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

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

32 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Once she’s acquired by a North Texas jury on the “Druggie failed to follow orders” defense she’ll be hired immediately at some suburban department, probably with a raise and hero’s welcome. Betty fucking Shelby is still working and actually teaching some course about survival or something. Should be a short class. “Shoot first ask questions later, jury will save you. Class dismissed.”

Are you familiar with the Balch Springs case?

[SHOOTER12 8,787]

She's fired........

Dallas police officer Amber Guyger was fired Monday, officials said, weeks after a racially-charged shooting in which the off-duty white cop killed her black neighbor, Botham Jean.

An investigation determined Guyger “engaged in adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter,” Dallas police Chief Renee Hall said in a statement, adding Guyger may appeal her termination.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dallas-police-officer-amber-guyger-fired-after-fatally-shooting-neighbor-botham-jean/ar-AAAAmML?li=BBnb7Kz

[hayden_horn 11,360]

17 minutes ago, SHOOTER12 said:

She's fired........

Dallas police officer Amber Guyger was fired Monday, officials said, weeks after a racially-charged shooting in which the off-duty white cop killed her black neighbor, Botham Jean.

An investigation determined Guyger “engaged in adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter,” Dallas police Chief Renee Hall said in a statement, adding Guyger may appeal her termination.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dallas-police-officer-amber-guyger-fired-after-fatally-shooting-neighbor-botham-jean/ar-AAAAmML?li=BBnb7Kz

yeah, someone posted it earlier. citing the "adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter" as cause is actually quite cowardly by dpd there.

[SHOOTER12 8,787]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

yeah, someone posted it earlier. citing the "adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter" as cause is actually quite cowardly by dpd there.

Dang, missed the earlier posting, sorry bout dat.

[El Diablo 4,232]

14 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

yeah, someone posted it earlier. citing the "adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter" as cause is actually quite cowardly by dpd there.

How so? They found a reason that didn't require her being found guilty of murder.

[RPM 26,185]

Fortunately she still has her LE certificate. DCSO here she comes!

[Guest Lobo]

honest question---when you are officially terminated from a police department, are you immediately severed from the Union as well?  Or do you get some kinda lag period, like 90 days, or until age 65, stuff like that?  

[ChiTownDoc 21,091]

5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

honest question---when you are officially terminated from a police department, are you immediately severed from the Union as well?  Or do you get some kinda lag period, like 90 days, or until age 65, stuff like that?  

In the cases I have seen, the union has you going forward should the need for their services (legal help) arise from their time as a cop.  

[bobcat1995 71]

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

honest question---when you are officially terminated from a police department, are you immediately severed from the Union as well?  Or do you get some kinda lag period, like 90 days, or until age 65, stuff like that?  

Yes and No, the police association can continue to support her if they choose.  Not sure what type of support they could offer outside of legal support.  Not sure any DPS association actually supplements any wages for officers who are suspended or terminated.  She was also likely a dues paying member of CLEAT or TMPA which will pick up her legal fees for the criminal and civil trials.

[SquishMitten 10,395]

yeah, someone posted it earlier. citing the "adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter" as cause is actually quite cowardly by dpd there.

Seems like they went with the fastest possible avenue to dismiss her. Fully internal conduct violation is pretty rock solid compared to the alternative.

[SquishMitten 10,395]

honest question---when you are officially terminated from a police department, are you immediately severed from the Union as well?  Or do you get some kinda lag period, like 90 days, or until age 65, stuff like that?  

Probably the same as any union/job/whatever. They support you as long as it’s in the best interest of the organization and its members. Doubt there’s a contractual requirement that they defend all members like they’re your personal attorney.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

3 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

yeah, someone posted it earlier. citing the "adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter" as cause is actually quite cowardly by dpd there.

I'm not at all sure what is the significance of that stated factor vs. "the shooting occurring on September 9."  I would imagine that basing termination on the shooting might require some more complex fact findings (and possibly even waiting for the conclusion of criminal proceedings), while whatever happened with her arrest (seeking special treatment? I dunno) might have been more expedient.  Not sure how you can call anything "cowardly" at this point.

But it's all a wild guess at this point.

[TXSooner518 2,432]

I think you're reading way too much into it. They fired her for participating in conduct that got her arrested and charged with a felony. They can't say "for shooting a mofo" because you can shoot someone without it being just cause for termination (self-defense for example.). Rather than making their own conclusions about the shoot, they terminated because she was arrested for a felony (the adverse conduct IS the arrest, not something that happened in conjunction with the arrest.)

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

26 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

 

Probably the same as any union/job/whatever. They support you as long as it’s in the best interest of the organization and its members. Doubt there’s a contractual requirement that they defend all members like they’re your personal attorney.

 

What the fuck are yer dues for then ?

