Oh this is good. Dallas PD cop kills man

[Bithabus]

Castle Law only applies if you are in your home, not if you think you are in your home. She killed a man while in the commission of another crime (trespassing), she is lucky her situation is not worse.

(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.

A metric shitload of defenses goes out the window since she had no right to be present at the location.

She was not trespassing. No notice was given, and she believed she was in her own home.

I agree that she had no right to be in that man's apartment. But, considering the circumstances, murder seems too harsh.

 

[Renegade]

She was not trespassing. No notice was given,

C'mon now, lets not go on the stupid train here, and suggest a doors and windows to your home are not effective notice to stay out and anyone can just open it and walk in.

Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden;
(2) "Notice" means:
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders

 

[Renegade]

she believed she was in her own home.

And we found out today that was a result of her own gross negliglence, more concerned with texting a lover to arrange a late night booty call, than paying attention to were she was.

As I said earlier, there are no facts that favor her.

 

[Bithabus]

And we found out today that was a result of her own gross negliglence, more concerned with texting a lover to arrange a late night booty call, than paying attention to were she was.

As I said earlier, there are no facts that favor her.

I agree her actions were negligent. Perhaps criminally negligent homicide would be an appropriate conviction.

 

[Bithabus]

C'mon now, lets not go on the stupid train here, and suggest a doors and windows to your home are not effective notice to stay out and anyone can just open it and walk in.

Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden;
(2) "Notice" means:
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders

I don't buy that accidentally entering the wrong apt because the door is unlocked is trespassing.

 

[Renegade]

I don't buy that accidentally entering the wrong apt because the door is unlocked is trespassing.

Even attempting to enter is, and the consequences can be more than a ticket, as a Carter Albrecht found out.

 

[Bithabus]

Even attempting to enter is, and the consequences can be more than a ticket, as a Carter Albrecht found out.

According to the letter of the law, yes. But I've seen people enter the wrong apt because someone left the door unlocked. I wouldn't vote to convict for trespassing in those instances.

 

[Renegade]

I agree her actions were negligent. Perhaps criminally negligent homicide would be an appropriate conviction.

Her unlawfully entering the apt did not cause his death, as she could have immediately left and he would be alive. Her intentionally shooting him did. If he was behind the door, and her opening it and entering caused him to slip, fall and crack his skull, that might CNH.

This is why the case is more interesting than man bites dog.

 

[Bithabus]

Her unlawfully entering the apt did not cause his death, as she could have immediately left and he would be alive. Her intentionally shooting him did. If he was behind the door, and her opening it and entering caused him to slip, fall and crack his skull, that might CNH.

This is why the case is more interesting than man bites dog.

Her negligent act was entering the wrong apt. If it had been her apartment, shooting him would have been justified.

 

[Renegade]

According to the letter of the law, yes. But I've seen people enter the wrong apt because someone left the door unlocked. I wouldn't vote to convict for trespassing in those instances.

Agreed

I was in college apt and left key in lock as phone was ringing and was expecting call (pre cell phone). unknown passerby opened door (to my shock), and handed me keys and told me I left keys in door.

Another time I was ferrying 2 cases of beer to room and when I got back with second, 1st one was gone. trespassing and theft right there. That night I go up and down hallway and see who is drinking Molson beer (not available in that state). Didn't exactly require Kojak-like skills.

 

[Renegade]

Her negligent act was entering the wrong apt. If it had been her apartment, shooting him would have been justified.

As I already covered in #699

(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section

 

[Bithabus]

As I already covered in #699

(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section

I understand what you are saying. Technically she had a duty to retreat and failed to do so. That could sink her. I still wouldn't vote for a murder conviction.

 

[Renegade]

I understand what you are saying. Technically she had a duty to retreat and failed to do so. That could sink her. I still wouldn't vote for a murder conviction.

There will be no winners in this case, only losers. I admit I am hypocritical on this one.

1) If it was my sister the cop, she made a mistake meant no harm to anyone, leave her alone.

2) If it was my brother the deceased, send the stupid moron to Huntsville.

 

[Bithabus]

There will be no winners in this case, only losers. I admit I am hypocritical on this one.

1) If it was my sister the cop, she made a mistake meant no harm to anyone, leave her alone.

2) If it was my brother the deceased, send the stupid moron to Huntsville.

Or somewhere in between. Maybe, a trip to Gatesville but only for a few years.

 

[BillFairbanks]

Her negligent act was entering the wrong apt. If it had been her apartment, shooting him would have been justified.

Would it?

I’ve seen no indication that he attacked or threatened her. Just that he “didn’t follow her commands”

I think the jury will want to know why she felt the need to immediately use deadly force instead of taking the time to assess the situation and realize she was in the wrong apartment. He was 13 feet away from her and unarmed.

If she had gone to her own apartment and found the maintenance guy in there would she have immediately shot him or found out why he’s there?

I think most reasonable people in her situation would have realized their mistake and apologized to their neighbor for barging in on them.

Of course, he was eating ice cream. So if she thought he was stealing her Blue Bell it would’ve been a justified shooting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BillFairbanks]

Another Double Post

 

[ThoughtCriminal2A]

...
I’ve seen no indication that he attacked or threatened her. Just that he “didn’t follow her commands”...

yes but that is not the issue.
The "higher standard" is the issue.
Either the "higher standard" applies, or it does not.

Amber admitted she did make entry into the domicile of Botham Jean, at night, and did shoot/mortally wound Botham Jean while both of them were inside his domicile.
That entry is breaking and entering the habitation, a felony in the 2nd degree; but council for the prosecution has failed to bring that felony charge;
So the jury will now find fact on the one murder charge, and determine if she is, or is not guilty as charged.


The issue--
Based on her choice of employment as a badge wearer, Amber has gotten a pass on the felony B&E of habitation,
so does Amber also get a pass on slaying Botham Jean, on the grounds that she had a badge at the time?
Or does she not get a pass, and face the same 25-life penitentiary sentence as us little people would face?

Where is the "higher standard"?

Texas has a long standing and unhealthy obsession with cops.
And innocent people are paying the price for that obsession with their lives.

That issue is complicated by the skin color of Amber and her victim:
white cop,
black "perp",
shoot first ask questions later.

Also note this is not the first time Amber has shot an unarmed black man.
She has a history of doing this; her previous victim survived, while Botham Jeam did not.

 

[Kar98]

She was not trespassing. No notice was given, and she believed she was in her own home.

Or so she claims...

 

[AustinN4]

Or so she claims...

And you will never know differently unless there is a recording from his apartment we don't know about.

 

[Kar98]

And you will never know differently unless there is a recording from his apartment we don't know about.

Unless Botham's diary is found with the entry "traded more D for D to crazy eyes white girl, gotta remember to get my lock changed".

Who bangs on what they claim they though is their own apartment door yelling let me in, let me in, and finds it unlocked and enters?