IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


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 incident , Texas cases

Reply
Old 29th September 2019, 10:58 AM   #241
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
A murder conviction in Texas.
OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 10:59 AM   #242
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,970
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Let's talk about application of the castle doctrine. To Botham.

He was sitting in his apartment keeping to himself. An intruder pushes open his door and starts screaming at him.

1) Her claim is that she yelled to "Show me your hands" and when he didn't, she shot him. Then again, he had no obligation to show her anything. He was peacefully sitting in his apartment, and an intruder burst in and started shouting commands. If the "castle doctrine" has any meaning, it has to mean that someone in their home does not have to follow the commands of an intruder.

2) I don't know about whether she claims he was coming at him or not (can't keep up with it), but even if he did, so what? He had the right to defend his home, yes? If we can't put her in jail for defending what she thought was her home, why is it ok for him to be killed for defending his actual home?
The Guyger apologists have already succeeded in proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that Jean had every right to kill Guyger.

Problem is Jean is the dead one in this scenario.

As you say Guyger's alternative universe seems to outweigh Jean's real one because simply because Guyger is alive to make up fan fiction about the scenario.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:01 AM   #243
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 26,614
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Here, the words "prison" and "jail" are used essentially synonymously. I had no idea there was a distinction in America.

Context, as usual, is important.

In colloquial usage "jail" is often used as a common term describing incarceration in general (along with a whole raft of other terms). This can and often does include "prison".

The opposite is not true. "Prison" is usually taken as a much more specific case than "jail".

In conversations where detail is important then the distinction between the two is generally recognized.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:11 AM   #244
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 26,614
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
We're talking around each other as in:

- Did Amber Guyger, prior to the events in question (say prior to opening the door to Jean's apartment give or take a step in sequence of events or so) have any intention of killing Botham Jean. No, probably not. I don't think anyone here is seriously advancing the notion that this murder was premeditated or planned out on a long time frame.

- Did Amber Guyger have enough time during the sequence of events to go, on some level or in some context, "I now have to decide to or not to kill this human being in front of me." Many here would argue yes.

- Does this moment of decision making count as "premeditation." This is debatable, with points to be made either way.

I don't see what's debatable about it. She already told us she had made that decision.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:11 AM   #245
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It's enough for what?

To distinguish a murder charge from a manslaughter charge in Texas.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:12 AM   #246
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.
Sure about what? Guyger herself said she intended to kill, on the stand under oath.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:14 AM   #247
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 26,614
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
She stated under oath in court that she intended to kill him.

How long it took her to make that decision is irrelevant. When she made it is. She made that decision before she shot him. Hence intended.
That's not premeditation, that's training. If she walked into the room intending to kill that's premeditation.

You're just explaining why it was premeditated.

When isn't important. Whether it was when she walked through the door, or when she pulled out her gun.

That doesn't change the fact that it was.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:17 AM   #248
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,970
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I don't see what's debatable about it. She already told us she had made that decision.
Some people are obviously using the term "premeditated" to only describe decisions made well in advance of the actual actions.

To what degree that is true is another matter.

I've long been opposed to characterizing the events as Guyger shooting Jean "by accident." It was an intentional act.

"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 29th September 2019 at 11:33 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:32 AM   #249
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.
Do you disbelieve Guyger when she says she pulled the trigger intending to kill Jean?
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:44 AM   #250
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
Do you disbelieve Guyger when she says she pulled the trigger intending to kill Jean?
I believe that when an officer pulls their gun and squeezes the trigger, their intent is to kill. Not wound, not slow someone down but to stop the suspect in their tracks. That winging someone is for the movies. This is part of their training
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 12:00 PM   #251
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,051
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Some people are obviously using the term "premeditated" to only describe decisions made well in advance of the actual actions.

To what degree that is true is another matter.

I've long been opposed to characterizing the events as Guyger shooting Jean "by accident." It was an intentional act.

