Police

Remember That Cop Who Thought She Was Entering Her Own Apartment and Shot the Guy Who Really Lived There?

Now she's on trial for murder, and she's claiming self-defense.

|

A former Dallas cop is fighting a murder charge in court this week. Last September, she shot and killed a neighbor in his own apartment after mistaking his home for her own and assuming he was an intruder. Even though she was the actual intruder, she is claiming she killed the man in self-defense.

The ex-cop, Amber Guyger, is battling one count of murder for killing Botham Jean. If convicted, she faces anywhere from five to 99 years in prison. She was initially charged only with manslaughter, but after further review of the evidence a grand jury later indicted her for murder. The trial began Monday and is expected to run about two weeks.

Jean had been sitting on his couch eating a bowl of vanilla ice cream when he heard Guyger enter his apartment. According to Guyger's defense attorney, Robert Rogers, Jean was startled by the sudden intrusion, shouted "Hey! Hey!," and rose from the couch. Guyger then drew her gun and fired two shots at Jean, piercing his heart and lungs. In the defense's opening statement, Rogers argued that Guyger's fatal mistake resulted from a culmination of exhaustion from working 40 hours in four days, knowledge of recent burglaries in the complex, and genuine confusion over whose apartment she was in.

Rogers claimed that Guyger attempted to de-escalate the situation by demanding that Jean show her his hands, and that this failed because Jean's shouting drowned out her orders and made the officer "fear for her life." Jean's last words, according to a witness, were "Oh my God, why did you do that?"

Assistant District Attorney Jason Hermus noted that Guyger failed to follow her police training for what to do if she suspected someone of being a burglar. The correct response was to retreat, take cover, and call for backup, not open fire.

On Thursday, State District Judge Tammy Kemp blocked a portion of lead investigator David Armstrong's testimony. Armstrong claimed that Guyger had acted reasonably and had not committed a crime in shooting Jean. Kemp ruled that this information only represents Armstrong's opinion and is not admissible in court.

Bodycam footage of Jean's final moments depicts Guyger, still clad in her police uniform, frantically repeating "I thought it was my apartment" as officers begin CPR on Jean. Guyger also stated that she thought she was in her apartment approximately 20 times in her initial 911 call.

In the same call, she said "I'm gonna lose my job," prompting District Attorney Hermus to declare that Guyger appeared "as concerned or more concerned about how [the shooting was] going to concern her than this poor guy on the floor next to her."

The defense's motion for a directed verdict of not guilty for the murder charge has been denied. Jean's family has also filed a civil suit against the City of Dallas.

NEXT: 7 Cases Everyone Should Know from the Burger Court

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “exhaustion from working 40 hours in four days”

    So a regular salaried shift? Wtf? Fry this whore.

    1. If she was that incompetent, that fuzzy-brained, so poor at making the most basic decisions (is this my apt?) at the end of her shift, she does not belong in uniform or out on the streets unsupervised.

      I can buy that she had the wrong apt. I can buy that she was surprised to find someone else in”her” apt. But if her first reaction to some guy eating ice cream is to shoot, then she has no business being free.

      The real problem is that her copy mentality override any normal sense. The real culprit is cop mentality, cop training, cop immunity.

      1. Are there stats refuting whether women in law enforcement go to lethal force more frequently or faster than their male colleagues? The size and strength differential would lead me to assume that they do.

        1. That would be a difficult stat to track. My cop buddies talk about how women cops have to have a male cop present generally before any sort of force scenario, so I think that would skew the data quite a bit, if it even existed.

            1. You are really obsessed with me. Which of these other people am I today, nutbag?

          1. The article says proper procedure is to retreat and call for back up. So your cop buddies are saying females follow procedure. How does that skew the data dumbfuck?

            1. Was the name calling necessary? How bad is your life that you jump to that constantly? Look at the mirror and improve yourself. We could have had a discussion about how female officers have to do things differently because they cannot engage 1 on 1 with citizens in scenarios when male officers are allowed to, but now we won’t.

