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

[TwiceHorn 31262]

5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

For the sake of argument, let's pretend she was an office clerk. Coming home from a late shift at the office. She carries, because she lives in a bad neighborhood. 

Same events occur. How should she be charged? 

I would be completely content with manslaughter and knowledge that a jury might not find her actions reckless, but reasonable or close to it under the circumstances/mistake of fact. 

Here, though, as stated above, I think charging murder is probably right. She could end up in the same place, but will have to testify and explain herself to get there. 

[South Austin 52128]

I have this one nagging question about the whole situation; it may seem random, and some might think it completely inappropriate, but here it is -- since the night of the shooting incident, do you think the police officer has had sex?

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I would be completely content with manslaughter and knowledge that a jury might not find her actions reckless, but reasonable or close to it under the circumstances/mistake of fact. 

Here, though, as stated above, I think charging murder is probably right. She could end up in the same place, but will have to testify and explain herself to get there. 

Fair. I think she should be charged with murder and the extenuating circumstances can be used to reduce her sentence. However, I have a bad feeling about this one. I think she'll get charged with neg homicide and get 1-2 with probation.

[El Diablo 4232]

It's the "we're so tired it's just easier to shoot people" defense.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

I have this one nagging question about the whole situation; it may seem random, and some might think it completely inappropriate, but here it is -- since the night of the shooting incident, do you think the police officer has had sex?

Are you trying to line up conjugal visits?

Regardless, she's fucked now.

[TwiceHorn 31262]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

Seems like most police-involved shootouts/high-speed chases start out with an officer trying to serve a warrant. Of course that could be way wrong.

No I think you are right there. But the police have militarized themselves particularly in the field of serving warrants, ostensibly to avoid this. So whether it needs to be high stress, they seem to insure that the cops and the citzenry are going to get a heavy dose. 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4968]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i'm confused by this. i work a (nominally) 8 hour shift with two days off, as do most people.

and overtime, i get, but 15 hours of warrant processing seems to be excessive. if they go over 8 hour shifts because of processing an arrest or a ticket, whatever, that's fine. overtime, i understand, because i work a lot of it myself. 

truck drivers can't work more than 11 hours straight. i presume police work involves driving most of the time, and it seems unsafe to have weary drivers in police cars.

edit: also, the fact that they are using the 15 hour shift as part of the narrative building underlines it as an issue, imo. seems like an admission that is too long for a shift, and that is part of the reason she was so tired she went to the wrong apartment.

Yeah, but is your job staffed 24 hours? Thats the difference. Would you want to work 8 hours in the middle of the night with only two days off at the end? Not enough time really to get completely adjusted back to a day schedule. And what if her replacement calls in sick? Either someone has to work a double or their supervisor has to find someone who can come in, which then must come from a small pool of workers since they only have two days off each week instead of three or four like with 12 hour shifts. 12 hour shifts are pretty much the best way to go with something that has to be run 24/7. As far as the driving bit, I would assume they have a partner with them, so drive time would be much shorter.

[Lhorn 4885]

2 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I have this one nagging question about the whole situation; it may seem random, and some might think it completely inappropriate, but here it is -- since the night of the shooting incident, do you think the police officer has had sex?

This is Surly.  Nothing is “completely inappropriate.”  

[TwiceHorn 31262]

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Fair. I think she should be charged with murder and the extenuating circumstances can be used to reduce her sentence. However, I have a bad feeling about this one. I think she'll get charged with neg homicide and get 1-2 with probation.

Until I see some evidence that she was some sort of killemallletgodsortemout type, I am less concerned about the actual punishment than putting her through the process without perceived breaks. Right now I am kind of assuming she was little different in temperament than the hypothetical office worker. The fact that she was a cop puts the extra onus on her. 

I also think that many punishments for first time offenders are needlessly harsh. 

[OU Sucks 8745]

48 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Technically, the words are those of the Texas Ranger that swore out the arrest affidavit, not the words of the defendant.  It's probably not a far stretch to say he used her words, or put his words in her mouth.

It's probably not a far stretch to say he used her words after putting his sword in her mouth.

Edited September 11, 2018 by OU Sucks

[relapse98 634]

1 hour ago, lemonlime said:

on evidence that the doors automatically shut than I would on the shooter's self-serving account that the door was ajar

Unless they are blocked open.

[relapse98 634]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Also, are there apartments that come with failproof midgets? If so, where? Asking for a friend.

No. They are lazy little fuckers. Apt to leaving doors ajar.

[relapse98 634]

22 minutes ago, South Austin said:

since the night of the shooting incident, do you think the police officer has had sex?

I doubt she has with Botham Jean. If so, ick.

[Pato del Muerto 52338]

13 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

Unless they are blocked open.

