Ex-cop Amber Guyger is found guilty of murder
vermontsavant wrote:
I think a Christian fundamentalist Dallas jury...
Do you know for certain that they were all fundamentalists of any religion or even Christians?vermontsavant wrote:
... convicted her of being a bad person...
Last time I checked, murder in any degree IS "bad".vermontsavant wrote:
... and ignored evidence...
Evidence, please?vermontsavant wrote:
... manslaughter, which is what she was really guilty of.
Were you there in the courtroom at any time during the trial?vermontsavant wrote:
I think her actions were incredibly reckless but they did not rise to premeditated murder
What was the exact wording of the jury's verdict? It certainly was not an accidental shooting, which could result in a 3rd degree murder (manslaughter) conviction -- she took aim and fired more than one round, after all. And there is reasonable doubt that she planned to commit the murder, which would result is a 1st-degree conviction. This leaves a 2nd-degree murder conviction. Now, I don't know if Texas law differentiates between degrees of murder, but second-guessing the verdict is for the appeals trial to determine. Let's wait and see how that turns out.
_________________
Fnord wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I think a Christian fundamentalist Dallas jury...
Do you know for certain that they were all fundamentalists of any religion or even Christians?vermontsavant wrote:
... convicted her of being a bad person...
Last time I checked, murder in any degree IS "bad".vermontsavant wrote:
... and ignored evidence...
Evidence, please?vermontsavant wrote:
... manslaughter, which is what she was really guilty of.
Were you there in the courtroom at any time during the trial?vermontsavant wrote:
I think her actions were incredibly reckless but they did not rise to premeditated murder
What was the exact wording of the jury's verdict? It certainly was not an accidental shooting, which could result in a 3rd degree murder (manslaughter) conviction -- she took aim and fired more than one round, after all. And there is reasonable doubt that she planned to commit the murder, which would result is a 1st-degree conviction. This leaves a 2nd-degree murder conviction. Now, I don't know if Texas law differentiates between degrees of murder, but second-guessing the verdict is for the appeals trial to determine. Let's wait and see how that turns out.The evidence clearly points toward manslaughter,she did not walk into that apartment looking to kill anyone,I believe she thought she was acting in self defense but still had no business taking those shots.She should never had been a cop or even carry a gun and she clearly has some deep rooted issues she needs to work out but I don't think a sentence of 20,30 years or life is appropriate.
What evidence points toward manslaughter?
She didn't know where she was and was confused,if she wasn't confused why else would she have been in the wrong persons apartment.To rob it,there was no evidence of robbery,she didn't take his stuff then leave the apartment.She was tired from working long hours.
Why is she not innocent?She didn't perform CPR as a trained officer,she texted her boyfriend before calling 911,she did not wait for back up from other officers.She acted with disregard for human life and her negligence caused the death of another person.
Your right about the appeals court,this case is far from over.
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined
vermontsavant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I think a Christian fundamentalist Dallas jury...
Do you know for certain that they were all fundamentalists of any religion or even Christians?vermontsavant wrote:
... convicted her of being a bad person...
Last time I checked, murder in any degree IS "bad".vermontsavant wrote:
... and ignored evidence...
Evidence, please?vermontsavant wrote:
... manslaughter, which is what she was really guilty of.
Were you there in the courtroom at any time during the trial?vermontsavant wrote:
I think her actions were incredibly reckless but they did not rise to premeditated murder
What was the exact wording of the jury's verdict? It certainly was not an accidental shooting, which could result in a 3rd degree murder (manslaughter) conviction -- she took aim and fired more than one round, after all. And there is reasonable doubt that she planned to commit the murder, which would result is a 1st-degree conviction. This leaves a 2nd-degree murder conviction. Now, I don't know if Texas law differentiates between degrees of murder, but second-guessing the verdict is for the appeals trial to determine. Let's wait and see how that turns out.The evidence clearly points toward manslaughter,she did not walk into that apartment looking to kill anyone,I believe she thought she was acting in self defense but still had no business taking those shots.She should never had been a cop or even carry a gun and she clearly has some deep rooted issues she needs to work out but I don't think a sentence of 20,30 years or life is appropriate.