            2. “Remember That Cop Who Thought She Was Entering Her Own Apartment and Shot the Guy Who Really Lived There”

              Pepperidge Farms remembers!

          2. Tony, the guys dressed as ‘cops’ down at the gay bar you frequent aren’t policemen any more than the ‘firefighters’ amd ‘constructing workers’ ar those things either.

            Hint: The assess chaps should be a clue there.

            1. what, are they too woke to dress as Indians any more?

              1. That would be “Native Americans” mister.

        2. I don’t know of anything recent but a decade or two back, I read a study with exactly those statistics. And yes, female officers do turn to lethal force more often and sooner than male officers.

          As with your assumption, the study hypothesized that it had to do with the size/strength differential. I remember being disappointed that the study didn’t attempt to control for that factor by calculating the correlation between the lethal force rate and officer size among their male data points.

          1. And here is an updated study reaching basically the same conclusion. Unfortunately, the full study is paywalled so I can’t vouch for their methodology.

            1. Very interesting. Thanks for posting.

        3. I think you may be on to something here.

      2. To be fair… it was pistachio ice cream.

    2. My thought exactly. Oh, you worked 4-10s? Go on, murder away.

      1. not really working, one defense is she was distracted by sexting a coworker

    3. But she’s claiming self defense because, you know, a guy sitting in a chair eating ice cream is all a cop needs for a reason to waste him.

    4. That forty hours in four days sounds really reasonable, four ten hour days. According to news reports and testimony at trial she had just gotten off a 13 hour shift, so maybe not a regular salaried shift.

      I’ll post a comment relating other information from the trial separately.

  2. She’ll be found not guilty of murder and that’s all that will happen.

    They shouldn’t be charging her with murder.

    1. They should be charging the stiff with MAKING her murder him! Why d’ya think “we” have qualified immunity? She needs a better lawyer.

    2. Does the trial charge of murder include the original charge of manslaughter as a lesser included/alternate charge?

      I think manslaughter would stick. For murder to stick, one would have to prove she walked into the wrong apartment with malice aforethought with intent to kill Rogers.

      Between police getting qualified immunity for using maximum force with minimum judgement and prosecutors amping up charges beyond what the facts support, justice is getting shredded and public safety imperiled in USA today.

      1. Does the trial charge of murder include the original charge of manslaughter as a lesser included/alternate charge?

        I am not a lawyer. But my understanding of Texas law is that, if the grand jury does not include all of the required elements for a crime within the indictment, including all of the culpable mental states for the various degrees of criminal homicide, then the prosecution may not give the jury a charge for that particular crime.

        IOW, if the indictment doesn’t mention recklessness or negligence, just ‘knowing’ or ‘intentionally caused’, then the prosecution may not ask the jury to determine whether Guyger is guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide. I had thought manslaughter was a lesser included offense within murder, and thus didn’t need to be separately mentioned within the indictment, but my later understanding is that’s incorrect.

        So, if the jury doesn’t find Guyger guilty of murder, and I think there’s a decent chance they don’t, given her story, she walks. Along with South Dallas burning.

        Again, I’m not a lawyer. Get one if you think you need one. You probably do.

      2. ” For murder to stick, one would have to prove she walked into the wrong apartment with malice aforethought with intent to kill Rogers.”

        No necessarily.

        I don’t know anything about Texas law, but where I am (Wisconsin) and, in my understanding, in most other states, there is first degree and second degree murder.

        Only first degree murder requires premeditation (malice aforethought)

        The article doesn’t specify first or second degree murder.

        Oh, and according to the linked article, the prosecutor went to the Grand Jury asking for a manslaughter charge, and the Grand Jury upped it to murder.

        1. I don’t believe that last part without more details. Overcharging is now a well-known way for prosecutors to cover for cops, and grand juries typically do what they’re told.

          The prosecutor could have easily gone in formally seeking manslaughter but really looking for murder. Just hint to the badge-lickers on the jury that murder is really hard to make stick; then hint to the less sympathetic ones that it was really heinous crime and they need to send a message.

