ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Amber Guyger , Dallas incidents , murder cases , police incidents , police misconduct charges , shooting incidents , Texas cases

Closed Thread
Old 27th August 2019, 09:55 AM   #441
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,441
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
WAG? I'd say for some people the fact that she was a cop means an assumption of professionalism and deference to her judgement in the case. Amber the bartender was just a trigger-happy redneck with no training looking to blow someone away. But if a cop went to the wrong apartment and shot the occupant, well there must have been something done to her to cause that mistaken entry and surely a cop wouldn't have shot someone without cause, so he must have done something to deserve, or at least cause, it.

I say this as someone with generally a strong pro-law enforcement bias. I think the fact that she was a cop has some people wondering what he did wrong to make her shoot, since she must have had a good (even if flawed) reason for her actions, her being a professional and all.

Personally I don't buy an inch of that reasoning.
She is a cop who had previously shot a suspect with at least some justification, but also she was the only police officer to actually think it worth shooting in that case, which suggests she's a bit more trigger-happy than most other cops.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 09:55 AM   #442
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I've seen absolutely zero evidence of that.
Her whole publicly released statements have focused on how she thought she was in her own apartment. That's mistake of fact, which might decriminalize her actions under Texas law. The defense would be incompetent not to try it.

And that's what I find interesting, too. I agree that each and every thing she did was wrong, and 100% her own fault. But just like Texas law allows you to use deadly force against someone you believe is about to commit a robbery (shudder), she may get off easy under mistake of fact. Remember, this is the state that allows you to shoot a hooker in the back if she steals your cash.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 27th August 2019 at 10:01 AM. Reason: freaking cel phone
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 09:56 AM   #443
Joe Random
Master Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,096
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
She is a cop who had previously shot a suspect with at least some justification, but also she was the only police officer to actually think it worth shooting in that case, which suggests she's a bit more trigger-happy than most other cops.
Yup, that's my take on it as well.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 09:58 AM   #444
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 6,166
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
ETA: Didn't see the edit, I think you ninja'd me.
Haha yeah, sorry. I realized right after I'd posted that I'd kind of failed to make my point so I edited. I was hesitant to wade in here, but I've been lurking. This case is just crazy. It actually inspired me to put a bunch of decorations on my door, in the hopes that the other idiots living in my building never make a similar mistake and try to come bursting in for some reason. Obviously, I tend to keep my door locked, but **** happens. I forget things, like we all do.

Overkill? Probably. But now my door looks really nice!
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:02 AM   #445
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,705
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Her whole publicly released statements have focused on how she thought she was in her own apartment. That's mistake of fact, which might decriminalize her actions under Texas law. The defense would be incompetent not to try it.

And that's what I find interesting, too. I agree that each and every thing she did was wrong, and 100% her own fault. But just like Texas law allows you to use deadly force against someone you believe is about to commit a robbery (shudder), she may get off easy under mistake of fact. Remember, this is the state that allows you to shoot a hooked in the back if she sets your cash.
As has been pointed out multiple times, the mistake of fact only gets you to the wrong apartment. It doesn't justify shooting someone to death for doing absolutely nothing. She wasn't even in the apartment, so Castle Doctrine doesn't apply. She wasn't defending herself from anything and according to her she couldn't see because it was dark. She was firing a gun at nothing and ended up murdering someone. We need to drop the mistake of fact because that's not a justification here.

Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
Haha yeah, sorry. I realized right after I'd posted that I'd kind of failed to make my point so I edited. I was hesitant to wade in here, but I've been lurking. This case is just crazy. It actually inspired me to put a bunch of decorations on my door, in the hopes that the other idiots living in my building never make a similar mistake and try to come bursting in for some reason. Obviously, I tend to keep my door locked, but **** happens. I forget things, like we all do.

Overkill? Probably. But now my door looks really nice!
The more voices the better. It encourages conversation. We have a security system at my house, but where I live I almost never arm it. We've never had anyone try to come in our house, or anything like that. We lock the doors sometimes, but we can't even do that consistently.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

Last edited by plague311; 27th August 2019 at 10:33 AM.
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:04 AM   #446
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,048
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
The more voices the better. It encourages conversation.
BLAH!