"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.
I would argue that it is a question for the lawyers to haggle over since it is part of the job of being a lawyer.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 12:05 PM   #252
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,051
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
To distinguish a murder charge from a manslaughter charge in Texas.
Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 12:15 PM   #253
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.
Do the jurors have options in this case? I would be troubled with a stiff sentence and no sentence.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 12:27 PM   #254
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
Who cares what they call it as long as she does some time? You can, of course, go for the Casey Anthony all or nothing strategy but that didn't work out so well.
I agree with that, but I think properly understanding how intent and negligence factor in to this crime will affect sentencing no matter which crime she gets convicted of so I think it's still important to understand intent.

Prior to the trial I would have been happy with her getting some minimum prison time. But after learning some things for the trial about how she acted while Jean was dying I want more than the minimum time.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 12:30 PM   #255
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
"Intention become premeditation exactly X.X seconds before the act" is a question for the philosophers.
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
I would argue that it is a question for the lawyers to haggle over since it is part of the job of being a lawyer.
Well, the lawyers and judges seem to have thought about it and seem to agree that the time spent premeditating isn't the issue, it's the quality of the thought.

For example:
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictiona...editation.aspx

Quote:
The process of premeditation and deliberation does not require any extended period of time. The true test is not the duration of time as much as it is the extent of the reflection. Thoughts may follow each other with great rapidity and cold, calculated judgment may be arrived at quickly."
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 01:00 PM   #256
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,334
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
To repeat, in Texas criminally negligent homicide and manslaughter are about doing something that you knew or should have known causes a risk to others who are killed as a result, but without intending that result.
That last bit is not correct. Lack of intent is not an element of manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. It is commonly described that way because if there were intent then it would be murder. Intent is not exclusionary of those lesser charges.

But we have not heard from the judge on whether lesser included charges will be an option for the jury.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 01:04 PM   #257
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,334
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Imperfect self-defenseWP. Texas actually originated this doctrine. Which would reduce it to manslaughter, for a sentence of 2-20.
The only thing I have been able to find on imperfect self-defense originating in Texas is the issue where someone provokes somebody and uses self-defense against them when they attack. Provocation in regards to self-defense has since been codified into the Texas Penal Code.

I can't find anything about murder being considered manslaughter in Texas if there is an imperfect self-defense as a result of a determination that a person truly held a belief that force was necessary but that belief was not reasonable.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 01:10 PM   #258
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,334
Premeditation is not an element of murder in Texas. Similarly, it has nothing to do with manslaughter.

It only exists to a partial degree in that at the punishment phase for a murder conviction, if a person proves that the murder occurred as a result of sudden passion rising out of provocation then it is a second degree felony instead of a first degree felony. But this type of lack of premeditation specially requires provocation.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 01:33 PM   #259
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,146
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
See above, she created a scenario in her head and acted as if it was real. It is really the only explanation that makes sense.
It totally makes sense but like all the options, it has a flaw. It doesn't explain her not noticing the 4th floor parking was open to air (in some way) and not noticing the door rug which would have occurred before she had time to imagine a burglar in her apartment.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 03:28 PM   #260
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It's enough for what?
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
She's not charged with "premeditation." Let's try this once again.

https://www.versustexas.com/criminal/homicide/

She intended to kill him. She said so herself. Then she did. That's enough.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
OK then. Well if you're sure, it must be true.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I believe that when an officer pulls their gun and squeezes the trigger, their intent is to kill. Not wound, not slow someone down but to stop the suspect in their tracks. That winging someone is for the movies. This is part of their training
ac, I'm not following you. If you acknowledge that she intended to kill then surely the standard I'll quote here:
Sec. 19.02. MURDER.

(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;

has been met. The question of whether Guyger was justified by acting in self-defense is a separate. What brought her to the door is also a separate question. She may have gotten to the door by accident, but once there her actions were intentional and deliberate. If it a lesser charge is available to them the jury may compromise on a lesser verdict but I believe that would be contrary to the law and the facts of the case. Guyger intended to kill Jean. She either legitimately did it in self-defense or not. I believe she did not legitimately act in self-defense.
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 03:47 PM   #261
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
ac, I'm not following you. If you acknowledge that she intended to kill then surely the standard I'll quote here:
Sec. 19.02. MURDER.

