It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dallas Officer Kills Man After Walking Into Wrong Apartment: Police

page: 10
31
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 02:14 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

2 possibilities on how she got in -

* - 2 witnesses stated they heard her yelling open the door (or something along those lines).


* - The other reference I have seen says as she was trying to enter the apartment, the victim heard something/someone trying to come thru the door and went to see what was going on. He apparently opened the door as the lady was trying to use her key and things went downhill from there.




posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 02:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I agree with you for the most part however on murder its possible. Do to the fact she entered someone else's apartment and shot them. The DA could decide she had the intent to shoot them the moment she entered the room if she knew someone was there. Judging from the fact that the victim probably opened the door for her it could be murder,



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Fair enough...

Question -
If you were the prosecuting attorney and you charged her with murder answer the following:

* - Prove she specifically intend to make contact with the victim.
* - Prove she knowingly tried to enter a structure that did not belong to her.
* - Prove she specifically intended to kill the victim.
* - Explain why, if she "murdered" the victim, she then turned around and called the situation into dispatch letting them know what occurred.
* - Explain what the suspect and victim argued about at the door.
* - Reconcile witness statements that they heard her yelling to open the door which drew attention to what the suspect was doing.
* - Explain what occurred that required the suspect to use deadly force.

I am playing devils advocate just so everyone is clear in my post. I am demonstrating why a murder charge doesnt apply to this situation.

The fundamental question you have to answer to support your murder charge is her intent. You have to demonstrate to the court the suspects intent that night to purposely make contact with the victim and demonstrate her intent on killing the victim.

1 caveat -
You need to use legal requirements to support your argument. Which is to say hearsay is not allowed as a consideration, speculation is not allowed and finally you can only use facts in evidence.

My point is it is easy to say someone murdered another person. The hard part that people dont consider is proving it.

In my opinion the incident, with available facts, does not meet the legal requirement to charge her with murder. The material below is for criminal homicide. I only included the elements needed for murder by any person except for incarcerated individuals, who have different elements.
* - Texas penal code -CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

Sec. 19.03. CAPITAL MURDER. -(1) the person murders a peace officer or fireman who is acting in the lawful discharge of an official duty and who the person knows is a peace officer or fireman;

No peace oficer was murdered



(2) the person intentionally commits the murder in the course of committing or attempting to commit kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson, obstruction or retaliation, or terroristic threat under Section 22.07(a)(1), (3), (4), (5), or (6);

None of the above elements apply.



(3) the person commits the murder for remuneration or the promise of remuneration or employs another to commit the murder for remuneration or the promise of remuneration;

None of the above elements apply.



(4) the person commits the murder while escaping or attempting to escape from a penal institution;

None of the above elements apply.


Sec. 19.05. CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. (a) A person commits an offense if he causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence.

(b) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

None of the above elements apply.



Sec. 19.04. MANSLAUGHTER. (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.


All elements are met for Manslaughter.

Again not defending the officer. Just explaining why some statutes are not going to apply. Before someone tries to make an argument for homicide by trying to use burglary as a possibility. Burglary requires an intent on the suspects part to knowingly enter an occupied/unoccupied structure with the goal of theft while persons are home / not home. Again you would have to prove the suspects intent was to knowingly and illegally enter a structure to takes items that dont belong to the suspect.

Given available evidence murder still would not apply. The above is based solely on publicly available info.
edit on 10-9-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Press conference scheduled for sometime today.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
So far all I've found is that she parked on the wrong garage floor which seems to mean she ended up on the wrong apartment floor.

This wrong apartment situation seems quite bad for any normal person and hard to believe but strange things have happened.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Well, she did shoot the man on his own doorstep, that kind of proves she intended to kill the victim.

Don't know about Murder, but manslaughter or culpable homicide seems to be on the cards at the very least.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I am seeing reports that the prosecutor may convene a grand jury for an indictment. This could also lead to additional charges. I still dont think, based on available info, a murder charge is going to be possible.

@andy06shake - She shot the victim because she thought it was her apartment. She didnt specifically go to that address with the sole intent of killing the victim. She would have had to plan on doing that from the get go.

Either or we will find out soon enough and maybe some better details on what occurred.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Sec. 19.02. MURDER. (a) In this section:

(1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly produce a degree of anger, rage, resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind incapable of cool reflection.

(2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by the individual killed or another acting with the person killed which passion arises at the time of the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation.

(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

(3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, and in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commission or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.