There. That was my voice.

Discuss.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:09 AM   #447
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
As has been pointed out multiple times, the mistake of fact only gets you to the wrong apartment. It doesn't justify shooting someone to death for doing absolutely nothing. She wasn't even in the apartment, so Castle Doctrine doesn't apply. She wasn't defending herself from anything and according her she couldn't see because it was dark. She was firing a gun at nothing and ended up murdering someone. We need to drop the mistake of fact because that's not a justification here.
Yeah, and I have been one of the posters saying mistake of fact should stop at the door. But the defence will certainly try to extend it to the shooting. Where you or I think mistake of fact stops is irrelevant. How the defense argues it to the jury is what will matter.

I think this kind of thing is interesting from the standpoint of challenging laws regarding civilian executions, which I'm not exactly a fan of.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:33 AM   #448
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,458
Funny people only find the case where the white cop shoots the black guy "interesting" to the point that they have to adopt the full on persona of a member of their legal defense team over it.

Apparently nobody has ever made a mistake or been tired while committing a crime at any point in history that had to be discussed to this degree.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:35 AM   #449
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,705
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, and I have been one of the posters saying mistake of fact should stop at the door. But the defence will certainly try to extend it to the shooting. Where you or I think mistake of fact stops is irrelevant. How the defense argues it to the jury is what will matter.

I think this kind of thing is interesting from the standpoint of challenging laws regarding civilian executions, which I'm not exactly a fan of.
Yet, you say with a lot of certainty that what Distracted1 has said will come to pass. I have no reason to believe that if this is explained to the jury (that the mistake of fact only gets her to the door and absolutely no further) there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to understand it. We aren't talking about some convoluted mumbo jumbo. It's clear cut.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:39 AM   #450
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,458
There's also the subtext of what Distracted1 proposing being absolutely horrible and something we should be ashamed of if it does happen, which isn't the feeling I'm getting from the apologists.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 10:56 AM   #451
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Funny people only find the case where the white cop shoots the black guy "interesting" to the point that they have to adopt the full on persona of a member of their legal defense team over it.
And here comes the YOU'RE A RACIST IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME tripe. This has zip to do with skin color and a lot to do with under what circumstances people are allowed to kill each other. This one does get more hazy because she is a cop, who has more legal authority to shoot.

We can assume Guyvers lawyers will milk defense of fact like a fat cow. They e implied as much. For me, the discussion is far more about what changes should be made to law to CLEARLY CRIMINALIZE. scenarios like this. So take your Great White Savior racist finger pointing and shove it.

Quote:
Apparently nobody has ever made a mistake or been tired while committing a crime at any point in history that had to be discussed to this degree.
This whole thing is an outlier scenario. Mistake of fact was presumably created to not punish people for honest mistakes. But this one is arguably less than clear in whether it should apply. I think it shouldn't. Even a little bit. But will the Yosemite Sam State interpret it the same way? Could this nightmare freak show happen elsewhere, like our own states? Should we come up with new Amber Laws that shut down attempts to make ANY EXCUSES for civilians shooting others absent a clear threat to life? I think we should.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:01 AM   #452
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Yet, you say with a lot of certainty that what Distracted1 has said will come to pass. I have no reason to believe that if this is explained to the jury (that the mistake of fact only gets her to the door and absolutely no further) there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to understand it. We aren't talking about some convoluted mumbo jumbo. It's clear cut.
That's your opinion on where mistake of fact starts and ends, or rather where you think it should. I doubt you are a Texas criminal attorney, but forgive me if I am mistaken on that point. Wanna make a bet that the defense rolls it out, no matter what you think gets explained to the jury?
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:06 AM   #453
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,705
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
That's your opinion on where mistake of fact starts and ends, or rather where you think it should. I doubt you are a Texas criminal attorney, but forgive me if I am mistaken on that point. Wanna make a bet that the defense rolls it out, no matter what you think gets explained to the jury?
No, I don't want to make that bet. As you said, they've already stated they're going to do as much. Why would I doubt it?

