Another controversial police shooting is in the news, this one particularly heart-breaking. A synopsis of events and some legal analysis is found here.
This incident came up in a private forum to which I belong. Some emotion was evident. A friend of mine whose wisdom I greatly respect wrote,
“Story in the local mullet wrapper this morning shed a little more light in my mind… seems the cop parked on the wrong floor of the parking garage (seems the apts have parking on the same floor) and went to what would have been her apt on the third floor… of course she was on the fourth… According to the report, her key worked in the door of the shootee’s apt on the fourth floor… she walked in to the dark apt and saw movement where there should be none… then shot…
“If that story is correct it is hard to see how the shooting could be called a black/white issue… though I have learned never to expect lib agitators to use reason or logic…
“Applying the ‘reasonable man’ test here I can see how she would have thought someone was in her home, given her key worked in the lock…
“Grand jury is going to decide… If they ‘no bill’ things may get interesting…
– – “Chuck”
I replied,
“I’m with Chuck on this. Over the years, I’ve been involved in somewhat similar cases.
“It’s obviously a terrible tragedy that has extinguished one young life and ruined another. Before we rush to judgment, we have to apply the three-pronged test of the reasonable person doctrine: what would a reasonable and prudent person have done/in the exact same situation/knowing what the defendant knew at the time?
“The wrong door: in cookie-cutter architecture (office buildings/apartment buildings/hotels etc.), how many of us have ever gone to the wrong door? I know I have.
“Missing the distinctive red carpet and vases at the victim’s door: She might simply have wondered, ‘Who’s my secret admirer?’ She is, after all, a cute young female cop and probably gets hit on all the time. I’ve come home more than once and found something at my door that wasn’t there when I left, and that never led me to believe I was at the wrong house.
“What did she see that made her take the action she did? Reports given to us, the public, thus far indicate very dim light. Did the young man have a natural startle response that mimicked someone going for a gun? If you have a cop who lives alone — and probably has guns of her own in that apartment — might it not be reasonable for her to believe that an intruder in her apartment was now very likely armed with one of those guns, if he didn’t have one of his own before?
“Let’s always remember, the rules on deadly force boil down to ‘You don’t have to be right, you do have to be REASONABLE within the totality of the circumstances you are facing at the time.’
Those of us outside the investigation don’t yet know nearly enough to rush to judgment.”
–“Mas”
Other issues: Being in uniform, she must have had a flashlight on her person, and very likely a tactical light on her pistol. Were these employed for PID (positive identification)? Was there even time for her to do that? And should she be considered negligent if she did not? What if she did use the light, and it showed her he had no weapon visible? These questions need to be answered too.
One comment: as noted above, I’m hearing people who should know better say that because she intentionally fired it’s automatically murder. This disregards the fact that virtually every justified homicide was an intentional act.
We need to know more before we judge. This may well turn out to be an “excusable homicide,” a conclusion which says in essence, “A terrible mistake was made, but under the circumstances, any reasonable and prudent person might have made the same terrible mistake.”
Sorry, I don’t buy it. Violation of Rule #4, and by someone who should’ve / is paid to have known better.
Let’s see whether the key actually fit the lock. If it did then there’s some mitigation, but if it didn’t then this raises even more questions.
They’re now saying the door was slightly ajar,and opened when she attempted to use her key.
If the door was slightly ajar, I can imagine her thinking, “Who’s in my apartment? I always lock my door!” Then she sees a silhouette or notices some movement. She just went from condition orange to condition red. She may have been sure in her mind she saw a criminal, and felt she didn’t have time to activate a flashlight, she needed to shoot before he attacked her. Too bad she didn’t flick on the light switch. Too bad she didn’t issue verbal commands before pulling that trigger.
I agree with Mas, a terrible tragedy which could have been done by any reasonable person.
The way all those bad circumstances came together reminds me of the sinking of the Titanic. Like a line of dominoes leading to disaster.
And now they’re saying she banged on the door and said let me in. And the poor bastard opened it.
If that is the case then it isn’t totally unreasonable for someone to conclude that their apartment is being burglarized. However, if you barge into someone else’s house and kill them I’m going to want you to have a really compelling justification. “Oops, my bad” doesn’t qualify, to least to me. If not there are a series of criminal offenses that involve the word Negligent in the name or definition of the offense for a reason.
If the guy had shot her dead when she walked in the dimly lit apartment would that have been a reasonable action?