(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a felony of the first degree.

(d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he caused the death under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second degree.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42

originally posted by: amazing
Yep. She knew him before hand they were friends at the least and possibly more.

It's not a mistaken apartment thing. It's a she shot him for another reason thing.


Ah that explains why cnn and the left didnt go straight to the racist card. Although im surprised they still didnt jump the gun , since they never like to have facts or completed investigation get in the way of using the racist card


Well remember that right wing media doesn't like facts either. Watch Fox news for 5 minutes and you'll see what I mean. That's why I never watch any news.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Kudos to the Texas Rangers.

I think this is murder. Unless she can present us with a reason to shoot him.

She had no reason to shoot him cause even if he was in her house he did not attack her or anything. That shows premeditation to kill if someone blindly draws a weapon and fires without being in danger or even looking at her surroundings. The premeditation will come because she was premeditated to fear black guys. Her prior shooting will also come into play. I think there is a thread on here covering it if someone could find it.


Deliberation and Premeditation Whether a killer acted with the deliberation and premeditation required for first degree murder can only be determined on a case by case basis. The need for deliberation and premeditation does not mean that the perpetrator must contemplate at length or plan far ahead of the murder. Time enough to form the conscious intent to kill and then act on it after enough time for a reasonable person to second guess the decision typically suffices. While this can happen very quickly, deliberation and premeditation must occur before, and not at the same time as, the act of killing. "Malice Aforethought" Under many state laws, perpetrators of first degree murder must have acted with malice or "malice aforethought." Malice generally includes an evil disposition or purpose and an indifference to human life. States treat the concept of "malice" differently. Under some laws, malice aforethought essentially means the same thing as acting with a premeditated intent to kill or extreme indifference to human life. Other states require a showing of malice distinct from the willfulness, deliberation and premeditation generally required for first degree murder.


criminal.findlaw.com...

I am not quite sure how this applies to Texas law but if she has a history even remotely deemed racist then first degree would be considered due to malice. imo
edit on 10-9-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

She still shot the Man with the intention to kill, just the wrong intention based on poor judgment.

Else he would have been shot in the knee, arm, or not at all i imagine.
edit on 10-9-2018 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: interupt42

originally posted by: amazing
Yep. She knew him before hand they were friends at the least and possibly more.

It's not a mistaken apartment thing. It's a she shot him for another reason thing.


Ah that explains why cnn and the left didnt go straight to the racist card. Although im surprised they still didnt jump the gun , since they never like to have facts or completed investigation get in the way of using the racist card


Well remember that right wing media doesn't like facts either. Watch Fox news for 5 minutes and you'll see what I mean. That's why I never watch any news.


I will pass i have no desire to watch foxcrap either.

Cnn is about prematurely making everything into a racial or sexist issue while foxnews is about fear mongering . Like i said im surprised this wasnt spun into a racial issue maybe because the assailant was a female?

However the left does appear to have surpassed the right from full retard to nuclear retard .



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Xcathdra

She still shot the Man with the intention to kill, just the wrong intention based on poor judgment.

Else he would have been shot in the knee, arm, or not at all i imagine.


We would need to know what occurred that made her feel deadly force was warranted. When she went to the door it was not her intent to kill anyone. She thought she was entering her own apartment. The act of trying to enter the wrong apartment caused the encounter and by extension the use of deadly force. To sustain a murder charge they have to prove it was her intent to kill the victim. Publicly available info to date says thats not the case.

The death of the victim was not the primary reason she was present at the apartment.

Secondly people need to get out of the Hollywood mindset that its easier and safer to try to shot to wound. If you are in a situation where you feel your life or someone else life is in imminent danger I guarantee you wounding is nowhere near the top of the thought process. Shooting till the threat stops is.

As I said before this is based on publicly available info. I still believe manslaughter will be the charge. Due to the fact the suspect is white / female / a cop and the victim is black is most likely the reason a grand jury is even involved. Given the reaction in this thread over the difference between murder and manslaughter using a grand jury in a politically correct charged atmosphere it makes some sense.

I am not knocking anyone who thinks she should be charged with murder. I am just saying the required elements under Texas law have not been met.
edit on 10-9-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I would imagine it's safer not to shoot at all, to be honest. And right about now i guarantee if she has an ounce of common decency she would probably agree.

She shot a half-naked unarmed Man on his own doorstep for absolutely no other reason than her own stupidity.