The reason my opinion on where it starts and ends is because it HAS to end at the door. What possible mistake of fact was made post her getting to the apartment? I don't need to be a lawyer to understand simplistic things like that.

After she got to the door everything she did was with purpose. She pulled her gun, she fired two shots, she killed the man, then decided it would be a good time to bother doing some critical thinking. There was no mistake once she got to that door. None.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:06 AM   #454
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,105
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
This whole thing is an outlier scenario. Mistake of fact was presumably created to not punish people for honest mistakes. But this one is arguably less than clear in whether it should apply. I think it shouldn't. Even a little bit. But will the Yosemite Sam State interpret it the same way? Could this nightmare freak show happen elsewhere, like our own states? Should we come up with new Amber Laws that shut down attempts to make ANY EXCUSES for civilians shooting others absent a clear threat to life? I think we should.
I share your pessimism about the good people who will be on the jury in my fair state, but feel the need to point out that Yosemite is California.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:12 AM   #455
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I share your pessimism about the good people who will be on the jury in my fair state, but feel the need to point out that Yosemite is California.
And with that, my entire argument collapses like a guy watching football in his Dallas apartment.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:17 AM   #456
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,105
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
And with that, my entire argument collapses like a guy watching football in his Dallas apartment.
Pew, pew.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:18 AM   #457
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,184
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I share your pessimism about the good people who will be on the jury in my fair state, but feel the need to point out that Yosemite is California.
But Yosemite Sam doesn't have much connection to California, being a US cartoon character that only fictionally visited California intermittently.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:22 AM   #458
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,458
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
And with that, my entire argument collapses like a guy watching football in his Dallas apartment.
Nothing proves you're not racist like making fun of a dead black guy.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:22 AM   #459
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,705
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
But Yosemite Sam doesn't have much connection to California, being a US cartoon character that only fictionally visited California intermittently.
But he is named after the park!!!

I was never sure where Bugs ended up after he missed his turn at Albuquerque.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:24 AM   #460
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,105
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
But Yosemite Sam doesn't have much connection to California, being a US cartoon character that only fictionally visited California intermittently.
Thank you for pointing out his strong connection to Texas. Which I assume must be based primarily on mudflap distribution.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:26 AM   #461
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,105
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I was never sure where Bugs ended up after he missed his turn at Albuquerque.
Area 51?
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:31 AM   #462
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Nothing proves you're not racist like making fun of a dead black guy.
I could just hand you some straws rather than watch you grasping so hard at them. Maybe you could make a new straw man out of them. Your current ones are wearing thin.

I'm sure you've never made a joke involving someone who died. Do tell, O Great White Savior.

Eta: wanna hear me joke about dead white guys too? Or would that confuse your faux Great White Savior shtick?
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 27th August 2019 at 11:32 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 11:45 AM   #463
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,048
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Nothing proves you're not racist like making fun of a dead black guy.
Is it ok to make fun of dead white guys?

Come on, Joe. That's not a fair accusation.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 12:03 PM   #464
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,878
Perhaps this thread needs to be moved to the Trials and Errors section? That way we can discuss what we think the Defense/Prosecution will do (even if we do not agree with it or think that it is a legit move) without some posters yelling "but they can't do that!" every 5 minutes?
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 12:35 PM   #465
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,610
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
If the mistake of fact defense is allowed, then the defense will be presenting expert testimony that walking into the wrong apartment, after a long shift, was reasonable, the jury will be instructed that it is the defendant's state of mind that is at issue. If the jury decides that the mistake of fact was legitimate, and there was no intent to walk into a stranger's apartment and shoot the resident, then all murder charges are out.



If the jury accepts the Mistake of fact argument, then even negligence will be ruled out. If Mistake of fact accepted by jury, then, there is no mens rea, they will have to look at it as someone walking into their home, and encountering someone in the dark. That is not murder.
No. The mistake of fact gets her to the wrong apartment, it does not cover her intentional shooting of Jean. Two separate and very distinct events.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 12:40 PM   #466
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,610
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Her whole publicly released statements have focused on how she thought she was in her own apartment. That's mistake of fact, which might decriminalize her actions under Texas law. The defense would be incompetent not to try it.