What evidence points toward manslaughter?
She didn't know where she was and was confused,if she wasn't confused why else would she have been in the wrong persons apartment.To rob it,there was no evidence of robbery,she didn't take his stuff then leave the apartment.She was tired from working long hours.
Why is she not innocent?She didn't perform CPR as a trained officer,she texted her boyfriend before calling 911,she did not wait for back up from other officers.She acted with disregard for human life and her negligence caused the death of another person.
Your right about the appeals court,this case is far from over.
20 or 30 years? I just saw the sentence on the news, I understood ten years. Did I misunderstand?
vermontsavant wrote:
I certainly don't know the religion of the jury but it seems to me she was convicted of being a bad person, the evidence clearly did not rise to premeditated murder. She was passed off as a homewrecking slut and testamony on her behalf was disregarded because of this.
Was it? Do you know the minds of the jurors? Besides, a murderer IS a "bad person". Now, if you are concerned that a homewrecking slut (as you put it) did not receive a fair trial, then by all means, submit an Amicus Curiae brief to the presiding judge, and wait for a reply.vermontsavant wrote:
The evidence clearly points toward manslaughter...
To convict a defendant of manslaughter in Texas, prosecutors must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant recklessly caused the death of another individual. There is no requirement of premeditation to this crime and no requirement for there to be intent or knowledge on the part of the defendant. The only requirement is that the defendant's conduct was reckless. "Reckless" here implies accidental through carelessness or indifference. Had her sidearm dropped from its holster, struck the floor, discharged, and killed the victim, THEN it could be deemed "accidental" due to her carelessness in securely holstering her sidearm; but no, she drew her sidearm, took aim, and fired twice, resulting in the death of the victim by her own intentional act. There are several different types of defenses to the crime of manslaughter:
• Insanity: The defendant was not found to be insane.
• Self-defense: The deceased was eating ice cream while watching TV.
• "Heat of passion": The defendant walked into the wrong apartment, saw a stranger, drew her sidearm, and killed him in "cold blood".
Since the defense could not or did not prove insanity, self-defense, or "heat of passion", the charge of manslaughter was not applicable. Since the prosecution could not or did not prove premeditation, the charge of 1st-degree murder was not applicable, either. This leaves on 2nd-degree murder -- voluntary murder without premeditation -- as the eventual outcome.
Whether she was a "Good" person or a "Bad" person, the jury found her guilty of intentionally murdering the victim. The only thing to do now is wait for the inevitable appeal, which will likely result in the same verdict due to her confession on the witness stand.
An armed, white, female cop murdered an unarmed, black, male civilian in cold blood in Texas and was convicted of her crime. Deal with it.
_________________
Bravo5150 wrote:
20 or 30 years? I just saw the sentence on the news, I understood ten years. Did I misunderstand?
10 years.
Texas permits parole after 1/3 of the sentence, so she has to do at least 3.3 years.
Though, some articles are saying she has to do 5 years before parole.
_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
20 or 30 years? I just saw the sentence on the news, I understood ten years. Did I misunderstand?
10 years.
Texas permits parole after 1/3 of the sentence, so she has to do at least 3.3 years.
Though, some articles are saying she has to do 5 years before parole.
At least she didn't just get transferred like other cops finding themselves in similar situations after killing a civilian.
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
20 or 30 years? I just saw the sentence on the news, I understood ten years. Did I misunderstand?
10 years.
Texas permits parole after 1/3 of the sentence, so she has to do at least 3.3 years.
Though, some articles are saying she has to do 5 years before parole.
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined
Fnord wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I certainly don't know the religion of the jury but it seems to me she was convicted of being a bad person, the evidence clearly did not rise to premeditated murder. She was passed off as a homewrecking slut and testamony on her behalf was disregarded because of this.