        2. The death penalty is off the table in Texas, so it must be second degree murder. And 1st degree wouldn’t make sense anyway; this obviously was not premeditated.

          Manslaughter is usually automatically included as a lesser charge in a murder case, unless Texas law is different or the prosecutor or grand jury specifically excluded it. It would apply if you miss your target and kill someone, but it’s generally not credible to argue that you aimed at him and pulled the trigger “accidentally”. That’s second degree murder if it was on the spur of the moment, 1st degree otherwise. I don’t expect there’s any precedent for the argument that the killing was an accident because going into the wrong apartment was an accident, and clearly the grand jury didn’t buy it. But a petit jury of 12 people too stupid to find a way to get out of jury service might compromise on manslaughter even though it makes no sense under the law…

          The self-defense claim is ridiculous.

      3. If you pull out a gun and start blasting it into a wall and kill someone on the other side you might not have intended to kill that specific person but you were doing so likely to (unintentionally) end human life that you can be charged with murder. Walking into apartments and shooting anyone inside regardless of the circumstances qualifies I think.

      4. In Texas, “murder” is equivalent to “2nd degree murder” elsewhere.

        Here’s something I just grabbed from a law website about it…

        “Texas does not officially use the term “second degree murder” which can sometimes be a little bit confusing. Instead, the equivalent in Texas is known as just “murder,” which is a first degree felony. To convict a defendant of murder, prosecutors must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

        -The defendant intentionally and knowingly caused the death of another person;

        -The defendant intended to cause serious bodily injury and committed an act that was clearly dangerous to human life and this act caused the death of an individual; or

        -The defendant committed or attempted to commit a felony (other than manslaughter) and in performing that felony, committed an act that was clearly dangerous to human life and this act caused the death of an individual.”

        Sounds like the charge is accurate. Hence claiming “self-defense” as her defence against the charge.

      5. “malice aforethought” doesn’t mean she planned it out, it just means she meant to kill him when she pulled the trigger

      6. She admitted intent on the stand.

    3. Actually, it depends on how the murder statutes are written.
      If we believe her, she thought she was in her own apartment facing an intruder sitting in a chair eating ice cream. That by itself is iffy. Maybe manslaughter. Maybe murder.

      But entering someone else’s home, shooting the occupant who did nothing more offensive than sit in a chair and eat ice cream? That’s more than manslaughter.

      My bet is that proper procedure would have been for her to note the open door, call in the “burglary” and wait for backup. She didn’t do that. I call it murder and hope she gets a REAL 20-year sentence. Minimum.

      1. There is no way that the jury will convict her of murder. 1st degree manslaughter is the most she will get, given her clean record, lack of drugs in her system, and that she was a cop. Her lawyer will convince them she really believed someone had broken into her apartment as she doesn’t have a history of going around and opening random apartment doors and threatening people.

  3. “Sentence first, trial afterward!”

  4. exhaustion from working 40 hours in four days

    If she’s not even fit for an office job then maybe she’s not fit to be a cop.

    1. I can’t imagine the riot that would be caused by a change in policy where LEO can’t for the sake of public safety claim ungodly amounts of OT pay.

  5. I still think there was something between her and him or she at least thought there was and he turned her down. Maybe she should use the PMS excuse.

    1. I do too. Makrs more sense really.

  6. I could almost buy the story if she had been the one entering the apartment. How exhausted do you need to be to sit in someone else’s kitchen and not notice it? Are we expected to believe they had the same shitty Ikea sofa and same box of cornflakes?

    1. I’m not sure you have the facts in order ma’am.

  7. File under: only police officers who fear for their lives if somebody shouts “Hey!” at them are responsible enough to handle firearms.

    1. She was the onliest one responsible enough to have a gun.

  8. She was initially charged only with manslaughter, but after further review of the evidence a grand jury later indicted her for murder.

    Yeah, she’s gonna walk. Manslaughter and a host of reckless disregard-type add-ons would have done it.