And that's what I find interesting, too. I agree that each and every thing she did was wrong, and 100% her own fault. But just like Texas law allows you to use deadly force against someone you believe is about to commit a robbery (shudder), she may get off easy under mistake of fact. Remember, this is the state that allows you to shoot a hooker in the back if she steals your cash.
Sorry but no. The mistake of fact is her going to the wrong apartment under the erroneous belief she'd gone to her apartment. It does not cover her actions after that.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 12:50 PM   #467
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,610
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Sorry but no. The mistake of fact is her going to the wrong apartment under the erroneous belief she'd gone to her apartment. It does not cover her actions after that.
Let me expand on that a bit to make it clearer.

If there was crime that said entering someone else's apartment without their knowledge and permission her mistake of fact would be a defence against being convicted for that crime when she erroneously entered someone else's apartment . But she is not being prosecuted for breaking and entering, or trespass.

She did not mistakenly or by accident kill Jean. She intentionally tried to kill him.

For a mistake of fact defence against that deliberate killing she would have to have thought (for example) that her gun was filled with blanks even though unknown to her a colleague had reloaded it with live ammunition back at the station. That would be when she could use a defence of mistake of fact, as she had not intentionally tried to kill Jean.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 01:34 PM   #468
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,173
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
I really don't think there would be all this discussion and legal controversy if Guyger hadn't been a cop. I don't know why exactly I think that, but I do. I'm just trying to imagine the scenario with a non-cop.

Amber is a bartender. She just worked a double shift, and it was a stressful one. She's very tired. Amber also has a concealed carry permit, and tends to carry her weapon with her when going home alone late at night. Because she is so tired, Amber accidentally walks into the wrong apartment upon arriving at her building. Believing the resident inside to be an intruder, she panics, draws her weapon, and shoots him.

Would anyone be defending Amber the bartender? I could be wrong, but I honestly don't think so. Amber the bartender would have gone straight to jail that night, and people would be calling her an idiot and chanting string her up.
Your scenario (And Guyger) is very similar to a Law question regarding Mistake of Fact.
Both this example, and the case at hand are likely to result in an acquittal, or a hung jury. It's not that i'm racist, or rooting for the cops, i'm trying to point out that your rage over the color of the victim, and the shooter, will have no bearing on the legal case, and how it will be presented to the jury.

Here is the question from Lawshelf Education, tell me why Amber Guyger is different than the person in the example.


Quote:
Bob lives by himself in a town where, because of zoning requirements, all of the houses are built identical to one another and are painted the same color. Bob has been on a business trip for the past week and he arrives home in the middle of the night. Exhausted and not paying attention, Bob accidentally pulls into the driveway of the house next door to his. Bob then tries to unlock the door of the house, which belongs to Bob's neighbor Frank, with his keys. Still not realizing that he is in front of the wrong house, Bob cannot understand why his keys do not work. Too tired to figure it out, he goes around to the back, breaks a window and enters the house through the window. Frank, who is asleep upstairs, hears the window shatter and calls the police. Bob is arrested and charged with burglary. If he tries to mount a mistake of fact defense, he will probably be:

D. Acquitted, if Bob's mistake was reasonable.
Correct- Mistake of fact can protect a defendant from a guilty verdict if it shows that the defendant lacked the required intent to commit the crime. However, the mistake that the defendant made must be a reasonable one. In other words, in order to be able to use mistake of fact as a defense, the mistake that the defendant made must have been one that an ordinary person would have made as well. That being the case, if Bob's mistake was a reasonable one, his mistake of fact defense will be successful and he will be acquitted. Therefore, D is the correct answer.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

Last edited by Drewbot; 27th August 2019 at 01:35 PM.
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 01:38 PM   #469
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Let me expand on that a bit to make it clearer.

