Dallas Officer Kills Man After Walking Into Wrong Apartment: Police

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Well, that's fair i suppose because stuff the taxpayer having to foot the bill to keep police on the street that off people mistakenly on their own doorstep.

Its tragic all the same, because even if she did not mean to kill the Man, he's still dead and her own life damaged in a rather irreparable manner.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's not entirely correct (in most states anyway). Bond is bond. The judge sets the bond at arraignment and that's it. A bail bonding company has to put up a surety in the full amount (and they have to have the wherewithal to do it too). They are the ones who decide if they will accept 10% cash and the balance in collateral.

Now, the judge can later change and/or reduce the bond amount based on Defense filings if he/she chooses. The Prosecution will usually vigorously object to any reductions though because it reduces their odds of getting a plea arrangement as a last resort (which will go down as a 'conviction' on their record as opposed to a loss).

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk


In New Jersey there are several bail options including paying 10% in cash.

a reply to: C84K2

She most likely called on her cell phone. There is a video of a woman walking the hall talking on one that is said to be her.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Well, I can't speak for NJ, so I'm sure you're probably right there, but...

How does NJ ensure the perp is good for the other 90%?? This is why the bail bondsmen exist, to serve as middlemen in the collateral assignment and asset forfeiture process so the state or municipality doesn't have to get involved in this financial labyrinth right at the start.

ETA - Otherwise, the bond isn't the bond, it's only 10% of the bond, meaning the other 90% was just smoke. What's the point of the higher amount if they'll let them go on 10%? They have nothing to get the other 90%.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: C84K2

She most likely called on her cell phone. There is a video of a woman walking the hall talking on one that is said to be her.

Then why would a document say she went into the apartment to call 911? You don't need to go into the place just to call from her own cell phone. I'd probably stay outside the door, but that's just me. She's a trained police officer thinking she was in her own apt.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Well, I can't speak for NJ, so I'm sure you're probably right there, but...

How does NJ ensure the perp is good for the other 90%??

They don't unless you fail to appear. Makes total sense, eh?

That's why there is a job call a bounty hunter. Get the person back so the bondsman doesn't lose the money.

a reply to: C84K2

Who know if the info in the article is incorrect? I don't know positively. But in today's world, I would bet on cellular phone, look how many people carry one.

edit:

I see now in the article. She started the call there - it doesn't mean she used his phone.

AM,

I actually knew a guy who's kid got in some serious trouble. The guy was my stupid neighbor at a house I owned back in the 90's. (No wonder his dumb kid got in trouble). The kid went up on some bomb threat charges (at a school no less). Bond was set at like $500k. I was actually in a legal dispute with this dooshbag at the same time, and I was going to file a lien on his property, but was hindered by the fact he'd signed his house over to the County (by way of the bonding company) to keep his kid out of the slammer for the year and a half it took them to get this kid to trial. So believe me, I checked all the County records in great detail because no way was I going to believe this jack-wagon at his word. Turned out he convinced his parents to do the same thing (because his house wasn't enough collateral).

The County held both of those houses for like 3 years while this whole drama played out. Of course this jackass declared bankruptcy right in the middle of all this to further complicate everything, so I wound up just giving up. He was playing the system, and I would have needed a whole team of attorneys and accountants to sort through it all.

That article seems to back up the idea of shoot first and check out details, etc second. She sees someone in a darkened room so the first thing to do is shoot the person. Had she taken the time to investigate a bit, it may not of happened since she may have discovered the address number error.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

LOL!

Uhhhh...no! But it's NJ so go figure, right?

Mobster's gotta' eat, right?

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: C84K2

Who know if the info in the article is incorrect? I don't know positively. But in today's world, I would bet on cellular phone, look how many people carry one.

It could be incorrect, but that would mean the document was incorrect, unless the writer got sloppy and careless as the info was transferred from document to article.

Yeah, most people do carry cell phones, but have landlines as well. A lot have those cordless landline ones. I'd be interested to know how she made that call, his phone, or hers.

But this is speculation on your part and mine. We really don't know either way. That's just thoughts I had on that paragraph.

Grand jury

District Attorney Faith Johnson said the investigation into what happened that night is ongoing. The final case will be presented to a grand jury, who will then decide whether or not to charge Guyger with manslaughter, murder or any other charges, Johnson said.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

More often than not though if you don't play the system, then the system plays you.

Truth is its designed that way really.

Just a shame you got an arse for a neighbor, trust me when i say i know how that feels.

a reply to: andy06shake

Oh, he ain't my neighbor no more!

I sold that house shortly after that.

a reply to: andy06shake

The is this phenomenon that is that no matter where a person moves, there will always be one screwy neighbor. I think the planet makes sure they are evenly spread for maximum enjoyment.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I moved on as well, simply not worth the hassle, for myself, Mrs, and kids.

Felt as if i had given in at first but the fact of the matter is i now have a house with garden, rather than a crap tenement flat and associated problems that come with such.

So silver lining and all that jazz.

a reply to: roadgravel

Potluck i suppose but our last one was a mad stalker creepy pedo.

My new neighbors could not be nicer people, so he shoots he scores really.

Plus the kids are happy and safe no less.

Then again people move and properties change hands, who knows whats on the cards really. LoL

She's toast. Her police mode kicked in and caused her to do a major screw up.