    Still, you know damn well if the guy had had a gun and shot her when she came through the door, well, cop-killers in Texas are automatically given the death penalty.

    1. Yeah, it sounds to me like she was over-charged, unless Texas allows a lesser-included-charge instruction.

      1. Which if course raise the question of why she was (obviously) over charged. I find it believable that the prosecutor simply overcharges everyone as a matter of course. They do that.

        I ALSO find it believable that the prosecutor did it to tank the case. They do that too.

        1. To be clear though, it was a Grand Jury that decided to bring the Murder charge, not the prosecutor.

          So either the Grand Jury was in on this strategy, or they were manipulated by a prosecutor playing 3D Chess.

          1. Oh, please. Grand juries give prosecutors whatever they ask for 99.999% of the time. They don’t “decide” anything.

            1. Ham sandwich… meet jury. Jury… ham sandwich.

          2. “was a Grand Jury that decided to bring the Murder charge, not the prosecutor.”

            I don’t believe the prosecutor is required to adhere to that however.

            1. I believe that varies by state. In my state, a prosecutor can’t pursue felony charges without a rubber stamp from a grand jury.

          3. meanwhile a California grand jury declined to prosecute an off-duty copy who gunned down 3 unarmed people in a Costco because one of them knocked him down.

        2. If I recall correctly, she was originally charged with manslaughter. The [Black, Female] Republican D.A. of Dallas County did not “appropriately handle the case” and shortly thereafter lost her election, some speculate (me included), because of the outrage at not charging a white women for killing a black man, with Murder (Roughly, Criminal Homicide without justification or affirmative defense).

          Tex. Penal Code §19.02

          “And there has been outrage over how District Attorney Faith Johnson, who is a Black, Republican woman, handled the case. On Tuesday, Johnson lost her reelection to retired judge John Creuzot, who is a Black Democrat, and he seems ready to do the job Johnson did not do.”

          Prosecutors are not bound by the determinations of a Grand Jury. Their duty is ultimately to uphold the law. But practically, if the D.A. does not have the evidence to prove each element of the crime charged, they will attempt a plea with the defendant based on the evidence they have, or otherwise go to trial on the charge they “Know” they can prove.

          This is an extremely condensed run down of Texas Law and law in general.

          https://thebeatdfw.com/3106934/newly-elected-dallas-da-says-the-appropriate-charge-for-amber-guyger-is-murder/

          I know, I know… Learn how to code.

    2. Maybe but if I were on the jury and heard 40 hours in 4 days defense; she’d loose any sympathy I’d might have had for her. That’s a normal work schedule. Almost everyone I work with does 50 hours in 5 days at the least and to my knowledge none of them break into a home and shoot the occupant.

      1. Yeah but is everyone else’s mission to come home safely? I hear some of those 40 hours are often spent investigating underage drinking at the local watering holes…
        Surprised there was body cam footage available

        1. the body cam footage was from the officers responding to the murder

    3. Unless rubbing out a fellow First Responder™ who was not quite quick enough on the draw with that smoking gun. In these qualified immunity conundrums, “may the best man win” helps decide which contender the Lawerd wanted to win the gunfight.

    4. I could see it being murder. She had time to look around and see where she was. As far as I know they victim didn’t have a weapon or anything. She made the decision to shoot him anyway. It wasn’t (or didn’t have to be) a split second, life-or-death decision where she made the wrong call.

    5. Not necessarily. Here’s one from Corpus Christi where a guy shot three cops coming through the door on a no-knock warrant, and he walked. https://www.caller.com/story/news/crime/2016/12/13/man-acquitted-officer-involved-shooting/95396862/

      There have been a few others.

  9. Well, she has to have SOME kind of defense strategy, I suppose. Would have been better if she’d just plead guilty and save the state the expense of a trial, though.

  10. I’ve lived in Dallas, and just from looking at the picture of perp and victim am willing to bet folding money and lay odds she walks, nay, struts out of the courtroom blowing kisses to the jurors and D.A. Any takers?