If there was crime that said entering someone else's apartment without their knowledge and permission her mistake of fact would be a defence against being convicted for that crime when she erroneously entered someone else's apartment . But she is not being prosecuted for breaking and entering, or trespass.

She did not mistakenly or by accident kill Jean. She intentionally tried to kill him.

For a mistake of fact defence against that deliberate killing she would have to have thought (for example) that her gun was filled with blanks even though unknown to her a colleague had reloaded it with live ammunition back at the station. That would be when she could use a defence of mistake of fact, as she had not intentionally tried to kill Jean.
Yeah, I think everyone gets that and it's how we are all hoping it goes. What some of us are thinking is that this interpretation may not be supported in statute or precedent in Texas Law. This is the ok-to-shoot-the-fleeing- hooker state, remember. Also you can use deadly force against someone e you believe is about to commit a robbery. Some cold blooded brothers running around the Lone Star State.

Can you cite statute or precedent for your claim, under Texas law? Most of what I've been reading from Texas lawyers commenting in the news say it's a realistic defense.

Eta: and see Drewbot's citation above regarding how mistake of fact may affect subsequent crime
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 27th August 2019 at 01:42 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 01:43 PM   #470
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,173
Thermal-

I think the point is, that once mistake of fact (Her entering the wrong apartment) has been entered as the defense, and the jury will be instructed to mistake of fact, that anything after the mistake of fact (entering the wrong apartment), is going to follow that mistake.

Mistakenly enters what she thought was her apartment. Shoots what she thought was an intruder based on that mistake. In other words, there was never any intent to shoot a stranger in his apartment.

The sleep experts, are going to testify to the reasonableness of being tired, leading to entering the wrong apartment. Not whether or not shooting was justified based on being tired.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 01:59 PM   #471
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Thermal-

I think the point is, that once mistake of fact (Her entering the wrong apartment) has been entered as the defense, and the jury will be instructed to mistake of fact, that anything after the mistake of fact (entering the wrong apartment), is going to follow that mistake.

Mistakenly enters what she thought was her apartment. Shoots what she thought was an intruder based on that mistake. In other words, there was never any intent to shoot a stranger in his apartment.

The sleep experts, are going to testify to the reasonableness of being tired, leading to entering the wrong apartment. Not whether or not shooting was justified based on being tired.
Yeah, that's how I'm afraid it might play out.

My personal take is that when you decide to be the Reaper and shoot someone, there is no 'whoopsie' defense of any kind accepted. I'd like to see all the Guygers and Drejkas in the country locked up for life.

Although WRT sleep experts: put one mother on the jury and she'll be pissing herself laughing at what Guyger tries to pass off as sleep deprivation.

Eta: poster Devils Advocate, who I believe is a US attorney(?), states that if mistake of fact is accepted, Guyger can claim self defense in the shooting.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 27th August 2019 at 02:28 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:36 PM   #472
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,097
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
....
Mistakenly enters what she thought was her apartment. Shoots what she thought was an intruder based on that mistake.
....
Back to the beginning: Suppose for the sake of argument, she had entered her own apartment and she had encountered someone else. Would she have been justified in killing an unarmed man who posed no threat, instead of doing almost anything else, particularly just retreating out the door? As others have noted, the guy could have been an engineer making emergency repairs, or maybe a relative with a key making a surprise visit, or even an actual burglar who would have surrendered if he had been given a chance. The question on the table is whether it was reasonable for Guyger to believe that her life was in danger. All of the evidence suggests that it was not.

And let's not forget that this is an apartment building: A stray bullet will likely go through walls and windows and maybe kill a bystander. That's all the more reason to exercise extreme restraint.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:38 PM   #473
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 6,166
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Your scenario (And Guyger) is very similar to a Law question regarding Mistake of Fact.
Both this example, and the case at hand are likely to result in an acquittal, or a hung jury. It's not that i'm racist, or rooting for the cops, i'm trying to point out that your rage over the color of the victim, and the shooter, will have no bearing on the legal case, and how it will be presented to the jury.