Was it? Do you know the minds of the jurors? Besides, a murderer IS a "bad person". Now, if you are concerned that a homewrecking slut (as you put it) did not receive a fair trial, then by all means, submit an Amicus Curiae brief to the presiding judge, and wait for a reply.vermontsavant wrote:
The evidence clearly points toward manslaughter...
To convict a defendant of manslaughter in Texas, prosecutors must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant recklessly caused the death of another individual. There is no requirement of premeditation to this crime and no requirement for there to be intent or knowledge on the part of the defendant. The only requirement is that the defendant's conduct was reckless. "Reckless" here implies accidental through carelessness or indifference. Had her sidearm dropped from its holster, struck the floor, discharged, and killed the victim, THEN it could be deemed "accidental" due to her carelessness in securely holstering her sidearm; but no, she drew her sidearm, took aim, and fired twice, resulting in the death of the victim by her own intentional act. There are several different types of defenses to the crime of manslaughter:
• Insanity: The defendant was not found to be insane.
• Self-defense: The deceased was eating ice cream while watching TV.
• "Heat of passion": The defendant walked into the wrong apartment, saw a stranger, drew her sidearm, and killed him in "cold blood".
Since the defense could not or did not prove insanity, self-defense, or "heat of passion", the charge of manslaughter was not applicable. Since the prosecution could not or did not prove premeditation, the charge of 1st-degree murder was not applicable, either. This leaves on 2nd-degree murder -- voluntary murder without premeditation -- as the eventual outcome.
Whether she was a "Good" person or a "Bad" person, the jury found her guilty of intentionally murdering the victim. The only thing to do now is wait for the inevitable appeal, which will likely result in the same verdict due to her confession on the witness stand.
An armed, white, female cop murdered an unarmed, black, male civilian in cold blood in Texas and was convicted of her crime. Deal with it.
No I don't know the minds of the jurors,but I think her bad behavior at the crime scene and in her personal life did weigh against her.
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined
Fnord wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Nobody has the right to walk around, not paying attention...
Last time I checked the freeways, travelling while stupid was a "right" that too many people seem to enjoy.EzraS wrote:
... especially when they are trained to be observant ...
Not a mitigating factor.EzraS wrote:
... and are armed ...
Please re-read the Second Amendment.EzraS wrote:
... and trigger happy.
Bingo. No one has the "right" to be trigger-happy, not even trained and duly-sworn officers of the law. That's why prison is the only option in this case. I'm glad to see it, too.The word "right" is being used loosely, rather than literally.
There are distracted driver laws in place. And police officers are held to a much higher standard when it comes to traveling stupidly
Her being trained to be observant was very much a mitigating and determining factor in this case.
The second amendment addresses private citizens rather than law enforcement and military appointed by the government to carry a firearm.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,578
Location: Right over your left shoulder
10 years seems a bit light, but I'd anticipate there's a good chance she'll be spending much of it in PC, because if they put her out in general she'll leave in a bag much sooner than anticipated.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
funeralxempire wrote:
10 years seems a bit light, but I'd anticipate there's a good chance she'll be spending much of it in PC, because if they put her out in general she'll leave in a bag much sooner than anticipated.
Oh yeah, there is no way the put her in general population.I also think the murder conviction will be knocked down to manslaughter on appeal.
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
Sweetleaf wrote:
Guilty of murder yet only gets 10 years.
Texas puts sentencing in the hands of the jury unlike most states where a judge does sentence.Texas gives jurors wide descretion in sentencing.I think the jury saw mitigating factors in the case and gave a light sentence.
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
OK bill would charge abortion recipients with murder |
14 Feb 2024, 12:04 pm |
4th bday party turned murder mystery whodunnit? |
19 Feb 2024, 2:56 pm |
Tarot-Touting Influencer Commits Murder-Suicide. |
15 Apr 2024, 9:11 pm |
At 17, she found out she was autistic. |
16 Feb 2024, 9:12 am |