done?

she was too busy hyperventillating-  which btw- both the video posted around page 3-4 of this thread  AND the neighbor have reported.    The moment she realized she was in the wrong apt, she started melting down while calling 911, and  you cant really perform CPR if you yourself are hyperventilating. 

Not that I am defending her at all, I am just pointing out that she was so frazzled it messed with her body.      I agree that she should have been helping, but the human brain can do weird things when it knows its life is basically over due to a situation.

[AUS-97HORN 11673]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Is there a video? I saw something from Twitter or some other bullshit, but nothing credible. 

 look at post 182.    its the video in question

[Guest Lobo]

Crazy Joe Davola forecasted all of this some 25 years ago when he responded to the inquiry of why he kept his apartment door open all the time...

"I like to encourage intruders."  

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Is there a video? I saw something from Twitter or some other bullshit, but nothing credible. 

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/dallas/article218068660.html