Amber Guyger Found Guilty of Murder!!!..... 10 years

Strapped

Strapped

Superstar
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
43,483
Reputation
1,546
Daps
53,498
Reppin
404
She was confused because she had the D on her mind . How the fuxed did she get in . She made a kill shot to his heart . Too many careless moves by her . She had tunnel vision until she killed him
 
dtownreppin214

dtownreppin214

l'immortale
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
55,687
Reputation
10,536
Daps
191,922
Reppin
Shags & Leathers
philmonroe said:
Basically this. Common sense says their is no way this isn't an open and shut case regardless of who the race of the people are. Unless your inebriated its no excuse for you not to see that's not your spot before shooting someone.
Click to expand...
All they need is one juror to sympathize with her sob story about being overworked. Unfortunately, I don't think this jury will come to an unanimous decision.
 
mag357

mag357

Superstar
Joined
Jan 4, 2017
Messages
18,294
Reputation
-28
Daps
56,606
To be totally honest..
I feel that the prosecution DIDNT do a great job...

Maybe because that didnt have much to work with...

We already know she shot him... we already know she killed him.

The whole case seemed open and shut because no one could believe a person who is a cop...could just accidentally walk into a person's apartment and shoot them.

But then damn near everybody gets up on the stand and talks about how easy it is to be on the wrong floor, or walk to the wrong door smh...:snoop:.

The ranger (who I dnt trust) talks about how Botham's lock was kinda messed up.
Then one of the other tenants talks about how her lock was kinda messed up too:snoop:...

Ok, so at the end of yesterday's testimony... I'm thinking... Prosecution needs to present evidence or be working on some kind of theory on how she got in his apartment...
Thats the only way they can win this jury back.

Because with all the testimony leading up to today.. it seems very plausible that she could have parked on the wrong floor and went to the wrong door, and bothams door wasnt all the way closed... smh

Prosecution had to show some type of ILL intent...
A conversation between them b4 the shooting.
Her breaking in... something.

The prosecution did nothing at all to show this or even attempt...

Only thing they may have gotten was her not attempting to give him life saving assistance once she shot him...
Prosecution had police on the scene state that Botham was still alive but barley...
She was on the phone txting
She didnt try to save him..

Anyway, it looks like criminal negligence... Carrys a 2yr max and $1k fine, I believe... she won't see a day behind bars...
Pay fine and community service
Smh
 
dtownreppin214

dtownreppin214

l'immortale
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
55,687
Reputation
10,536
Daps
191,922
Reppin
Shags & Leathers
Phil Kingston (ran for mayor of Dallas and lost) on FB:

I haven't made a secret of my position that this case is definitely murder and that the supposed defenses Guyger is putting forward shouldn't even have been mentioned to the jury. Being mistaken as to whose house you're standing in is, in my conception of the universe, per se unreasonable. That is to say, I would be in favor of a bright-line rule that says unlawfully entering the home of another person is unreasonable as a matter of law and that all mistakes flowing from that first mistake are similarly unreasonable.

But I am not on the bench, and if I had been called for that venire, I would never have been seated on the jury. So it's just like, my opinion, man.

My question for those of you who disagree is: how many mistakes of fact does she get to string together before the accumulation of mistakes becomes one giant, steaming pile of unreasonable?

Wrong floor
Wrong apartment
Didn't see that door mat
Why is this door open?

For me, those 4 are already stretching her theory too far, but it gets so much worse when she tries to graft on a self defense claim to her mistake of fact claim. She now says she feared for her life, but Jean was armed only with ice cream, and he was literally a choir boy. He was an accountant whose hobby was singing in church. So where does that fear for her life come from?

I suspect the real explanation is that, once she was mistaken about whose house she was in, she wasn't necessarily more scared than she was convinced that she was entitled to kill an intruder. If it'd been her house, then Texas law would be on her side, which is another great argument for my bright-line rule. If you're entitled to kill an intruder then you have to be perfectly certain of whose house you're in.

And it raises the question of what the law says about Jean's rights. If Jean had been armed with a gun instead of his ice cream and had killed Guyger, he likely wouldn't even have been referred to a grand jury. Texas law, in many ways, makes the rights of the resident vastly superior to the rights of the intruder. I am making an assumption here, but I don't think many of Guyger's supporters would be really chill about overturning the castle doctrine.

One other problem I have with Guyger's defense: reasonableness can be judged from the standpoint of the average person, but the jury is also entitled to judge Guyger as a person supposedly professionally trained in the reasonable use of deadly force. She's not the average person making an average mistake. She's supposed to be less trigger happy than this.

If all this sounds like I'm unsympathetic to Guyger, I don't mean it that way. I feel sure that she hates what happened and would undo it if she could. But I am unsympathetic to what I see as logical and legal gymnastics in her defense and in her supporters' statements.
Click to expand...
 
dtownreppin214

dtownreppin214

l'immortale
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
55,687
Reputation
10,536
Daps
191,922
Reppin
Shags & Leathers
SIAP but this was posted on her social media. This is the mentality these pigs walk around with.

maxresdefault.jpg.86df96cf76d4bff543bbbe8e3205999b.jpg
 
CHICAGO

CHICAGO

Vol. 9: Trapped
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
54,259
Reputation
11,545
Daps
368,475
Reppin
CHICAGO
dtownreppin214 said:
All they need is one juror to sympathize with her sob story about being overworked. Unfortunately, I don't think this jury will come to an unanimous decision.
Click to expand...


IT HAS TO BE UNANIMOUS
WHETHER ITS GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY.

IF THEY ALL CANT AGREE
ITS A MISTRIAL AND WE DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN
WITH A NEW JURY.
:devil:
:evil:

​
 
sinistersouth

sinistersouth

Banned
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
1,269
Reputation
-250
Daps
5,386
Reppin
New York City. I mean Kansas.
i havent watched any footage yet, has the state mentioned anything other than the red door mat, pertaining to clues she would've noticed that she wasn't at her apartment? everyone keeps mentioning the door mat, fukk his door mat. what about his neighbor's mats? any other clues that it's a different floor. decorations on someones door, a light thats out, mismatched paint, shrubs in different spots from one floor to the next, hell, the feeling of being at a different elevation; the fukking list im sure goes on and on, but all they want to mention is 1 thing? kiss my dog ass. several DOZEN differences along the route to either his or her apartment from the moment you drive onto the property, including in the parking garage. any sensible person can thus conclude there's no way she could've been confused about where she was; that her route was intentional, and upon arriving at that brothers door, she promptly shot him. Murder
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top