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

1 minute ago, TXSooner518 said:

I think you're reading way too much into it. They fired her for participating in conduct that got her arrested and charged with a felony. They can't say "for shooting a mofo" because you can shoot someone without it being just cause for termination (self-defense for example.). Rather than making their own conclusions about the shoot, they terminated because she was arrested for a felony (the adverse conduct IS the arrest, not something that happened in conjunction with the arrest.)

Possibly, but see https://reason.com/blog/2018/09/24/dallas-cop-who-killed-botham-jean-fired

 

Quote

Questions also remain regarding the timing of Guyger's dismissal. Hall said at a town hall on Tuesday that she couldn't fire Guyger due to "local, state, and federal laws" preventing her "from taking action." In a written statement on Thursday, Hall explained she didn't want to "compromise the criminal investigation" into the shooting. "As an employer, DPD can compel Officer Guyger to provide a statement during a DPD administrative investigation and those statements given to DPD could potentially compromise the criminal investigation," Hall said.

But Hall seems to have cast aside this reasoning, opting to fire Guyger while the criminal investigation is still ongoing.

I find that reason.com is above-average at legal reporting.

[Brothahorn 10,085]

Fortunately she still has her LE certificate. DCSO here she comes!

She will end up i some back water five person PD.

[TexasEd 8,062]

The way I'm reading that article and the Chief's convoluted message is that:

1. DPD wanted an internal affairs statement from Guyger and as an employee they can compel her to give one.
2. The IA statement cannot be used against Guyger in a criminal case so they did not do it early.
3. Texas Rangers were conducting a criminal investigation and needed to give DPD the green light to get their internal affairs statement after they collected the criminal investigation evidence.
4. Once Rangers had what they needed from a criminal standpoint they told DPD they were good.  The IA statement was taken after the criminal investigation statements so that there is a separation of interviews of what can and cannot be used in a criminal case.
5. With the IA statement out of the way DPD was good to fire Guyger since they had what they needed.

Anyway, that's the way I read it.

[Vic Mackey 46,919]

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

27 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

The way I'm reading that article and the Chief's convoluted message is that:

1. DPD wanted an internal affairs statement from Guyger and as an employee they can compel her to give one.
2. The IA statement cannot be used against Guyger in a criminal case so they did not do it early.
3. Texas Rangers were conducting a criminal investigation and needed to give DPD the green light to get their internal affairs statement after they collected the criminal investigation evidence.
4. Once Rangers had what they needed from a criminal standpoint they told DPD they were good.  The IA statement was taken after the criminal investigation statements so that there is a separation of interviews of what can and cannot be used in a criminal case.
5. With the IA statement out of the way DPD was good to fire Guyger since they had what they needed.

Anyway, that's the way I read it.

Nah.  A more logical way to read it is as follows.  First understand that firing her is in the nature of a civil proceeding, like a lawsuit (there most assuredly can be a lawsuit over her firing, the rest is just preliminary).  There is quite a bit of law that states a person need not be subject to civil proceedings over the same subject matter as a criminal proceeding so they aren't faced with the dilemma of defending themselves in the civil case, while invoking the 5th in the criminal case.  The solution is that the civil case is delayed or stayed until conclusion of the criminal case.

By analogy, the DPD didn't want to force a civil or internal affairs proceeding while she is subject to criminal charges over the same subject matter.  There's probably something somewhere in the law that says she could halt such proceedings, much as she could a civil case.

However, the DPD apparently found an independent (unrelated to the shooting) ground for discharge relating to some aspect of her arrest, so they could shitcan her without infringing on her right to a fair criminal trial.

That's the way I read that.    I could be presuming too much competence, both in the way it was handled and the way it was reported in the press release.  But assuming the press release was intentionally worded that way, and not false or misleading, that's where I end up.

Edited September 25, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[BlueGreySky 998]

Yeah. Fuck this bitch.

['stache 21,743]

Makes me wonder if her BAC test came back and she was fired for breaking a rule about drinking in uniform with your service firearm. The shooting can be subject to all sorts of defenses of discretion, fear, necessity, etc., but “don’t drink in uniform with your gun” seems black and white.

 

[kevwun 15,595]

I think Twice Horn is right.  She fucked up in the days after the murder in some way and it's probably clear cut, so the DPD took advantage and fired her for it.

[Reagan1k 3,008]

10 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

16 hours ago, RPM said:

Fortunately she still has her LE certificate. DCSO here she comes!

She will end up i some back water five person PD.

Or she may end up working at a state park - blocking traffic and screaming Miiikkkeee when someone tries to leave.  I hear there is an opening at Lake Georgetown.

[JimmyHoffa 1,188]

1 hour ago, kevwun said:

I think Twice Horn is right.  She fucked up in the days after the murder in some way and it's probably clear cut, so the DPD took advantage and fired her for it.

