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.
She needs to be put down with the needle.
She’s a criminal, a murderer, and a liar it seems now.
Not surprised the Blue Line might try to protect her either.
Was this female cop (I know, I know, don’t go there) tested for alcohol or drug use after the incident?
I agree with the general idea of this piece, though. A cop is not above the law.
She is going to get a pussy pass and a cop pass. The fact she isnt on a murder 2 charge shows this is how it will play out.
Further a woman shot a man, hence no female group outrage or negative press spin on her, men are disposable and women are victims who just have unfortunate accidents.
Fuch modern society for all this. Fuch feminism. Fuch the police state we created that gives two tier justice to elites, their lackeys and then all of us lowly peons.
I agree that David French is insufferable. Bigly.
His recent tweet about not being Republican is laughable hypocrisy.
The reasoning of this article, though, is sound imho.
“A cop is not above the law.”
You mean that they shouldn’t be. Because lots of evidence indicates that in fact, they are.
Bullshit. If this cop entered your house and shot your child, would you feel the same? She should hang.
That’s exactly what it was. She needs to pay the price for that and the murder that it produced.
Does anyone if the assertion that a red rug was on the floor at the door?
I don’t know if was inside or outside but if outside that should have
been an indicator to her that that wasn’t her apartment.
There’s more to this story than - dumb cop freaks out, panics, jerks her pistol and smokes a diplomats son - more, much, much more (JMHO)
Not even sure why her job as a cop is even relevant unless there were other incidents. The woman was OFF DUTY and entered someone else’s house and shot and killed him. The police department already fired her and disavowed any relationship it once had with her. Really has nothing to do with cops and everything to do with a private citizen breaking into someone’s house and shooting him in her off-duty hours.
Murder II. I’m just sayin’
But you have five seconds to comply.
because women are mostly outclassed in hand to hand combat with almost any man (David Hogg excepted) - hence - the likelihood of female cop involved shootings is higher. Use it or lose it.
Or this one...
Dime a dozen these days with room temp IQ’s wearing badges.
Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House
https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95475&page=1
“Really has nothing to do with cops and everything to do with a private citizen breaking into someone’s house and shooting him in her off-duty hours.”
You are correct, but she walked the streets for 72 hours after the shooting.
I doubt you could do that if you broke into your neighbor’s house and shot and killed him.
He said Jean had a red doormat outside his apartment door.
“In fact, to ensure no one mistook his apartment the way this
officer is claiming in this case, he went out and bought the
biggest, brightest red rug and placed it right there at his
doorstep,” Merritt said.
http://www.news-herald.com/article/HR/20180911/NEWS/180919894
First Degree Murder requires premeditation.
Murder in the Second Degree accurately describes her actions as there was no premeditation. 40 years in prison will be an appropriate punishment.
The hypothetitical is, given it is Texas, what if she broke into the guy’s apartment and he shot her?
What then?
If what I've read about this incident is,in fact,the truth,the whole truth and nothing but the truth I believe that she's guilty of something like "negligent homicide".
One does not "intend" to be negligent.
It's kinda like ILLary and Comey.He said that there was no intent on her part so no charges will be filed.
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.