Posted on 10/01/2019 10:33:27 AM PDT by Envisioning
Give me your address and we'll see if you think it's a crime. Seriously.
In Texas, what she did is considered burglary. It can also be considered criminal trespass (30.05) since his door is obviously designed to exclude intruders. and that is a misdemeanor. In order for it to be murder and not negligent homicide or manslaughter, it has to be in commission of a felony and that's where a burglary charge comes in.
And in Texas, burglary doesn't just mean I break in a steal your stuff. 30.02.a.3 comes into play here. It becomes burglary when you enter another person's residence, without consent, and commit an assault OR felony (which shooting someone certainly is). You don't have to meet mens rea.
So....30.02.a.3 and 30.05 are BOTH things she did. One is a felony and the other is a class a misdemeanor...which is why they didn't gl with 30.05.
Fortunately for me, I do, and I know the law. One of my best friends has bar privileges for the SCOTUS and regularly argues cases before the high court. He's a constitutional scholar and practices law here in Texas (San Antonio). So, I feel very confident (after many conversations with him) about what I am saying. Had Botham Jean shot Amber Guyger in his home after she entered HIS home, her mens rea would not be an issue....only the fact that she had most certainly violated TPC 30.05 (the Actus Reus). Of that, there is NO doubt. A door of one's home has LONG legal standing as something that is designed to exclude intruders.
I disagree. The circumstances of the shooting is the relevant factor. Had she been walking down the hall and dropped her gun which then went off and the bullet went through the wall and killed him, that would be an accident. She shot an unarmed man in his own apartment which she illegally entered. And it was her illegal act led to her shooting a man.
You keep comparing this to an auto accident where someone is killed and nobody is charged. And you're right, that happens every day. But if I'm fleeing the police and hit a car and kill the occupant, I'm getting charged. If I drink to excess and hit a car and kill the occupant, I'm getting charged. Even though in neither case did I intend to kill anyone, I was in the process of committing an illegal act that lead to the death. Do that and you're going to get charged every time. And that's what happened here.
Was it her apartment? Was she invited it? Since the answer to is "no" then she was there illegally.
Good.
Now watch her get a five year suspended sentence.
Yeah, but they had a tough job proving it beyond a reasonable doubt. But they did their job well and it stuck.
Link: Penal Code Chapter 30
She did fail to render aid, but SOP with cops is two shots.
Tests were done and no alcohol or drugs were found in her system.
“””Cops are taught to neutralize the threat,”””
Cops are also trained to de-escalate any situation. Something that Amber failed to do -— big time.
Even though Amber had attended an 8 hour de-escalation training class in April 2018, she forgets all her training in Sept 2018 and instead ‘neutralizes’ the victim who was watching TV and eating ice cream in his home.
It was a mistake. A horrible, tragic mistake. Negligent homicide, but there was no premeditation, so a murder conviction is unwarranted.
Well, no, but they would have found meds in her purse or medicine cabinet.
You walk into a guy's apartment pull your weapon and shoot him.
That is murder.
It was a mistake. A horrible, tragic mistake. Negligent homicide, but there was no premeditation, so a murder conviction is unwarranted.
The fact that she didn’t adminster aid after her tragic “mistake” underminds your argument. If she attempted to save his life I might agree with you. She did not.
That’s what I was thinking but it was Dallas County. I didn’t see any planning or motive but there was gross negligence.
It WAS a horrible mistake and none of us know how we’d react. Sure, she’d been trained to give aid, but she wasn’t working a case, she thought it was her own home. Murder requires premeditation, and there was no testimony of that. I stick by my original statement.
It’s not her vs a dead man
It’s her vs the jury as it weighs her credibility
In the 911 tapes she admits that she mistook the victims apartment for her own. In the body cam video she admits it again. She never administered aid even though she knew she shot an innocent man.
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.