(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;

has been met. The question of whether Guyger was justified by acting in self-defense is a separate. What brought her to the door is also a separate question. She may have gotten to the door by accident, but once there her actions were intentional and deliberate. If it a lesser charge is available to them the jury may compromise on a lesser verdict but I believe that would be contrary to the law and the facts of the case. Guyger intended to kill Jean. She either legitimately did it in self-defense or not. I believe she did not legitimately act in self-defense.
I think that's the question. Ddid she believe it was self defense? This really is a tough one in my mind. Maybe I would be more confident if I was more familiar with the case than I am.

I think for a police officer to say they didn't intend to kill when they pulled the trigger would almost be disingenuous. According to the statute, I would be wrong and there is no question the outcome. But, I also don't believe the statute had this situation in mind. I can't ignore her recklessness but I also believe it would be a mistake to not recognize a genuine extenuating circumstance.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 03:58 PM   #262
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,970
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I think that's the question, did she believe it was self defense.
And this is the disagreement we've been having for 3 threads now.

I don't care if Amber Guyger truly and honestly believed in her heart of hearts that she was in her apartment and Botham Jean was running at her brandishing a machete in one hand and a notarized form saying "I hereby declare my intent to murder you, yes you Amber Guyger." If we could wrap Amber Guyger in Wonder Woman's Lasso of Truth and prove beyond all metaphysical doubt that she did honestly and truly believe in that moment that she was acting in pure and noble self defense my opinion of her guilt would not change one iota.

Because I don't find the belief that she was in her apartment reasonable. I don't think she's lying, I just think she's so wrong she's achieved the same level of guilt. I'm sorry there's no readily available concise Latin phrase for it to throw around but there is, or at the very least should be, a legal limit on how "wrong" you're just allowed to be and point at as an circumstance to justify your actions.

That's really the true irony of this. I've thought Amber Guyger was telling the truth from day one... and I still think she's guilty. I'm throwing her into same category as someone who actually makes an honest mistake seems wrong to me somehow.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 04:17 PM   #263
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And this is the disagreement we've been having for 3 threads now.

I don't care if Amber Guyger truly and honestly believed in her heart of hearts that she was in her apartment and Botham Jean was running at her brandishing a machete in one hand and a notarized form saying "I hereby declare my intent to murder you, yes you Amber Guyger." If we could wrap Amber Guyger in Wonder Woman's Lasso of Truth and prove beyond all metaphysical doubt that she did honestly and truly believe in that moment that she was acting in pure and noble self defense my opinion of her guilt would not change one iota.

Because I don't find the belief that she was in her apartment reasonable. I don't think she's lying, I just think she's so wrong she's achieved the same level of guilt. I'm sorry there's no readily available concise Latin phrase for it to throw around but there is, or at the very least should be, a legal limit on how "wrong" you're just allowed to be and point at as an circumstance to justify your actions.

That's really the true irony of this. I've thought Amber Guyger was telling the truth from day one... and I still think she's guilty. I'm throwing her into same category as someone who actually makes an honest mistake seems wrong to me somehow.
And I disagree with the idea that her state of mind doesn't matter when considering her penalty. I absolutely agree that this woman was so reckless that whether she believed that she was in the right and that she was acting in self defense doesn't equal a Get out of Jail card.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 29th September 2019 at 04:23 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 04:22 PM   #264
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
And I disagree with the idea that her state of mind doesn't matter when considering her penalty.
Who said anything like that? You've been saying things like you can't see her being charged or convicted of murder and that's what most people are disagreeing with you on. You've been disagreeing with the charge not the penalty. There is a LOT of discretion at sentencing, everything from 5 to 99 years. I would think most people here are expecting and desiring something near 5 (which could have her out in 2.5 years I think).
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 04:38 PM   #265
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Who said anything like that? You've been saying things like you can't see her being charged or convicted of murder and that's what most people are disagreeing with you on. You've been disagreeing with the charge not the penalty. There is a LOT of discretion at sentencing, everything from 5 to 99 years. I would think most people here are expecting and desiring something near 5 (which could have her out in 2.5 years I think).
The problem in my mind is leaving that wide range of discretion up to someone else.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 04:44 PM   #266
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
What do you mean "someone else"? It's up to the judge (and jury maybe?).