Fact is through stupid people commit murder just as well as the rest, so don't discount the notion just because she's an idiot as the prosecutor won't.

I imagine all sorts charge are still on the table.
edit on 10-9-2018 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
I think this is murder. Unless she can present us with a reason to shoot him.

From publicly available info she claimed she thought an intruder was in her apartment. That was the reason for the force. Its up to the prosecution to make the argument that her sole intent for going to the wrong residence was to kill the occupant.



originally posted by: howtonhawky
She had no reason to shoot him cause even if he was in her house he did not attack her or anything. That shows premeditation to kill if someone blindly draws a weapon and fires without being in danger or even looking at her surroundings. The premeditation will come because she was premeditated to fear black guys. Her prior shooting will also come into play. I think there is a thread on here covering it if someone could find it.

Actually it doesnt. Again she thought she was at her apartment. Under Texas state law (and almost every other state) an intruder in your home essentially meets the legal requirements for the use of deadly force (castle doctrine). Some states are more strict however the state of Texas is not.

Premeditation in the context of an element for a murder charge means she had to plan on going to this guys apartment solely to kill him. Not accidentally go to the wrong apartment, getting into an argument and then killing him.

A fear of another race is not premeditation.

Her prior shooting wont come into play because it was A - ruled justified and B - the victim in that shooting (who survived) verified the officers version of events. He got into a physical altercation and attempted grabbed her Taser. That meets the requirement to use deadly force by the officer.

Trying to raise the previous shooting in a new incident, imo, wont be allowed since it has absolutely no evidentiary relevance.




originally posted by: howtonhawky
criminal.findlaw.com...

I am not quite sure how this applies to Texas law but if she has a history even remotely deemed racist then first degree would be considered due to malice. imo

The definitions you provided only explain / define what something means in a legal context. You have to use the elements in the statute in order to determine if all were met in order to charge a person for breaking that law.

Premeditation is a plan of action decided upon by one or more persons where the sole intent is to take another persons life for whatever reason.

Premeditation is not going to the wrong address.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I would wager that manslaughter will be the choice because its easier to get a conviction and get real jail time.

They will play the female card, probably try to slander the dead guy (abusive ex etc), and play up the entire angle of honorable police officer trying hard to bring in criminals etc.

It will all play well with any jury, if they go big and get a jury sympathetic to cops, or women then she walks, stick with something with a more flexible definition and at least they can try to get about 10 years.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I confess I only went by the OPs presentation; I did not click the link. I just don’t now how she could have gotten the wrong room, not noticed her key didn’t work, and didn’t notice any strange artwork or furniture before killing another person. Did she shoot through the door? Yes, I’m being lazy on this thread( believe it or not, I actually do have responsibilities despite my constant presence on this site)
edit on 10-9-2018 by Guiltyguitarist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   

edit on 10-9-2018 by Guiltyguitarist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
I would imagine it's safer not to shoot at all, to be honest. And right about now i guarantee if she has an ounce of common decency she would probably agree.

Witness statements said she was in tears after the fact.



originally posted by: andy06shake
She shot a half-naked unarmed Man on his own doorstep for absolutely no other reason than her own stupidity.

No - according to her there was an intruder in her residence.



originally posted by: andy06shake
Fact is through stupid people commit murder just as well as the rest, so don't discount the notion because just because she's an idiot because the prosecutor won't.

I imagine all sorts charge are still on the table.

I understand what you are saying. I am just pointing out that public evidence to date doesnt meet all the elements to charge her with murder.

Manslaughter - yes.

Contrary to popular belief a prosecutor cant just issue a slew of charges against a person just because. Each charge must be supported with evidence that shows each required element of a crime was met.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra



2 possibilities on how she got in -

* - 2 witnesses stated they heard her yelling open the door (or something along those lines).


* - The other reference I have seen says as she was trying to enter the apartment, the victim heard something/someone trying to come thru the door and went to see what was going on. He apparently opened the door as the lady was trying to use her key and things went downhill from there.


I read that too. But there are some things that don't make sense.


The arrest affidavit further reveals that Jean’s door was unlocked, and it was dark inside when Guyger entered his apartment. She allegedly thought he was a burglar when she saw a person in the dark, shooting Jean a single time in the chest after she told authorities he ignored verbal commands. The Dallas Morning News reported that she had just worked a 15-hour shift.
heavy.com...

If true, why was the door ajar and why was the guy standing in the dark? Is she lying? If so, just wow!
edit on 10-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join