The actions of the Dallas PD in attempting to immediately defame the victim, just like the Minneapolis case where they executed multiple search warrants desperately trying for something to hang on Justine Damond, does not raise my confidence.
In both cases I do not believe the residence of the officer who unreasonably shot an unarmed innocent person was searched. Just the residence of the victim.
And that, right there, would have been reason for her to be on high alert. She was in her own apartment, (she had every reason to believe) and her door being ajar would have indicated an intruder.
Flowers and red carpet would have added “stalker” thoughts in my head.
I dunno, Mas, and since I don’t, I’ll side with “tragic mistake” and not “criminal homicide.”
Whatever the final outcome vis-à-vis the legal disposition, this kind of thing makes me extremely wary of calling the cops while an incident is in progress. I am more likely to survive if I call Mr. Mossberg first, and the cops after it’s all over with but the shouting. That call is to report to report the episode, not to ask for help. If somebody who matters (i.e. not the perp) is injured, I would just ask for EMS so they aren’t kept from rendering aid until LE says so. I am a lot more concerned with surviving than I am with what happens to the cop after I am shot, and whether they feel bad or not. As an Armed Peon I feel that I have reason to regard every contact with LE as a potentially lethal encounter.
If the door was slightly ajar and she thought that someone was improperly in her apartment she should have called the police.
For all she knew it was an angry arrestee waiting with a shotgun to blow her away.
I don’t buy it.Entertain that she is a UNIFORMED OFFICER and may have decided to get her way against a man who she likely considered to be disrespecting her authority ( yes, those pesky noise complaints ARE an indication that she already had an axe to grind, and quite possibly, decided that she was not going to let him get away with that ). After she killed him, she concocts a hard to believe story ( after being given two days to come up with something believable, a luxury that non police are NOT afforded )and… apparently changed her story repeatedly until she was finally charged with something. I do NOT buy that she didn’t know that she wasn’t even on her floor, nor in her apartment. Maybe I’m too reasonable to be gullible like that. The many variations of how she got into the man’s apartment, to me, are nothing more than a distraction meant to muddy the waters, and misdirect attention from the facts of who did the killing, and how she undertook same.
Sir, can you be more explicit about where the defendant changed her story? Or are you referring to the changing narratives in the press and external commentary, which can’t really be blamed on her?
Her story has apparently changed several times, at least according to the spotty reporting available. I remain concerned about her immediate escalation from confrontation all the way to lethal force in apparent violation of her training as a LEO. What possible threat could she have perceived to warrant this escalation?
That’s what we need to find out. I’m not sure her story has changed so much as the news stories have changed already.
News stories should always be taken with a grain of salt, and leaping to conclusions completely avoided. I do not recall a single news story about an event with which I was personally familiar that did not contain significant errors. Not to say that reporters do not mean well, or that they are necessarily at fault. In this case, the odor of marijuana could have had a large impact on what happened in the apartment.
We have been told there was Marijuana in his home (why are they attempting to demonize the victim) when will be told her Blood Alcohol or drug use from the Blood Test that was done. Why was she on the wrong floor? Mas, when was the last time you thought a LEO shot someone criminally? I come from a family of cops. I respect and admire LEO’s immensely. I am very worried about the militarization of our Police. The Drug Warrior Culture is sickening. The Thin Blue Line needs to stop gathering into a Gordion Knot to protect the bad actors in their midst. Shooting unarmed women in their pajamas on the city street is bad, going into someone’s house and killing them out of hand is inexcusable. If this had been a civilian with a CCW they would still be trying to figure out how to raise a 6 figure bail.
Kelly, over the years I’ve had to testify against cops. I’m not here to say cops can do no wrong. I’m here to say we all need to wait for all the facts before we judge.
Apartments have changed over the years. The apartment I lived in two years ago had electronic locks, very similar to, but more rugged than, the locks at hotels. Our locks had a green light and a loud sound when they allowed access.
I can imagine a more subtle lock that would allow someone to mistake “door was locked, key successfully unlocked it” with “door was unlocked, key did not match.” It’s very likely that we’re not talking about a classic physical key. And, if that’s the case, the key may not have truly fit the door, but the officer could have mistakenly believed it had.