And when I said "discretion" that probably over simplifies. I'd expect there are guidelines for sentencing and the judge can also exercise some discretion. It's not all "discretion".
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 04:57 PM   #267
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
What do you mean "someone else"? It's up to the judge (and jury maybe?).


And when I said "discretion" that probably over simplifies. I'd expect there are guidelines for sentencing and the judge can also exercise some discretion. It's not all "discretion".
To the judge. Sometimes the jury has something of a say regarding sentencing, but outside of the death penalty doesn't their responsibilities end with the verdict?
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 05:55 PM   #268
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
And I disagree with the idea that her state of mind doesn't matter when considering her penalty. I absolutely agree that this woman was so reckless that whether she believed that she was in the right and that she was acting in self defense doesn't equal a Get out of Jail card.
Have you listened to her testimony. Did you find her credible as to Jean's actions and movements that caused her to pull the trigger?
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 06:45 PM   #269
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 30,551
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
Have you listened to her testimony. Did you find her credible as to Jean's actions and movements that caused her to pull the trigger?
I've only heard a few excerpts. She didn't sound evasive in any way. But then again I've only listened to a portion of her testimony.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 07:55 PM   #270
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
To the judge.
I don't know what this sentence means.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Sometimes the jury has something of a say regarding sentencing, but outside of the death penalty doesn't their responsibilities end with the verdict?
I think most trials in Texas are jury sentenced, but I'm not sure.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 08:21 PM   #271
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,487
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I don't know what this sentence means.

I think most trials in Texas are jury sentenced, but I'm not sure.

Apparently the defendant gets to decide who sentences him/her.
Quote:
In Texas, we do have jury sentencing in non-capital cases. The accused can elect before trial to have the jury set punishment in the event of a conviction (and we get jury trials for everything). If the accused doesn’t elect jury punishment the judge sets punishment. In almost all felony cases the accused chooses jury punishment.
https://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2...cing-in-texas/

That strikes me as truly bizarre. It practically guarantees inequities in sentencing, beyond the problems built in to the system.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 08:30 PM   #272
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,487
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Apparently the defendant gets to decide who sentences him/her.
https://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2...cing-in-texas/

That strikes me as truly bizarre. It practically guarantees inequities in sentencing, beyond the problems built in to the system.

I agree that the defendant gets to decide who sentences them in Texas, but they only have two choices: judge or jury. Unless either of those two choices is demonstrably wrong I don't have a major problem with that.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 09:03 PM   #273
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,334
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I think most trials in Texas are jury sentenced, but I'm not sure.
In Texas, the jury decides the sentence, unless the defendant waives that right (in which case it would be the judge, but apparently waiving that right is rare.)
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 09:04 PM   #274
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,487
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I agree that the defendant gets to decide who sentences them in Texas, but they only have two choices: judge or jury. Unless either of those two choices is demonstrably wrong I don't have a major problem with that.
We pay judges to judge. They see hundreds, maybe thousands, of cases over their careers, and develop a philosophy of what constitutes a proper sentence for a particular crime. They also compare notes with other judges, and work out common sentencing guidelines for all defendants in their circuit. But for a jury, the case is unique. They have no frame of reference. I suspect that the result could be especially harsh or lenient sentencing based more on the history and personality of the defendant, rather than the specific crimes for which he was convicted.

I think Guyger, as a young, petite white woman and ex-police officer who says she felt threatened by a large black man in the dark, will be a much more sympathetic figure to the jury than some others might be in similar circumstances.

Last edited by Bob001; 29th September 2019 at 09:08 PM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 11:52 PM   #275
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 102,485
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It totally makes sense but like all the options, it has a flaw. It doesn't explain her not noticing the 4th floor parking was open to air (in some way) and not noticing the door rug which would have occurred before she had time to imagine a burglar in her apartment.
We see what we expect to see. Look at the classic experiment with watching basket ball and a gorilla walks across the screen and most of us do not notice the gorilla until we are told it is there.