That object would be found, or “found” at the scene right by the door and entered into evidence. 

I still think that if the door was ajar, it would have pushed openwhen she was messing with the key, and she would not have put down the things she was carrying in order to work the handle. 

[Deej 76542]

No. They are lazy little fuckers. Apt to leaving doors ajar.

Maybe he was having a party, and people had just been filtering in and out.

[TwiceHorn 31262]

48 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Agree to disagree.  

Any Joe or Jane public would have backed up into the well-lit hallway and called 911.  If they had a concealed carry, maybe they pull it out, maybe they put a hand on it, but no-way-in-hell a normal person  shoots this guy.  It was BECAUSE she was a cop that she had the misguided belief that it was her duty and/or right to give commands to a stranger and then shoot him in short order when he didn't comply.   

 

 

 

 

 

Regardless of what caused her to behave how she did, I think the expectations for behavior (not the cynical ones, but the aspirational ones), that is, the standard of care, probably has to be higher for a cop. Probably even in their own individual capacity. 

[RPM 26215]

8 hours ago, South Austin said:

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

[JBJ 3648]

A lot of people tape those automatic locks down.  The door could be both not locked and not open.  But it could open when she's fiddling with it.  I don't really think it's relevant to the case unless the prosecution is going to argue that she was knowingly breaking in.

Based on the info in this thread, this seems to fall somewhere between manslaughter and negligent homicide.  I welcome the manslaughter charge, but don't think it will stick.

Edited September 11, 2018 by JBJ

[TwiceHorn 31262]

5 minutes ago, JBJ said:

A lot of people tape those automatic locks down.  The door could not be locked not open.  But open when she's fiddling with it.  I don't really think it's relevant to the case unless the prosecution is going to argue that she was knowingly breaking in.

Based on the info in this thread, this seems to fall somewhere between manslaughter and negligent homicide.  I welcome the manslaughter charge, but don't think it will stick.

Well, I think how much effort she had to put into getting inside when she didn't have the proper key has something to do with whether she knew or should have known she was not at the right unit.

At this point, I think we have to assume that she did not know she was at the wrong unit (if we don't everything gets a lot worse).  The question then becomes, how reckless or negligent was she in failing to ascertain she was at the wrong unit.  Although these issues don't go directly to the shooting part of it, I think it definitely has some bearing.

If her defense takes the form of mistake of fact, the mistake has to be "reasonable."

Edited September 11, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Huckleberry 32694]

So how many messages do you think the property manager has recieved demanding huge visible apartment numbers on every door?

[Deej 76542]

I'd be messaging them to stop renting to cops.

[Huckleberry 32694]

recieved

Dammit

[TwiceHorn 31262]

16 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

 

 

Dammit

 

Something about typing in these fields turns me into a spelling doofus. I only see it much later.

[Steel Shank 9413]

This is going to set women back 500 years and rightfully so.

[maninblack 7974]

[Ghost of LL 15477]

1 hour ago, JBJ said:

A lot of people tape those automatic locks down.  The door could be both not locked and not open.  But it could open when she's fiddling with it.  I don't really think it's relevant to the case unless the prosecution is going to argue that she was knowingly breaking in.

Based on the info in this thread, this seems to fall somewhere between manslaughter and negligent homicide.  I welcome the manslaughter charge, but don't think it will stick.

You've got the mens rea fucked up.  She intended to cause death.  That's second-degree murder.  That she mistakenly thought she was privileged to kill doesn't change her intent.

Manslaughter is for when you were reckless and didn't have the intent to kill.  You were fucking around with a loaded gun and it went off--that's manslaughter.

But I aimed the gun at you and shot you mistakenly thinking you were a burglar--that's murder.

[TwiceHorn 31262]

For reference, and since I was looking at it earlier, Texas Penal Code Ch. 19 Criminal Homicide

Also relevant:

Sec. 8.02. MISTAKE OF FACT. (a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.

(b) Although an actor's mistake of fact may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of any lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact were as he believed.

Edited September 12, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Pato del Muerto 52338]

Anything ever happen to the cop in Minneapolis who shot and killed the Australian woman who was coming up to their cruiser...to explain why she called them?

[Brisketexan 104557]

Regardless of what caused her to behave how she did, I think the expectations for behavior (not the cynical ones, but the aspirational ones), that is, the standard of care, probably has to be higher for a cop. Probably even in their own individual capacity. 

The irony is, it’s actually LOWER in reality. See, cops have years of training to know when someone is a threat (spoiler: EVERYONE IS AN IMMINENT THREAT!). So, if they shoot, the very act of shooting PROVES that the person was a threat. Mere civilians, well, we can’t possibly tell such things, so we have no business shooting someone at all (I mean...unless you’re white, and the guy you shot is black...then he was probably a threat).