Even though a Cop, she is human and subject to the same things that might affect any of us in a similar situation. Just how effective was her police training anyway? Was there ongoing situational training? If so, when was the last class? We have also heard the individual did not respond to her commands. He was probably just as startled and confused as she. We all know things happen is split seconds, but may seem longer. She did not linger in the OODA Loop, but instead came to the conclusion to take a certain action,
I pray for the man who lost his life and that his family will remain strong through the exploiters yet to come their way. I pray the officer will get the help she needs to come to terms with the ordeal. It is, after all , an event that will stay with her for life.
What I have read is that the door was unlocked and unlatched and it opened when she tried to insert her key. No idea if any of that is true, but the local radio station here was interviewing the local PIO and that is what he said he had heard.
I’m sorry. What we have here is cops trying to cover for another cop and it stinks. Why was her (and so many other cops) immediate reaction to ANY unusual situation to draw her weapon and open fire (frequently emptying the magazine)? How about a command, POLICE! FREEZE! SHOW ME YOUR HANDS! ON THE FLOOR!
It is totally un PC to say this (although everybody thinks it) but did the fact that she was a woman confronting a man and naturally being intimidated have anything to do with her opening fire instead of going with a non deadly force reaction? Go ahead and howl with outrage. You know it happens.
No, it was BANG! (followed closely by her babbling, as the police union lawyers have told them to say, “I was in fear for my life, I was in fear for my life!” even as her brass was still bouncing on the floor of HIS apartment). Where was the immediate threat? There wasn’t any. He heard the door open, turned around and the next thing he was dead. We have dozens of examples from the cop who gunned down the motorist he had pulled over who jumped out of the car and ran away only to be shot in the back as the cop yelled, “TAZER, TAZER” in the stupid hope his dash cam wouldn’t see him murder the man running away from him. That cop is now in prison, and rightfully so, for murder. How about the cop in St. Paul, MN. who reached across his partner to shoot the Australian woman as she walked up to their car, in her pajamas, to ask them an innocent question. I don’t know what happened to him, but I hope he is headed there too.
Why do police see the general public, ordinary people going about their lives as the enemy and people to be feared? Is it training or cop culture gleaned from hanging around with other cops?
Not long ago I heard the lawyer for one of the cops who murdered Amadu Diallo (I’m sure I butchered the spelling of his name) in New York city many years ago comment that his client was still undergoing psychiatric treatment for his part in the murder. My immediate thought was, “Too bad that treatment isn’t taking place in a state penitentiary.”
You remember this event, three jackass cops fired 41 rounds of ammunition (we were told that this wasn’t such a big deal, that many of the shots were fired straight up as the cops were falling down as they backed away in fear of Mr. Diallo and his deadly assault wallet) at an unarmed man standing in a doorway trying to identify himself with nothing more lethal in his hand that his wallet. He came from a country where anyone from the government could take your life without cause and nothing would be done about it. He was naturally scared out of his mind when confronted by the three stooges. We got the same pathetic excuses then as in this incident, “It was dark, they were scared” etc. 41 shots fired, hitting him ONLY 19 times. I remember, and I am not kidding here, reading about it and thinking, “Well, I wonder how Massad Ayoob is going to excuse these jerks from this tragedy.” At the time I was subscribing to a magazine for which Mr. Ayoob wrote a monthly column, and sure enough, next month there was his analysis of the shooting which exonerated the three murderers. A jury followed suit and three executioners walked free.
I’m not on the band wagon of the radical left that is advocating violence against cops, far from it. But clearly something has to be done about the selection of police officer candidates that weeds out the homicidal maniacs who only stop shooting when the slide locks back, or the training that results in this sort of action.
This woman is guilty of murder period. And I hope she pays and pays dearly for it. Both financially and emotionally and others are made aware of the price she pays. And if the situation was reversed and the man walked into her apartment, saw her and fired his gun killing her, he would be jailed, indicted and tried for some form of murder.
AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW IT.
Michael, you don’t know what you don’t know. I was a consulting expert for lead defense attorney Stephen Worth in the trial of the officers who shot Amadou Diallo. There are good reasons why the jury — which heard all the testimony and saw all the evidence — acquitted the officers. You need to realize that Murder per se requires an element of malice.
Know your target and what’s beyond your target. She misidentified her target.
Sadly, I don’t think the “reasonable, and prudent person principle” is going to make a difference in the court of public opinion. What people will are already asking is, “If the deceased had shot her instead, would he be having a worse time of it?” The perceived favoritism towards cops in shooting cases will be what matters. We’ll hear about the man who went to jail after he shot a SWAT officer when they mistakenly raided his house, and similar cases.