I do accept that she went to the wrong apartment without realising but her subsequent actions only make sense if we consider she went into "hero cop" mode, once she had decided to be a hero that is all she focused on. And that isn't a mistake, that was a deliberate choice.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 04:35 AM   #276
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I've only heard a few excerpts. She didn't sound evasive in any way. But then again I've only listened to a portion of her testimony.
If you have a chance to listen to the whole thing I'd be very interested in your opinion.
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 08:13 AM   #277
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,995
Could Amber Guyger be convicted of a charge other than murder?

Originally Posted by WFAA ABC 8 News
A lesser charge could be included in the jury instructions after all evidence and testimony has been presented.

Amber Guyger is on trial for a murder charge, but there’s a chance she could be convicted of a lesser criminal charge in the September 2018 shooting of Botham Jean. Guyger, 31, was off duty but still in uniform when she mistakenly went into Jean's apartment and shot him. She is claiming self-defense because she thought she was in her own apartment and believed Jean was going to attack her.

The former officer was initially taken into custody on a manslaughter charge but was later indicted on a murder charge. The murder indictment says Guyger intentionally shot Jean, causing his death.

A manslaughter charge would mean Guyger acted recklessly. A charge of criminally negligent homicide could also be considered.

After prosecutors rested their case Thursday, defense attorney Robert Rogers asked State District Judge Tammy Kemp to give a directed verdict of not guilty of murder.

Rogers said prosecutors had not proved the murder case, nor a manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide case. Kemp denied Rogers' motion, but the question shows the possibility that jurors could choose to convict Guyger of something other than murder.

During jury selection, prospective jurors were told about manslaughter. Prosecutor Jason Fine said that they have to offer a lesser charge if there is a "scintilla" of evidence to support that charge.

It won’t be clear whether prosecutors will ask to include a lesser charge in the jury instructions until all evidence and testimony has been presented. It will be up to the judge to decide whether the evidence supports including a lesser criminal charge for the jury to consider during deliberations.

There is a precedent in police shootings to include a lesser charge of manslaughter.

In the case of fired Balch Springs officer Roy Oliver, the jury was given the option to find him guilty of murder or of manslaughter in the death of Jordan Edwards. The charge given to the jury explained that if they believed Oliver was guilty of either of the charges but had reasonable doubt about which charge they should choose, “they should resolve that doubt in the defendant's favor and find the defendant guilty of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter,” court records show. The jury ultimately convicted Oliver of murder.

Murder carries a sentence of up to life in prison. Manslaughter, which is a second-degree felony, carries a sentencing range of two to 20 years. If Guyger is convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to less than 10 years in prison, she could receive probation.

Criminally negligent homicide is a state-jail felony, which carries a sentence of 180 days to two years in jail...
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/sp...7-31a63c332bdd
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 08:19 AM   #278
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,970
180 whole days for killing someone sitting in their house doing nothing.

/s/ Wow I don't know if I can live in a society with that much blood on it's hands. Really going for our pound of flesh out of this poor widdle scawwed woman who made a honest mistake that any of us could have made aren't we?
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 08:29 AM   #279
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,995
The very first thing that has happened today at trial is that the defense has rested. Judge is now giving jury instructions.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 08:32 AM   #280
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,970
Quote:
The murder indictment says Guyger intentionally shot Jean, causing his death.
Because that's what happened and neither side is disputing that fact.

Quote:
A manslaughter charge would mean Guyger acted recklessly.
Bull ****. Bull ******* ****. Looking down for a minute to check your phone and hitting a pedestrian in a crosswork is "acting recklessly." Driving over someone because you're horny and have been awake for 16 hours and you "honestly mistook mistake of fact in mens rea e pluriubus unum ipso facto with sprinkles" the local go-kart track for your drive way and drove through little Timmy's birthday party is not.

Quote:
There is a precedent in police shootings to include a lesser charge of manslaughter.
Further bull ****. The "precedent" on police shootings has long been "They can do it whenever they feel like it for whatever reason they make up" and that needs to change.

And again is this lady a cop or a scawwed little victim? She can't be both in the same instant to make counter excuses for the same action.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 30th September 2019 at 08:51 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

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 06:42 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.