    1. i live here now go Cowboys. the state is bending over backwards to not convict her of murder it’ll probably work

      1. Yeah, watching the WFAA coverage we’re pretty sure she’s gonna walk. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t worried about what kind of reaction that will cause in this city.

  11. Assistant District Attorney Jason Hermus noted that Guyger failed to follow her police training for what to do if she suspected someone of being a burglar.

    This no doubt is her greatest sin. Internal police policies as we have learned time and again are paramount and supersede actual laws.

    1. Training is to shoot the dog first, ask questions later…

  12. Armstrong claimed that Guyger had acted reasonably and had not committed a crime in shooting Jean. Kemp ruled that this information only represents Armstrong’s opinion and is not admissible in court.

    “Sorry, honey. I tried.”

    1. Reasonably? F’ing cops!

  13. In Texas does such a charge include the possibility of conviction on lesser included offenses?

  14. I think we all agree that she is unfit to be a cop. She has been fired.

    But how did she get in the apartment? Was it unlocked? Did her key work?

    Was it unlocked, so that when she put her key in it twisted open the unlocked knob?

    Is there no deadbolt on these things?

    It seems entirely plausible that she did think it was her apartment and she was being confronted by a strange man in her apartment.

    Said man was probably aggressive but she was in uniform?

    She failed to follow training. She failed to exercise proper caution and restraint. I think this could rise to the level of manslaughter. Unclear on why this is murder unless the game is to charge her with something they can’t prove and then let her walk?

    1. Or, did she have her own key to his apartment?

      1. I remember rumors of a relationship but I can’t remember if the source was reliable.

        1. That story turned out to be total horse shit. This was random, but the dude is still dead nonetheless

    2. The doors are actually really fancy self closing with electronic keys. Apparently his door was ajar which allowed her in.

    3. could rise to manslaughter? even a cop loving grand jury decided to indict for murder.

  15. fun stat: 1 in 4 renters in that building have tried their keys in the wrong door

    1. the door was unlocked, otherwise this would never have happened.

  16. Gee, if only there was some sort of marking that could be placed on the door of an apartment to differentiate it from others nearby. It would be really hard to learn all the different random symbols they use, though, like “1” and “2” and “3” and “4” and “5” (which looks JUST LIKE an upside-down “2”) … I’d probably get confused and shoot a lawful tenant too.

    1. As I recall, after the incident, building tenants who were interviewed by media said that Jean had a doormat and multiple decorations on the door, so it would be extraordinarily implausible that she entered by mistake.

      1. The only residences I’ve ever seen where you wouldn’t immediately notice you were in the wrong one were military barracks and nursing homes.

        1. And if the police department had her work such a long shift that she didn’t notice, her supervisor ought to be charged with manslaughter!

  17. Cop enters enters wrong private residence, shoots and kills occupant. Cop is not on duty and not investigating a crime. The fact that she is a cop means exactly jack shit.

    1. Not to many jurors. Protect and serve!

  18. If you don’t want to get shot like a thug, don’t go living in your own apartment like a thug…

    1. And don’t ghost on a female cop like a thug.

  19. Well, I don’t know what Texas law says, but I would hope that any decent jurisdiction would at least punish you for manslaughter if you go into the wrong apartment and shoot the resident as a “burglar.” Never mind what training you had as a cop.

    I’d even be open to treating it as murder in some cases, such as if you’re reckless in barging into someone else’s place if no reasonable person would have done so.

    “Rogers claimed that Guyger attempted to de-escalate the situation by demanding that Jean show her his hands”

    No, de-escalating the situation would mean getting the hell out of the place where you’ve trespassed. When you’re trespassing and pointing a gun at someone who has the right to be there, you’re *not* de-escalating in a reasonable jurisdiction.

    1. The murder charge is a huge overreach and will probably cost them a conviction unless lesser charges are on the table. DA must be up for reelection.