I’m sad to say this, but they might have some justification. She should go to jail? I’m content to let a jury decide that matter, but I can’t deny that quite a few people will have cause to cry unfair if she walks.
If nothing else, hopefully this might lead to some reforms in the hours law enforcement are required to work. We can’t expect our finest to work to the point of physical, and mental exhaustion, and still make sound judgments in high stress situations.
I guess it’s to be expected that on gun forums, a presumption of a innocence would fall on the gun holder. However, on first look I have a hard time seeing the justification here. A reasonable person should identify the target, not shoot at figures in the dark. It’s tragic enough, but what if it had been a child? As a gun owner, one of the things I really, really fear is a cop unexpectedly forcing entry into my residence by mistake. I’m either bound to use my gun thinking it’s an intruder or bound to get shot by the cop.
>forcing entry … by mistake
Having been on the receiving end of that, jacked up at gunpoint in my own home by a dozen local PD who A) didn’t have a warrant and B) went to the wrong house…
Let’s just say I’m plumb out of toleration for incompetence.
The audio the news played clearly showed the officer was distraught. I’m not saying that excuses or justifies her actions but it makes more sense that this was a tragic mistake; possibly negligent, but not a racist hate crime some are purporting it to be.
At first I thought this was a tragic accident, possibly the result of negligence. But now the Daily Mail is reporting that the doors in that building can’t be left ajar – they’re heavy metal fire doors that close on their own. Also that at least one neighbor reported hearing knocking and a woman shouting “Let me in” just before the gun shot. And Officer Guyger had recently made noise complaints against Mr. Jean. If this report is accurate, it sounds more like Guyger may have deliberately gone to that apartment in order to confront Jean, and at some point in the confrontation, shot him. That might still be legitimate self defense, but if this scenario is what actually happened, then Guyger also lied about the chain of events, which argues strongly against it having been a justified shooting.
Since Mr. Jean is unable to chime in with his version, hers is the only one. Maybe she should have kept her mouth shut until a police union lawyer could tell her what to say.
This shooting stinks, full dress inquiry.
A tragedy for sure. If half of what the newspaper commented on comes about this is one extra large can of worms that has spilled. My thoughts are,vis the housing units owners liable in any way because of the apartments door locks being keyed the same? If folks are being thrown under the perverbial bus why not include the apartment complex owners.
You can find people who argue that the crucifixion of the savior Jesus was “reasonable” by the Romans.
After I worked for the dirtiest Federal agency, I understood how cops lie, falsify data, and protect each other. You gotta laugh when you can read non other than Bill Jordan’s book “No second place winner”, and see how Throw Down Guns was an art form.
Search warrants are routinely executed at crime scenes. If an illegal substance is recovered, the police have no choice but to seize it. Search warrant returns are court documents and, sooner or later, are going to be in the public domain. Would those who claim discovery, seizure, or disclosure of the marijuana is “demonization” of the victim want the Texas Rangers to ignore the marijuana or perhaps flush it down the toilet?
I think the problem is that no search warrant was executed on the shooters home, and the presence of the marijuana is irrelevant.
Mas, you are a big proponent of home carrying. You have analyzed this scenario from the perspective of the shooter. Can you analyze it from the perspective of the shootee? Can you weigh in what difference it might have made in this situation?
For one thing, someone into security sufficiently to home carry would probably have been more likely to have had the door locked, and it wouldn’t hav e gone down as it did. All speculation, though.
As a civilian CCW carrier for 25 yrs my training and Mas books have emphasized to be positive the lethal/ GBI threat exists before pulling the trigger. Firing at the last possible second. Of course, I wasn’t there but it seems she shot early.
RE: Guyger believing she was in her apartment, her initial report was she was ‘fatigued’ as explanation that she did not notice 1) the glaring lighted address adjacent the door; 2) the red carpet. (The vases and flowers were placed after the shooting as a memorial).
Yet Guyger was not fatigued enough to squirt off a very well placed fatal shot. Also, her official report has been amended to address apartment manager’s testimony that Guyger had multiple prior confrontations with the decedent (her immediate upstairs neighbor). Guyger initially failed to mention that, only mentioning it in her report when media publicly reported on it.
These are in evidence and from her official report and not subject to any inaccuracies in reporting by the media. This right here is enough to question the validity of all that Guyger has proffered so far.
Rick, can you share a link to the officer’s report?