And while my words above are hyperbolic, the principles and rules embedded therein are not - they’re how it works in the real world.

[TwiceHorn 31262]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

For reference, and since I was looking at it earlier, Texas Penal Code Ch. 19 Criminal Homicide

Also relevant:

Sec. 8.02. MISTAKE OF FACT. (a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.

(b) Although an actor's mistake of fact may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of any lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact were as he believed.

And I guess this is also relevant Texas Penal Code Ch. 9 Justification

Because the mistake of fact gets her into self-defense, but doesn't otherwise alter her intentions.

[SDG 3319]

One other mention I haven’t seen is parking. I’ve lived in 5 buildings similar to the op and they all have assigned parking with numbers. Did she park in his spot as well and not notice?  

[HiggyBaby 2514]

No. They are lazy little fuckers. Apt to leaving doors ajar.

Needs an alert of some kind

[Pato del Muerto 52338]

42 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The irony is, it’s actually LOWER in reality. See, cops have years of training to know when someone is a threat (spoiler: EVERYONE IS AN IMMINENT THREAT!). So, if they shoot, the very act of shooting PROVES that the person was a threat. Mere civilians, well, we can’t possibly tell such things, so we have no business shooting someone at all (I mean...unless you’re white, and the guy you shot is black...then he was probably a threat).

And while my words above are hyperbolic, the principles and rules embedded therein are not - they’re how it works in the real world.

Doesn’t read like hyperbole to me

[Aqua Buddha 14501]

51 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Anything ever happen to the cop in Minneapolis who shot and killed the Australian woman who was coming up to their cruiser...to explain why she called them?

(Reuters) - A former Minnesota police officer charged with murdering an unarmed Australian woman in July will argue that he acted in self-defense when he fired the fatal shot from his police car, a newspaper report on Wednesday said.

 

Mohamed Noor, 32, who has been charged with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the fatal shooting of 40-year-old Justine Damond, will next appear in court on May 8, online court records showed. 

Minnesota’s Star Tribune newspaper reported it obtained a court filing in the case made on Wednesday that said Noor intends to claim he used “reasonable force” when he shot Damond, a spiritual healer from Sydney, should the case go to trial.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minnesota-police/ex-minnesota-policeman-to-argue-self-defense-in-australian-womans-shooting-death-newspaper-idUSKBN1HX07Y

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

53 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Anything ever happen to the cop in Minneapolis who shot and killed the Australian woman who was coming up to their cruiser...to explain why she called them?

Charged with murder:

Quote

MINNEAPOLIS — The Minneapolis police officer who fatally shot an unarmed Australian woman last summer, an incident that led to protests and the ouster of the city’s police chief, was jailed Tuesday on charges of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/minneapolis-police-shooting-justine-damond.html

[0xdeadbeef 1626]

Not that it adds much to the discussion, but here's a video of how the keys and doors work at the Apt.

 

https://www.urbandramas.com/video/2319/male-proves-on-video-that-the-cop-who-shot-black-man-in-his-home-has-to-be-lying-with-her-key-story

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

4 hours ago, South Austin said:

I have this one nagging question about the whole situation; it may seem random, and some might think it completely inappropriate, but here it is -- since the night of the shooting incident, do you think the police officer has had sex?

Best sex of her life. 

[RPM 26215]

I accidentally got in the wrong pickup once back in the days you didn't automatically lock them. Same exact make/model/paint job.  I couldn't get my key to work then I noticed none of the crap in the cab was my crap. Got out quick and found mine parked a few spaces down. I always wondered what would have happened if the owner had shown up while I was sitting in his truck. We probably would have had a good laugh and not kill anyone.

[cmontexas 3250]

I dont understand why they hire these tiny chicks to be cops. They cant fight, so they are either going to shoot somebody or lose the altercation. This chick had already shot somebody once

[TwiceHorn 31262]

2 hours ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Not that it adds much to the discussion, but here's a video of how the keys and doors work at the Apt.

 

https://www.urbandramas.com/video/2319/male-proves-on-video-that-the-cop-who-shot-black-man-in-his-home-has-to-be-lying-with-her-key-story

Haha fuck.  Never occurred to me that the door handles would be that way and the only lock basically a deadbolt.  That doesn't make much sense then.

 

Assuming those are representative, and they appear to be from other shots, those are some seriously nondescript hallways and doors.

Edited September 12, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[cmontexas 3250]

My mom's cousin BB was the sheriff of Port Lavaca. When my great grandmother died the funeral was held at the cemetary in Pear Valley on her farm and then afterwards everyone congregated at the farmhouse which had been empty for several years at this point.