    2. Not sure that Manslaughter fits, it appears the distinction in TX law is reckless vs. negligent. If she was merely negligent then it’s Criminally Negligent Homicide. Is confusion about the apartment you have just entered recklessness or negligence?

      https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.19.htm

      Unless there is much more to the story I too fail to see how they prove Murder.

      1. I’ll reiterate that I don’t know what distinctions Texas law makes among various types of homicide.

        But in Utopia (well, a Utopia which still has a crime problem), I’d first look into whether a reasonable person would have gotten into a situation where they ended up killing someone in their own home. If they showed “an abandoned and a malignant heart,” eg., by unreasonably ignoring door and floor numbers and breaking into an apartment – then (civilian or cop), I’d call it murder.

        If it was a shitty apartment complex with every room looking like every other, and for some weird reason your key gets you into the wrong apartment by mistake, I’d be more understanding, and maybe call it manslaughter.

        This is simply my scheme for a Utopian legal code, I’m not saying Texas law is any way like this.

        1. Murder requires intent to murder for a malicious reason, not a random manslaughter case. This will end up being 1st degree manslaughter. No way they get murder for this one unless they can prove a connection between the two.

    3. it’s murder every time. he didn’t have a weapon and didn’t threaten her. she could have retreated and called for backup. the police station was across the street.

  20. And who the heck cares if she had the proper training in when to shoot burglars. Guy wasn’t a burglar.

    1. It’s like asking if she had training on how to destroy Freddy Krueger – interesting, but what does that have to do with the price of DVDs in China?

    2. Actually, if the training said “don’t shoot” under that set of circumstances it would weigh heavily against her.

      1. If it was an actual intruder in her actual home, I’d be more sympathetic and I would apply the legal standards which would govern a “civilian” whose home has been broken into.

        Again, I don’t know what Texas law says about this – I presume the jurors know better than to consult Reason articles on this case and taint themselves with bias.

        1. Objection. Assumes jurors are even aware of a publication called Reason.

          We’re an elite corps.

        2. Texas has the Castle Doctrine so if it had been her home, she would have been no billed by the grand jury.

          It wasn’t her apartment though. She would have had to have made a mistake of going to the wrong floor and into apartment that looked nothing like hers from the outside and most likely the inside and I find that hard to believe.

    3. She couldn’t possibly follow police procedure when confronting a burglar, since she couldn’t retreat from herself.

  21. Interesting how there are no riots. Maybe because it’s Texas, maybe because the black victim had some sort of real job and wasn’t the kind of gangbanger who excites the sympathy of the mob.

    The lack of riots indicates that the charge may actually be true, not filed to appease rioters.

    1. I think its partly because Texas, partly because the department jumped on her relatively quickly and didn’t try to make too many excuses for her.

      1. Also, the riots seem to take place in the more dubious cases where the shooting actually may have been justified.

        I think it’s easier to get a mob together if an “aspiring rapper and father of three” who “was just turning his life around” is the one who gets shot, because the mob would be more sympathetic.

        But why would they sympathize with some sell-out bourgeois?

    2. Interesting how there are no riots.

      Yet. Let’s see how Dallas does after Guyger is (likely) found not guilty of murder. I have my doubts there will still be no riots.

      Because the D.A. didn’t impress upon the Grand Jury the necessity of including lesser mens rea within the indictment, I don’t think the prosecution can now ask the jury to try and find her guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide.

    3. Yeah go ahead and make this into a race thing.

    4. It’s fucking hot here man. It was like almost 100 over the weekend. No one wants to riot in the heat.

  22. https://abcnews.go.com/US/dallas-police-officer-amber-guyger-set-trial-killing/story?id=65782786

    _ reading the abc news article that appears to accurately describe what the prosecutor and defense told the jury,
    _ knowing what I was told on self defense law in handgun permit class,
    if it was me in a similar situation, I would probably be charged with voluntary and/or reckless manslaughter under the circumstances depicted. And I suspect a local jury would find me guilty.