That's the way I took it as well. And something they don't do if the Union wasn't on board (usually).  

[kevwun 15,595]

I haven't seen a statement from the union yet, so that would be a pretty good hint they are ok with it.  I think everyone involved on the police side realizes she's fucked and aren't willing to stick their necks out for her.

[El Diablo 4,232]

My limited experience has been that unions, particularly the shop/chief stewards, can have fairly cozy relationships with the management of the companies that their members work for. It would not surprise me a bit if the union were putting distance between themselves and this lady for the betterment of their position in general.

[SameSame 1,691]

10 hours ago, Vic Mackey said:

Oh Fuck you!  I'm not anti-police, I'm anti-police who keep shooting unarmed men and getting away with it.  Just like I'm anti- piece of shit criminals who run around this city getting away with their crimes.

Either she is a methodical evil murderer or a complete fucking idiot, either way she doesn't need to be serving this city with a gun on her hip.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Looks like they went by the book to at least keep appearances clean.

[Reagan1k 3,008]

22 minutes ago, SameSame said:

Oh Fuck you!  I'm not anti-police, I'm anti-police who keep shooting unarmed men and getting away with it.  Just like I'm anti- piece of shit criminals who run around this city getting away with their crimes.

Either she is a methodical evil murderer or a complete fucking idiot, either way she doesn't need to be serving this city with a gun on her hip.

Correct - This is not cops vs. robbers in spite of what her lawyer put out there.  

There was no traffic stop in a dark alley and she was not performing any work duties. 

She was a citizen just like you or I who had a gun on her (legally unless she was impaired) and has to be held accountable for her actions regardless of the job from which she punched out on the time clock.

That was a shot across the bow to potential jurors in order to muddy the water.  

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

18 minutes ago, thestud said:

 

I highly doubt she did anything extracurricular on top of killing Jean.

Read Texas Govt Code on Civil Service. All the procedures for hiring, firing and discipline are there. That’ll help all of you understand the timelines a bit better

Chapter 143 makes it pretty clear that the only remedy available to a police department in the event of a felony indictment is suspension, at least until the criminal process is complete.  Which is kind of consistent with that notion that you can't or shouldn't press a civil proceeding while a criminal one is pending.

 

Quote

Sec. 143.056.  PROCEDURES AFTER FELONY INDICTMENT OR MISDEMEANOR COMPLAINT.  (a)  If a fire fighter or police officer is indicted for a felony or officially charged with the commission of a Class A or B misdemeanor, the department head may temporarily suspend the person with or without pay for a period not to exceed 30 days after the date of final disposition of the specified felony indictment or misdemeanor complaint.

So, it would seem that indeed she did something else wrong to get terminated.

Edited September 25, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[kevwun 15,595]

The union would have thrown a fit if she got fired before the legal process was done.  She did something else.

[SDG 3,319]

Any chance she was fired for overtime violations?  If there is any truth to the noise complaint there’s no way she worked “15” hours.  

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Did they perform a sobriety check  ?  How long do those results take to come back ?  

[SameSame 1,691]

14 minutes ago, SDG said:

Any chance she was fired for overtime violations?  If there is any truth to the noise complaint there’s no way she worked “15” hours.  

This was brought up before, but you don't have to be at the apartment complex to make a noise complaint.  You can call from anywhere to the office during the day and make a complaint about the previous night.

Or

You can call the answering service during the night and leave a message for management.

Her working her shift has nothing to do IF there was or was not a noise complaint.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

I'm kinda thinking she might have shown up for her arrest and booking shithammered.

[conVINCEd 21,468]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm kinda thinking she might have shown up for her arrest and booking shithammered.

Is that frowned upon?  If I was facing possible murder charges I think my alcohol consumption would increase substantially.

[bobcat1995 71]

2 hours ago, Reagan1k said:

Or she may end up working at a state park - blocking traffic and screaming Miiikkkeee when someone tries to leave.  I hear there is an opening at Lake Georgetown.

TCOLE has a form called an F5 - SEPARATION OF LICENSE.  The form list out reasons why the officer is no longer employed.  One of the options is Dishonorably Discharged.  I would hope not even a small, backwoods agency with only two people would hire an ex-officer with a dishonorable discharge.  

Dishonorably Discharged

(A) was terminated, by a law enforcement agency or retired or resigned in lieu of termination by the agency in relation to allegations of criminal misconduct; or

(B) was terminated, by a law enforcement agency or retired or resigned in lieu of termination by the agency for insubordination or untruthfulness.

[Orange&White 5,516]

26 minutes ago, SameSame said:

This was brought up before, but you don't have to be at the apartment complex to make a noise complaint.  You can call from anywhere to the office during the day and make a complaint about the previous night.