Mas, I
too have come home to find something at the door which wasn’t there when I left. And, as you say, that did not make me think I had the wrong house. Because there are other visual cues to confirm that I am at my house. On the other hand, if I had only what was left at the door as a visual cue, I would seek to be doubly sure. I have experience with that every time I have used a room at a multistory hotel or had occasion to visit an apartment complex.
We do make errors. However, it is not reasonable that a person would ignore or dismiss the visual cues and enter into a room (which if the door was ajar, why did not call for back-up?) placing herself in a stressful situation, not make positive identification, relying only of ‘verbal commands) then use lethal force. Also, it is not prudent to have done the same.
Looks to me as if it happened so fast she didn’t have time to call for backup.
Why did the cop not call for backup as soon as door was found to be unlocked? Then with the backup, ask the person inside to exit with hands up? And by then maybe she would have figured out that she was on the wrong floor, seeing as how the backup would have responded to the correct floor.
And what if it had been her apartment? What if maintenance was in there fixing a busted water pipe? What if she had accidentally left her door open and some Down’s syndrome kid, or some old lady with dementia had wandered in?
I cannot help but think that the mentality of “whatever it takes to get home at the end of shift” has a negative impact on some policemen and women. No, it is not “whatever” it takes. The reason police should be respected is because they accept some risk by balancing their safety with the rights and liberties of citizens. If a policeman or woman believes that no risks whatsoever should be taken, that is, there is no balance–no risk is acceptable, then cases just like this will keep on coming.
How many criminal home invaders barged into apartments in decent parts of Dallas and gunned down the occupant so far this year? If one lives in the not-bad part of town, who is a bigger threat? A home invasion gang, or a bunch of Barney Fife SWAT cops with the wrong address, or in this case, a random patrol officer?
Are we at the point when criminals have less to fear from cops then innocents? Criminals know the drill: assume the position, keep your hands still, etc. Innocents are dazed and confused, and if their arm moves 1/4″ in the wrong direction, they get a summary death sentence on the spot. Sure, they could be possibly reaching for a weapon, but with a 99% likelihood they are not. When cops are perceived as a greater threat than criminals, what is the public opinion of cops supposed to be?
Mas, I remember reading one of your articles where you recounted an incident when a newly wed couple was accidentally given the key to your hotel room. You responded with gun in hand and asked what they were doing. Your safety was balanced with their safety. But, I get the impression that some cops these days would have dumped a mag into both of them–and this has to stop.
I despise BLM and the political exploitation of these incidents, but it would be easier to defend good cops if these cops were not reinforcing BLM’s narrative.
Jacob, Apparently you missed something in Mas’s article. It’s being reported that the police officer’s key worked in the man’s apartment door.
It is also being reported that the door was ajar just enough that when she inserted her key the force of insertion pushed the door open, possibly making her believe that the key worked.
But then the key may very well have worked. In that case will any renter’s key open any door in that complex? Are they all keyed the same or randomly distributed?
Meanwhile we see racists immediately raising their ugly heads and voices with bigoted allegations.
Definitely a tragedy for both people. Like Mas said ‘We need to wait until the facts come out’. It does look like she lost her situational awareness, entered into someone else’s domicile and killed them only to find out afterwords she made the mistake of being somewhere she wasn’t suppose to be. If you’re going to carry a deadly weapon you should probably hold yourself to a higher standard and be aware of whats going on around you and know where you are. The fact that a LE officer made this mistake opens up a whole other can of worms.
If all these facts are established (cookie-cutter apartments, parking on wrong floor, and key fitting in the lock), she clearly should be exonerated. On a personal note, when visiting my daughter last year in her own cookie-cutter apartment I accidentally walked in on her neighbors in their apartment. Twice.
And did you immediately open fire?
Definitely a tragedy for both people. Like Mas said ‘We need to wait until the facts come out’. It does look like she lost her situational awareness, entered into someone else’s domicile and killed them only to find out afterwords she made the mistake of being somewhere she wasn’t suppose to be. If you’re going to carry a deadly weapon you should probably hold yourself to a higher standard and be aware of whats going on around you and know where you are. The fact that a LE officer made this mistake opens up a whole other can of worms.
I question if she would have been better served if she had called the police as we are told to do as CCW. I remember reading that it is extremely difficult for LEO’s to clear a residence using more than one cop and she was definitely at a disadvantage.
But I agree with Mas we need to wait for all the facts to come out. I worry this case will only give the cop haters one more reason to act up.