Here is the question from Lawshelf Education, tell me why Amber Guyger is different than the person in the example.
Sorry, but do you know who you're responding to? I never said a word about race. As to your Lawshelf example, I would say the difference is Guyger killed a guy.

Regardless though, you appear to be mistaking my position. I'm just wondering if the fact that she's a cop is what makes this case a million-pager of discussion as opposed to a 2-page "world's dumbest criminals" type thread. I don't see it as a "cop vs. black guy" politicized situation. I see it as a crazy outlier of a case, worst case scenario for everyone involved type deal.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:43 PM   #474
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Back to the beginning: Suppose for the sake of argument, she had entered her own apartment and she had encountered someone else. Would she have been justified in killing an unarmed man who posed no threat, instead of doing almost anything else, particularly just retreating out the door? As others have noted, the guy could have been an engineer making emergency repairs, or maybe a relative with a key making a surprise visit, or even an actual burglar who would have surrendered if he had been given a chance. The question on the table is whether it was reasonable for Guyger to believe that her life was in danger. All of the evidence suggests that it was not.

And let's not forget that this is an apartment building: A stray bullet will likely go through walls and windows and maybe kill a bystander. That's all the more reason to exercise extreme restraint.
This is why I'm hoping the mistake of fact and subsequent self defense claim will fail. Cracking off rounds in those conditions should be seen as criminal, not defensive
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 27th August 2019 at 02:44 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:49 PM   #475
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,353
I have heard things like, "he didn't comply with her commands to do ..." whatever she commanded him to do. Then again, so? She was not an on-duty police officer, so she's not giving lawful orders. If I got out a gun, pointed it at someone and started ordering them around, could I shoot them if they don't do what I say?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:52 PM   #476
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,353
Mistake of fact:
Police officer: I pulled you over for going 55 in a 35 mph speed zone
Me: Sorry officer, I though the speed limit was 55.
PO: Well, ok, it's just a mistake of fact. I won't give you a ticket.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 02:56 PM   #477
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
I have heard things like, "he didn't comply with her commands to do ..." whatever she commanded him to do. Then again, so? She was not an on-duty police officer, so she's not giving lawful orders. If I got out a gun, pointed it at someone and started ordering them around, could I shoot them if they don't do what I say?
American cops retain cop powers even when off duty

Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Mistake of fact:
Police officer: I pulled you over for going 55 in a 35 mph speed zone
Me: Sorry officer, I though the speed limit was 55.
PO: Well, ok, it's just a mistake of fact. I won't give you a ticket.
Mistake of fact requires the reasonable person standard. That a reasonable person could reasonably make that error. It doesn't mean just any old claim of mistake. Its not that complicated.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 03:03 PM   #478
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,353
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
American cops retain cop powers even when off duty
Did she identify herself as police?

Quote:

Mistake of fact requires the reasonable person standard. That a reasonable person could reasonably make that error. It doesn't mean just any old claim of mistake. Its not that complicated.
Hey, a reasonable person can not know the speed limit.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 03:11 PM   #479
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,465
[quote=pgwenthold;12800664]Did she identify herself as police?[quote]

We don't know. Being in full uniform may have been a tip, though.

Quote:
Hey, a reasonable person can not know the speed limit.
You could try it in traffic court, I suppose. Good luck with that.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th August 2019, 03:22 PM   #480
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,115
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
Sorry, but do you know who you're responding to? I never said a word about race. As to your Lawshelf example, I would say the difference is Guyger killed a guy.

Regardless though, you appear to be mistaking my position. I'm just wondering if the fact that she's a cop is what makes this case a million-pager of discussion as opposed to a 2-page "world's dumbest criminals" type thread. I don't see it as a "cop vs. black guy" politicized situation. I see it as a crazy outlier of a case, worst case scenario for everyone involved type deal.
Your last sentence answers your wonder about why this is a "million pager" of a thread.

It is an insane one-off of an occurrence that required multiple uncommon circumstances to happen at once, and lands at an intersection of "stand your ground", "castle doctrine", reasonableness, gun control, racism, sexism and a million other hot-button issues.

How could it not generate tons of discussion?
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:35 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.