Or

You can call the answering service during the night and leave a message for management.

Her working her shift has nothing to do IF there was or was not a noise complaint.

Or they pulled the GPS/call records off her cell phone and found out unequivocally that she was at the apartment while making the noise compliant when her time sheet says she was supposed to be working.

[SameSame 1,691]

Just now, Orange&White said:

Or they pulled the GPS/call records off her cell phone and found out unequivocally that she was at the apartment while making the noise compliant when her time sheet says she was supposed to be working.

Definitely could be that as well.  Just saying you cannot draw any conclusions about the supposed noise complaint without more information.

[irishtexan 11,442]

35 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Did they perform a sobriety check  ?  How long do those results take to come back ?  

Still processing that. Gotta make sure the results are accurate. 

Of course, they were able to execute a search warrant on the deceased's apartment and publish that he had marijuana within 48 hours of his death. 

But we gotta be sure the warrant on her apartment, electronic key, car, cell phone, 911 recording, and toxicology report are correct. So that probably won't be released for another coupla weeks. 

[PilotsError 2,280]

13 minutes ago, bobcat1995 said:

TCOLE has a form called an F5 - SEPARATION OF LICENSE.  The form list out reasons why the officer is no longer employed.  One of the options is Dishonorably Discharged.  I would hope not even a small, backwoods agency with only two people would hire an ex-officer with a dishonorable discharge.  

Dishonorably Discharged

(A) was terminated, by a law enforcement agency or retired or resigned in lieu of termination by the agency in relation to allegations of criminal misconduct; or

(B) was terminated, by a law enforcement agency or retired or resigned in lieu of termination by the agency for insubordination or untruthfulness.

lol.  if she doesn't go to jail, she'll be a cop again.  Hell, there's a town in Arizona that hires nothing BUT disgraced cops.

[Kyle 207]

3 hours ago, Reagan1k said:

Correct - This is not cops vs. robbers in spite of what her lawyer put out there.  

There was no traffic stop in a dark alley and she was not performing any work duties. 

She was a citizen just like you or I who had a gun on her (legally unless she was impaired) and has to be held accountable for her actions regardless of the job from which she punched out on the time clock.

That was a shot across the bow to potential jurors in order to muddy the water.  

Great post. This seems to be lost on many on both "sides" of this case. Whether or not she was a cop should be irrelevant. If anything, it makes her look worse. She walked into another person's home and killed the occupant. That feels pretty cut and dry to me. If one of us did that not only would there not be exploitative special interest groups but also we would spend most of our remaining days in prison. That feels like the appropriate outcome.

[bigup2dahorns 3,343]

Still processing that. Gotta make sure the results are accurate. 
Of course, they were able to execute a search warrant on the deceased's apartment and publish that he had marijuana within 48 hours of his death. 
But we gotta be sure the warrant on her apartment, electronic key, car, cell phone, 911 recording, and toxicology report are correct. So that probably won't be released for another coupla weeks. 

Not a lawyer but pretty sure I read that you don’t need a warrant for her apartment if she consents to a search and reportedly she did. Also thought they took her blood sample.

[irishtexan 11,442]

2 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

 

Not a lawyer but pretty sure I read that you don’t need a warrant for her apartment if she consents to a search and reportedly she did. Also thought they took her blood sample.

 

I'm being sarcastic with respect to how efficient investigative agencies are at processing information when it impugns the character of the victim, yet have not been able to provide any substantive information regarding what they've learned about the actions of the cop defendant that night. 

[immortal13 4,059]

I have no sympathy for this cop. None. She did not act in the way ANY normal citizen would act in that same situation. Cops are programmed to shoot first and sort out the bodies later. Eventually, after enough cases like this have ended up with the cop getting fired and/or prosecuted, they will learn and these types of shootings will decrease.....maybe

Edited September 25, 2018 by immortal13

[RPM 26,185]

DPD Chief has rescinded the policy of allowing officers 72 hours to "get their story straight" before making a statement after a shooting. Shockingly officers are not pleased.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-police-chief-calls-for-reforms-11178479

[Deej 76,510]

They shouldn't need 72 hours to come up with a lie.

[Kyle 207]

1 minute ago, Deej said:

They shouldn't need 72 hours to come up with a lie.

Regardless, cops should not be treated differently than citizens. I don't think citizens get 72 hours after they shoot someone to be interviewed.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

I was unaware that that was an official policy.  That is bullshit of the purest ray serene.

Pretty sure kudos are in order for Chief Hall.  Some remains to be seen, though.

[TexasEd 8,062]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

DPD Chief has rescinded the policy of allowing officers 72 hours to "get their story straight" before making a statement after a shooting. Shockingly officers are not pleased.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-police-chief-calls-for-reforms-11178479

Damn, that site is one ad after another.  multiple running with sound at the same time.