It seems that it is not going to be easy to get the facts here. I have seen that the friont door wqas ajar, and that it could not have been so; I read that she used her key, and that inserting her key simply pushed the door open; I read that a neighbor heard her request the occupant (Mr. Jean) to open the door and let her in.
What really strikes me though is the arrest affidavit. It states: “Upon being asked where she was located by emergency dispatchers, she returned to the front door to observe the address and discovered she was at the wrong apartment,” the document alleges.”
If Guyger had believed that she was in her own apaartment why did she have to go to the door to verify the address?
It also indicates that she attempted first aid. In the dark?
Upon turning on the lights, while on the phone with 911, did she notice that it wasn’t her furnishings and realize her error? Was it then that she offered first aid?
If the apartment complex has many of the apartments using the same lock/key set I would think there would be a high level of negligence on the management’s part. But the facts here are highly confused.
One last comment, also drawing from the arresting officer’s affidavit, presumably biased towards a fellow officer but hopefully not. In it it is indicated that Officer Guyger was outside the door when she saw the “silhouette” and issued her commands. It also states that she shot while still in the outside hallway and only entered the apartment after firing the fatal shot(s).
I see so many problems with this account.
1)She could have simply de-escalated, shut the door and called for back-up.
She wasn’t in immediate danger.
2) Just because she fired shots (a)that could have easily gone through the apartment walls and hit “innocent” people in their apartments) (b) didn’t necessarily mean that she hit her target and if he were dangerous may have been crouched with a weapon, waiting for her in the apartment too dark to make anything out but that “silhouette.”
It really sounds like a very bad shooting.
This is a tragic and difficult case.
The explanation provided in the manslaughter affidavit seems far-fetched. Parking on the wrong floor, walking to the wrong apartment, finding the door already unlocked when trying to use her electronic key card, mistaking the legal resident as an intruder and shooting him under this mistaken assumption. Then, not realizing that it is the wrong apartment until the lights go on and she goes back and looks at the number on the door. It is all a stretch but, given that she had just finished a 15-hour work-shift and was likely very fatigued, it is just possible that it is true.
On the other hand, the case for deliberate murder is even more far-fetched. Are we supposed to believe that she comes home after a 15-hour shift, really wants some sleep, fears that she won’t get it because of her noisy neighbor and decides, on the spur of the moment, to just go to his apartment and shoot the SOB so that she can finally get the sleep that she needs? Or maybe she did it because she is a white-supremacist racist and, angry after a long hard day, decides to nail that non-white, noisy neighbor right now?
Excuse me, but if I had just finished a 15-hour shift, shooting the neighbor would not be the first item on my agenda!
This is one for a jury to figure out. I won’t pre-judge it. My inclination is to accept the final judgment of the jury whatever it may be. I certainly won’t leap to racism and murder like some of the left-wing media are doing. We had enough of that in the Zimmerman case.
If she is given the benefit of the doubt on the killing, the public should be given the benefit of the doubt on her employment. I do not want people of questionable judgement to have a badge and a gun. She should find a line of work where she is not armed.
First off, I give the mainstream “news media” about as much credibility as The National Enquirer et al, especially in any kind of cross racial situation where police or armed citizens are involved and a minority person is harmed. With that in mind, all the evidence in this case is not yet available to us and it therefore isn’t fair to pass judgement on either concerned party. The matter could end up being adjudicated as an excusable homicide, but for the life of me I wouldn’t want to be in Officer Amber Guyger’s shoes.
Mas, maybe a year or two after the facts have been evaluated and decided upon this could be a teaching Ayoob File?
Paul,
Shame on you for bad-mouthing the National Enquirer that way! 🙂
I’ll have you know that the Enquirer is a pillar of truth, honesty and justice compared with the “Spin Doctors” in the “Fake News Media”.
Absopositivelylutely!!
My ad blocker kept me from reading the report/legal analysis. With that out of the way, a couple comments:
One- I wasn’t there, I don’t have copies of any reports/statements etc, So I have no opinion on the alleged actions. I learned decades ago to take media reports of incidents as “something happened there, correct details to follow-maybe”.
Two- If the department in question really does schedule 15 hour shifts (possibly prisoner transport/court action?), they would seem to be not looking after the best interests of either officers or the public. I’m not an attorney, but this would appear to put them in a less than favorable position regarding liability.