 

Family members were surveying furniture and whatnot when BB opens the top drawer of a large wooden dresser and a 3 foot bull snake rises out. Sheriff BB immediately draws and shoots a hole through that snake and the dresser. House full of goddamn people. My mom was pissed. She had her eye on that dresser

[JBJ 3648]

4 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

You've got the mens rea fucked up.  She intended to cause death.  That's second-degree murder.  That she mistakenly thought she was privileged to kill doesn't change her intent.

Manslaughter is for when you were reckless and didn't have the intent to kill.  You were fucking around with a loaded gun and it went off--that's manslaughter.

But I aimed the gun at you and shot you mistakenly thinking you were a burglar--that's murder.

To the bold: Shouldnt a lawyer know what mens rea means?  Hint: it not "mistaken mind"

....

Both examples you give sound more like negligent homicide.  Although the second one might not even be that and is pretty much the case we have in front of us. 

I think it was on Shaggy, the man in Houston who shot the lost tourist on his porch looking for directions. He was charged with manslaughter and negligent homicide and acquitted of both.  That's not terribly far off from this case.

Successful nanslaughter cases (non-intoxicated that is) usually involve some sort of criminal intent, but an unreasonable expectation that someone would die.  Like we get in a kerfluffle at a football game and I shove you, you slip on the aluminum bleacher, bonk your head on the back rest, and break your neck.

Being reckless with deadly force and no criminal intent is usually negligent homicide.  Like the examples you gave.

Edited September 12, 2018 by JBJ

[4th and 5 4914]

On 9/8/2018 at 3:32 PM, 4th and 5 said:

Homicide is murder (intentionally or knowingly) manslaughter (recklessly) or criminally negligent homicide (criminal negligence).

intentional and knowing mean conscious desire to bring about the result, or knew that the result would occur, generally referred to a specific intent. 

Recklessness and criminal negligence are general intents where the actor did not intend to cause the harm. Recklessness is the conscious awareness of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and proceeding anyway. Criminal negligence is different in the failure to perceive the substantial and unjustifiable risk is a substantial deviation from how a reasonable person would act. Like shooting a gun in a crowded area. No intent to kill anyone, but the act is a sufficient mens rea, or culpability, to be a crime.

Her conduct, in shooting him was an intentional act. She shot him with the specific intent to kill. That’s murder under the Texas Penal Code.

She could assert at least two defenses to her conduct. 

One is mistake of fact, if her belief that he was an intruder in her home was reasonable under the circumstances.

The other is self defense, but again, that requires a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary under the circumstances as she reasonably believed them to be at the time, not in hindsight. I question that she could avail herself of each element of the statute that would get her the presumption and jury instruction for “degree of force used presumed to be reasonable” and “no duty to retreat.”

I don’t see a jury buying the justification of self defense. They might bite on a mistake of fact defense but she could still be convicted of any lesser included offense of murder, to wit: manslaugher or criminally negligent homicide. 

Let me quote myself from page 5.

She intentionally caused the death of a person, a first degree felony murder, based upon a mistaken belief that deadly force was justified.

[JBJ 3648]

I agree with much of the quoted portion, but your summary is, again, ignoring what mens rea is.

"Intentionally caused the death of a person" is not murder; it's only the actus reus.

Edited September 12, 2018 by JBJ

[Js1 85095]

8 hours ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Not that it adds much to the discussion, but here's a video of how the keys and doors work at the Apt.

 

https://www.urbandramas.com/video/2319/male-proves-on-video-that-the-cop-who-shot-black-man-in-his-home-has-to-be-lying-with-her-key-story

Have this same key fob lock system at my place in Houston. 

Never tried to enter another apartment so...

[South Austin 52128]

45 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Have this same key fob lock system at my place in Houston. 

Never tried to enter another apartment so...

Well stay tuned. You may be able to do that and legally kill the resident.

[TwiceHorn 31262]

7 hours ago, JBJ said:

I agree with much of the quoted portion, but your summary is, again, ignoring what mens rea is.

"Intentionally caused the death of a person" is not murder; it's only the actus reus.

You are getting out over the skis here.  Regardless of the debate over whether you must intend only the act or the act and its result, Texas murder law encompasses both.

Quote

(b) A person commits an offense if he:

(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;

(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or

 

[Orange&White 5516]

Aren't there now witnesses now saying that the cop was banging on the door and yelling "Let Me In"?

If that is the case, that blows a gaping hole in her self defense argument. 

 

[4th and 5 4914]

8 hours ago, JBJ said:

I agree with much of the quoted portion, but your summary is, again, ignoring what mens rea is.

"Intentionally caused the death of a person" is not murder; it's only the actus reus.

That is incorrect.

The act is causing the death of another (actus reus).

The culpable mental state is intentionally (mens rea).

 

Edited September 12, 2018 by 4th and 5

[Gene Parmesan 3993]

The location of the body will pretty much tell the story of door open or not.