    The defense and the prosecution are presenting the best case scenario possible for their clients, Ms Guyger and the family of the homicide victim, respectively. I take the assertions of both with a shaker of salt. A trial jury should balance the horse manure of the one versus the bull manure of the other, pinch their noses and sort out a few nuggets of fact and make a judgement according to law.

    Supposedly after the reactions to MOVE, Waco and Ruby Ridge, the era of “Maximum Force With Minimum Judgement” was over. It appears increasingly, especially in this era of qualified immunity, those lessons were forgotten.

  23. “I’m gonna lose my job,”

    Like a fucking pleb!

    1. I mean it’s the same gun safety rule that all the rest of us learned:
      “Never point our gun at anything that could cause you to lose your job.”

    2. Honestly, from the statements she was saying mentioned here, I could believe this to be all an accident and her being in shock after the fact (I was babbling like an idiot too after a car accident I had when I was 16-17).

      She should still be charged with manslaughter, but I’m not sure if full-on Murder would be appropriate.

      1. Honestly, from the statements she was saying mentioned here, I could believe this to be all an accident and her being in shock after the fact (I was babbling like an idiot too after a car accident I had when I was 16-17).

        Did you kill someone? Because this wasn’t Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. She *accidentally* invaded some guy’s home and killed him.

        I’m not saying she wasn’t in shock but I think your equivocation between a trained officer of the law and an underage driver says more than you think it does.

  24. Have some sympathy. Who among us hasn’t shot someone after working 40 hours in 4 days?

    1. I mean, I’ve worked 40 hours in two days, and I didn’t kill anyone. Admittedly, I might’ve just been too tired . . .

  25. Murder? No.

    Manslaughter? Yes.

    1. IANAL but entering someone else’s apartment constitutes a home invasion and any murder that takes place as a direct result of that invasion is statutory/felony murder.

      1. In Florida armed trespass is defined by statute as a felony offense. Were this FL I’d agree that felony murder applies. I am less clear about Texas. She did trespass, but I’m not sure the term ‘home invasion’ applies either generally or legally speaking.

        1. I’m guessing they at least require knowledge, both that you are armed and more importantly that you are trespassing. It sounds like proving beyond a reasonable doubt that this lady knew she was trespassing is gonna be tough.

          1. Uh, I’ll admit I only know the Florida and NH versions of trespassing, but they’re identical so I suspect Texas is at least similar: you don’t technically have to know you’re trespassing, it’s sufficient to have reckless disregard for whether you might be. I think in this case that would be fairly easy – show some pictures of each apartment to the jury and highlight the (presumably) tremendous and immediately obvious differences.

      2. Home invasion means you intent on stealing/vandalizing/terrorizing/being a criminal in someone’s home. You should look that up.

        1. How do we know that wasn’t her intent? I’ve wanted to terrorize my downstairs neighbors before when they played awful 80’s music all night long.

        2. You should look that up.

          You should look up IANAL. It’s pretty clear that where felony trespassing is a thing, she easily falls within the letter of the law before she started shooting people.

  26. It’s weird to me that she didn’t know it wasn’t her apartment, even if she was very tired. To me, every home not only looks different but smells different as well. My sense of smell isn’t all that great, but aren’t women supposed to have a sharper sense of smell than men, generally?

    I’ve been brought home from surgery, still heavily drugged, and still knew my home from others.

    1. It’s weird to me that she didn’t know it wasn’t her apartment, even if she was very tired. To me, every home not only looks different but smells different as well. My sense of smell isn’t all that great, but aren’t women supposed to have a sharper sense of smell than men, generally?

      I’m more about the otherwise lack of decision-making ability. I’ve been to tired or otherwise too incapacitated to safely operate heavy machinery. I usually make sure the gun is secured away before achieving that condition. She was so run down and tired that she couldn’t tell one apartment from the next but winds up out shooting Dirty Harry in the clutch.

      1. If she was incapacitated when she got home from the job, she was incapacitated AND A DANGER TO THE PUBLIC while she was still on the job. Maybe it’s her supervisor that should be on trial for manslaughter.