Note: I spent a lot of time doing 12 hour shifts for various employers. At one point in time the employer cut our shifts to 10 hours. The difference was really amazing. I’ve done longer shifts due to inclement weather and ongoing incidents and there is a definite degradation of alertness and data processing.
There seems to be a significant amount of animus concerning the idea that this is being described by some and black/white issue or to the suggestion that there was some discriminatory intent of the officer. The reason why this issue comes up is because of the disparate treatment of this officer after the shooting. As a prosecutor for many years I can tell you that if you, regular joe gun owner, working a 15 hour shift shot a cop in their apartment you would be in jail and the charge would be murder. There would be judges woken up to obtain search warrants. This did not happen with this officer. It leads folks to ask why is the officer being treated differently? If she would have been booked that night like anyone else, it would be tragic but people would be inclined to let the system play out.
I can’t think of any firearms trainer that would have said that under these circumstances you would be justified in shooting this man. Even in a light most favorable to the officer her actions were reckless and would be considered manslaugher.
I am becoming more and more concerned that the leftist media is going to try to “spin” this case to support their “racist police” narrative and to score political points exactly like they did with the Zimmerman / Martin case. One can already see the same type of spin being applied.
For example, they first cast Zimmerman as a “White Racist” then, when it turned out that he came from a mixed racial heritage, he was re-cast as a “White Hispanic”. Notice the parallels in this story:
https://thegrio.com/2018/09/12/amber-guyger-racism-botham-shem-jean/
I tell you, it is giving me flashes of “deja vu all over again” as Yogi Berra would say. The leftist media would love to spin up a racist, anti-police narrative just before the midterm elections so as to motivate their lunatic, left-wing base to “get out and vote”. No doubt, they see a controversial shooting like this as a “Godsend”. It is just the kind of thing that they can grab onto and use to whip up emotion.
There is nothing more in this world that the leftist media loves than to spin out propaganda to support their narrative and whip up emotion. Emotion is the only thing that the Left has going for it since reason departed from their arguments years ago.
One story claimed that Officer Guyger has hired a PR firm to go to bat for her. If so, it was a wise move on her part. The media will be doing everything in their power to send negative PR her way and tarnish her as a racist, “white Hispanic” murderer. She will need some help to “fight fire with fire”.
If the media gets on a roll, this case is likely to turn into another “Show Trial” like it did with Zimmerman. With the media ramping up a smear campaign, Officer Guyger’s life and law-enforcement career are over. If she is convicted of a crime, the media pressure will push for a maximum sentence. If she is found “Not Guilt” (like Zimmerman), her life and reputation will still be ruined (like Zimmerman’s).
Either way, once the media begins their smear campaign, her life is over. The news media is sometimes called the “Destroy Trump” media. Actually, they try to destroy anyone who gets in the way of their left-wing ideology or anyone who presents a convenient target for propaganda usage. As in the old Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, Officer Guyger has just been “Targeted for Termination” by the news media.
Late to comment here, but there are a couple of observations that I haven’t read here yet, so maybe worth adding to the thread.
Mas’ original article has a link to report (now behind a paywall, cannot access a second time) indicated the family of Botham Jean has engaged attorneys Lee Merritt and Ben Crump. Confirmed in https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amber-guyger-dallas-police-shooting-family-of-botham-jean-searches-for-answers/
Hmmm, Benjamin Crump, where has that name popped up in a lethal force case? Remember Crump was part of the team hired by the family of Trayvon Martin in the Zimmerman shooting – and it seems that Crump was instrumental in engaging the PR firm of Ryan Julison to “manage the message” on social media and the national media. (See the excellent reporting at https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/06/30/how-and-why-the-media-got-it-so-wrong-the-zimmerman-case-packaged-and-sold-by-ryan-julison-benjamin-crump-natalie-jackson/ for details.)
So while the facts have yet to be exposed (the “shifting narratives” of the early media reports show that speed of reporting is a higher priority than accurate and fair content), this seems to be headed in somewhat the same way as the Zimmerman case.
If Guyger has engaged a PR firm (as TN_MAN mentioned in an earlier comment he made), that’s a smart move given the involvement of Crump and his skills in “controlling and shaping the message”.
The reports that Officer Guyger has hired a PR firm are mainly being spread by Shaun King on Twitter. However, I have not seen any independent confirmation and, given that Shaun King is a left-wing operative, this could just be disinformation being spread by the Left.
