Posted on 09/11/2018 2:21:41 PM PDT by billorites
Amber Guyger’s killing of Botham Shem Jean is an unspeakable tragedy. It also highlights the need for officers like Guyger to face impartial justice.
It is hard to think of a more tragic, more senseless shooting in America than the killing last week of Botham Shem Jean, a young black risk-assurance associate at PricewaterhouseCoopers, and a member of Dallas West Church of Christ.
This is what we know so far. Jean was home alone in his apartment in the South Side Flats complexin Dallas when police officer Amber Guyger entered and shot him dead. The precise chain of events is somewhat disputed. The affidavit supporting Guyger’s arrest warrant states that she believed she was entering her own apartment, which was directly below Jean’s and laid out almost identically. When she placed her key in the lock, the door pushed open, the apartment was dark, she saw a “large silhouette” across the room, and she believed she was facing a burglar. She “drew her firearm” and “gave verbal commands,” which she claims Jean ignored. She fired twice, and only then, she says, entered the apartment, called 911, turned on the lights, and realized she’d made a terrible mistake.
These statements, however, don’t square with other testimony. One witness reported hearing a woman yelling, “Let me in! Let me in!” before the gunshots and a man’s voice saying, “Oh my God. Why did you do that?” after them.
Aside from the horrific details of the shooting itself, there are already troubling indications that Guyger’s identity as a police officer is providing her with actual, undeserved advantages in the prosecution of this case.
First, police sources are reportedly indicating that Guyger may actually try to raise the fact that Jean didn’t obey her commands as a defense. It’s not a defense. The moment she opened the door to an apartment that wasn’t her own, she wasn’t operating as a police officer clothed with the authority of the law. She was instead a criminal. She was breaking into another person’s home. She was an armed home invader, and the person clothed with the authority of law to defend himself was Botham Shem Jean.
Which brings us to the second troubling element of the story. So far, Guyger is only charged with manslaughter. But all the available evidence indicates that she intentionally shot Jean. This wasn’t a warning shot gone awry. The pistol didn’t discharge during a struggle. She committed a crime by forcing open Jean’s door, deliberately took aim, and killed him.
Texas law defines murder quite simply as “intentionally or knowingly caus[ing] the death of an individual.” Manslaughter, by contrast, occurs when a person “recklessly” causes death. Guyger’s warning and her deliberate aim scream intent. She may have “recklessly” gone to the wrong apartment, but she very intentionally killed Jean. There is a chance that the grand jury will increase the charge to murder, so the early manslaughter charge is tentative. But I ask you: If Jean had mistakenly gone to Guyger’s apartment and then gunned her down in cold blood after demanding that she follow his commands, would he face a manslaughter charge?
Finally, it’s troubling that Guyger wasn’t arrested and booked until three days after the shooting. Reportedly, Dallas police had prepared a warrant the day after the killing, but they handed the investigation over to the Texas Rangers, who put a hold on the warrant.
What’s done is done, and the delayed arrest shouldn’t have any ultimate impact on the prosecution, but when all the available evidence indicates that a cop acted outside of her lawful authority, she should receive none of the courtesies and advantages so often extended to members of law enforcement. She’s a citizen, like any other, and it is hard to imagine — again — that if the roles had been reversed Jean would have enjoyed several days of relative freedom before he was arrested and booked. He’d have been in handcuffs that night, and rightfully so.
There is need for vigorous debate about the extent of police misconduct toward black men. I am unconvinced by the “open season” rhetoric, and the data supporting claims that police are more trigger-happy when confronting black men is controversial and conflicting. Without question, that’s an issue worth serious inquiry and study, and no one single incident or handful of incidents is dispositive or even all that relevant to settling it.
At the same time, however, each individual incident demands fair inquiry and the impartial administration of justice. Yet this has too often proven difficult. Juries credit officers for their fear without properly determining whether that fear was “reasonable.” And thus we’ve seen the sad spectacle of a mistrial after a cop shot an unarmed, running man in the back; the acquittal of the Minnesota cop who shot Philando Castile as Castile was doing his best to comply with the cop’s panicked, conflicting demands; and the acquittal of the cop who shot a sobbing Daniel Shaver as he crawled on his hands and knees, begging for his life.
Indeed, the justice system is often so stacked in officers’ favor that they enjoy qualified immunity, a judge-made rule that blocks even civil lawsuits against those who make dangerous and deadly mistakes.