  27. So the Defense argument is essentially that no one is safe in their own home if an officer mistakenly barges in. Good to know, and …. YIKES

  28. Sounds like murder to me, she intentionally shot the guy. She might have a defense if she had a reasonable belief that she was in danger. But even if it’s reasonable to space out and enter someone else’s apartment believing it’s your own despite a doormat indicating otherwise, it’s not reasonable to persist in that belief even after seeing someone else is in the apartment.

  29. This was a terrible accident and maybe the officer wasn’t prudent and rushed to judgment however these says police need to make snap judgment calls because of all the bad guys out there who won’t hesitate to shoot first and not even worry who it was. True, she may not have been qualified for her job or was not trained sufficiently but she should not be charged with murder.

    1. “This was a terrible accident…”

      It wasn’t an accident. It was the result of a conscious decision by the cop. And that decision turned out to be murder.

  30. I’m Reposting in order to correct a word. I was unable to edit it so am reposting with the correction

    This was a terrible accident and maybe the officer wasn’t prudent and rushed to judgment however these days police need to make snap judgment calls because of all the bad guys out there who won’t hesitate to shoot first and not even worry who it was. True, she may not have been qualified for her job or was not trained sufficiently but she should not be charged with murder.
    Reply

    1. “maybe the officer wasn’t prudent and rushed to judgment”

      Understatement of the year.

      “not trained sufficiently”

      So in the case of a “civilian,” who never gets trained in how not to go into people’s apartments and shoot the resident, the civilian should be let off the hook, right?

      1. “all the bad guys out there who won’t hesitate to shoot first and not even worry who it was”

        Sounds familiar, where did I hear about a case just like that recently?

    2. these days police need to make snap judgment calls because of all the bad guys out there who won’t hesitate to shoot first

      That’s their problem. They volunteered to take the job and take that risk. Their desire to go home safe at the end of their shift does not give them the right to push the risk they volunteered to take off onto the general public. If they make a “snap judgement” and turn out to be wrong, they should go to prison, just like any of us would. If cops don’t like that deal, they need to find another job.

  31. Why wasn’t this guys door locked?

    1. Maybe it was, and his girlfriend had a key.

    2. That’s a damn good question, and so is “Why wasn’t the question of how she got into the apartment discussed in any of the news reports about this case?” I doubt the officer would have left her own door unlocked, so if this one was unlocked, that should have been a clue right there that maybe this wasn’t her apartment, and she was on the wrong floor. As the furniture in the place should have been, unless this guy’s apartment was furnished identically to hers.

      1. Both sides say that the guys door failed to close property.

      2. Or if she really thought it was hers and she came home to her apartment with the door ajar, just walking in would be a stupid thing to do. Shouting to see if someone was there, telling them to come out with their hands behind their head would be a much better option.

    3. “Why wasn’t this guys door locked?”

      Yeah, he was asking for it by not locking his door.

      1. Dude was just asking a question, quit being a jerk.

  32. Luckily there was a witness or no charges would have been filed. She would have claimed Jean came at her, forcing her to shoot. As far as her claim that he refused to comply with her order to show his hands, the witness can testify that Jean’s hands were in plain site. Who stands up in this situation with his hands in back or in his pockets? No one.
    She claims exhaustion. Was a blood test done? I doubt it. That might have been routine for a citizen, but a cop? They stick together. Like the investigator said, “She acted reasonably.”
    Her preoccupation with herself as the man was dying says it all.

  33. My source tells me the judge gave the jury the option to convict for manslaughter. Hopefully the jury takes that route and dispenses a measure of justice. Secondarily, it would deprive the extremists of an excuse to burn the city.

  34. Obviously it was self defense What else would it be when you drunkenly break into someone’s apartment, gun down the owner, then realize you’re in the wrong place?
    Clear cut self-defense, I’m sure.
    There isn’t enough rope nor a telephone pole high enough she should be hung from.

Please to post comments