Nevertheless, it is a good idea. At this point, with the Leftist Media already holding her trial in their news reports, she needs both a good PR firm and a good law firm on her side.
There is no doubt that the Zimmerman playbook is being repeated. Even with some of the same actors like, as you point out, Benjamin Crump.
The Leftist media are also using some of the same Zimmerman-style tricks. For example, remember how they took an old photo of an overweight Zimmerman and darkened it to make him look like a thug? Then they took a photo of Martin from when he was an innocent 12-year old kid and ran them side-by-side. The sole purpose being, of course, to visually paint Zimmerman as the criminal and Martin as the innocent victim.
Well, they are doing the same thing here. They are taking the photo from Officer Guyger’s mug shot. Remember, this was after she pulled a 15-hour shift. She looks exhausted with circles under her eyes. She also looks like she is in shock. It is about the most unflattering picture of her that they could find. Then they contrast it with a picture of Botham Jean taken from his Facebook page. It shows him in a suit and tie with a big, friendly smile on his face.
It is the same trick. Visually painting Guyger as the criminal, racist killer and Botham Jean as her innocent victim.
You have to give the leftist media credit. If some dirty trick works for them then they stick with it. They have a consistent playbook. It is the same with Judge Kavanaugh. A sexual smear almost worked to keep Justice Thomas off the SCOTUS back in 1991. Now the Left is going with Version 2.0 in the hopes that it will be more effective this time against Kavanaugh.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t know the facts of this case and I don’t want to pre-judge Officer Guyger as guilty or not guilty. However, with the heavy thumb of the leftist news media on the “Guilty” side of the Scales of Justice, I am afraid that she won’t get her fair day in court. In America, any accused person should get their fair day in court. However, if the Left sets out to ruin you, fairness goes out-the-window. Before it is over, both Judge Kavanaugh and Officer guyger are likely to be able to testify to that!
Boston walt, the fact that Benjamin Crump has been retained is very interesting indeed. That undoubtedly means that this thing is no doubt headed in the same direction as the Travon Martin blowout by the Main Stream Media. I would have to agree with you that the fact that the Officer has hired a PR firm is undoubtedly a step in the right direction.
MAS; surely YOU did not fail to note my obvious comment on “distraction and misdirection”
Oh,you didn’t. You simply tried to “one-up” me by using some misdirection of your own, and avoid addressing the simple facts of the matter, those being that the sworn, uniformed Perpetrator went to the apartment of a man whom she had made noise complaints against, entered his apartment, and shot him dead. The Armed, Uniformed Suspect( the defendant, as you call her, without noting her erstwhile status ), was specially trained and entrusted to NOT make bone-headed errors that endanger the public. She seems to be claiming that she made a series of such errors, resulting in the death of a man who was, unfortunately, in his own apartment. Either she is the most ridiculously incompetent sworn officer ever to get pushed through recruit screening and academy, or none of this was an error.
The fact that she was given two days to get her story straight , as noted, seemed to be conveniently lost on you, despite the fact that your background would have you familiar with such things, is another planned flaw in the practice of having an officer’s department do an investigation of crimes in which that officer is directly involved. Their delay seemed to have been ended only by public opinion, and by the appearance of a total lack of credibility that said delay ( rightly ) caused. Then there was the fact of the department obtaining a search warrant days after, in an apparent effort to find SOMETHING, no matter how flimsy, to pin on the departed, the murder victim. MORE misdirection and distraction. Did not the investigating officers perform a search of the crime scene while it was fresh? The “wait for all the facts” line rings pretty hollow. I do not think that this unjustifiable killing of a man going about his routine, noncriminal, activities, in his apartment, on a different floor than the shooter’s, doubtlessly not equipped with the same furnishings as the shooter’s, is going to be merely explained away.
I write this not as a personal attack against anyone, but rather to point out and respond to the sort of MISDIRECTION and DISTRACTION used by attorneys and politicians everyday, when they do not wish to address the uncomfortable truths at hand.
No misdirection, sir; she made statements that night. The scene was secured, and warrants were requested through standard protocol. You don’t have enough information to back up your claims. New to the whole criminal justice thing, huh?
NOT surprisingly,I see my follow-up is not here! Remember- DISTRACT and MISDIRECT. Politicians, Lawyers and Expert Witnesses all practice this, regardless of cause, whenever expedient.
If you can’t find your followup, you lost it yourself, dude. Won’t be the first troll to lose his way…
Comments are closed.