We ask police officers to be brave. We ask officers to face a much higher degree of danger than civilians. We ask them to show restraint even in the face of provocations and tense confrontations. There are countless among them who do all we ask, and more. But we also ask something else: that police officers be subject to the very laws they’re sworn to enforce.
That’s where the system has failed in all too many cases, wounding a family that’s already suffering and breaking the public’s trust each time. At present there’s no evidence that Amber Guyger woke up Thursday morning intending to kill anyone. One can certainly feel a degree of sympathy for a person who makes a terrible mistake. But sympathy must not be allowed to cloud the quest for justice. Guyger’s blue uniform should not grant her a single advantage in the investigation and prosecution to come.
French as usual soils himself halfway through the article.
I’m not disputing the facts of the case. I was just curious as to whether this author gave the same concern to the shooting in MN.
An INNOCENT person died there at the hands of a cop, too, but it was a black on white shooting, versus a white on black shooting.
In the world of ‘urinalists’ there seems to be a difference on how they cover the stories.
The claim of racial preference holds some merit in that the cop was let go to run around for three days while a black, male, non-cop who did the same thing would have absolutely been thrown in jail.
Exactly! Didn’t know her own apartment. What was she on?
“””shooting in MN. An INNOCENT person died there at the hands of a cop, too, but it was a black on white shooting, versus a white on black shooting”””
Will justice be meted out in both cases or will ‘protected’ classes be let free?
I bet her fellow (male) officers are gonna demand a sh*tload of sexual favors in return for keeping quiet.
The first rule of firearms safety is...
Know your target and what is beyond.
Know your target not believe your target is. She didn't know who her target was. She didn't know what her target was doing. She didn't even know what apartment she was in. She didn't know any of the most basic facts about the situation she was in.
When you pull the trigger on a gun you need to know what you're doing. Not just who and what the target is but the whole situation.
Indeed, she should hang. As a message and a warning to all the other jackboots who shoot first and ask questions never. She needs the needle, but sadly won’t get it.
I heard bail was set at $300,000, which she paid.
Is that how she raised the money?
He spurned her and she responded by killing him.
Nothing else makes sense.
That’s what I’m sayin’! ;)
Know your target and what is beyond.
Absolutely. This seems to be lost on many. You don't blindly fire a gun into the dark, especially if you are a cop. This female cop needs to go to prison for 2nd degree murder, plain and simple.
Know your target, retreat to safety until sure of your target. At the least, she should have called for backup until the situation was known, and should never have fired twice to kill someone in what she says was a large silhouette in the dark. It could have been a grandma holding a couple babies in arms. Guilty cop.
If she in fact really did think that it was her apt. then everything she perceived about the situation after that was false.
Knowing who/what your target is and the background is just the start. You need to know all about the situation before you drop the hammer. And she was a cop.
Exactly. Break into my house and if you are lucky the dogs will take you down or, depending on which firearm I grab, you will have a colostomy bag or be dead.
If he had plugged her, he would probably be in jail right now....
Screw ‘Whataboutism’
The facts of any other shooting mean nothing in evaluating this one. Even suggesting a comparison is disgusting. If there had been 10 thousand such shootings, or none it would make no difference in that this bitch deserves Mr. Happy Needle.
Not that I don’t think the cop in MN shouldn’t fry, too, but I hate relative morality, be it from left or right.
David, yes, this is a problem. Now take your leftist narrative and shove it. The adults will handle it from here. And any facts that match your babbling are mere coincidence. Go away.
My thoughts went in the direction of yours. He mentioned ‘black men,’ like it’s only black men being affected by poor and/or criminal decisions made by cops. He lost a great deal of credibility when he expressed such a narrow-minded concern.
What about the whipped men who will cave at the first perceived opportunity (real or imagined) to get some? That has a lot to do with why many women get lighter sentences for the same crimes.
She wont serve a day. BIG TIME reasonable doubt!! Where are the women’s rights groups?
“””That’s what I’m sayin’! ;)”””
Minnesota: Black male cop shoots innocent white woman.
Texas: White female cop shoots innocent black man.
I have checked the internet and could find no information as to where Amber Guyger was born and what is her ethnic background.
If Amber Guyger also has recent immigrant status by herself or through her parents, then both of these cops could have double ‘protected class’ status.
Silence by the media on Amber Guyger’s background is usually indicative they are intentionally omitting it because it goes against their political beliefs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.