Metroplex
Sponsored by

Amber Guyger Trial

120,151 Views | 1267 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Bocephus
3rd Generation Ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:40p, 10/1/19
AG
Every juror has a different threshold for reasonable doubt.

For some it is beyond any and all other possible options. If you don't have it on film and have proof the film is not doctored, then it did not happen.

Other people use a standard less strict. Reasonable doubt to them is not beyond any doubt.

To me the most telling thing is HOW quickly the verdict came back. That signals a jury without many major dissenters. 12 men and women of at least three different ethnic/racial backrounds quickly reached this verdict.

They were in the room and saw and heard everything, not just what was on a streaming video cameo.

They felt as a group of 12 that this was the proper verdict.

Reply Quote
3
Guitarsoup
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:41p, 10/1/19
AG
No. What you wanted to happen prevailed.
Reply Quote
6
HouseDivided06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 3:42p, 10/1/19
AG
OK. Got it. You can be that black and white thinking if you want. But that's absurd that you can say definitively that "the medical examiners statement flies in the face of her testimony" when it in no way means her testimony was false. Neither of us have any idea. I am willing to admit that. You are not. But I can say that given that I do not know, that means there is reasonable doubt, and therefore I would not have been able to convict based off the evidence presented.
Reply Quote
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:42p, 10/1/19
AG
These texts are bad! I read them last week, glad the judge let them in.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
powerbelly
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HouseDivided06 • 3:43p, 10/1/19
AG
HouseDivided06 said:
OK. Got it. You can be that black and white thinking if you want. But that's absurd that you can say definitively that "the medical examiners statement flies in the face of her testimony" when it in no way means her testimony was false. Neither of us have any idea. I am willing to admit that. You are not. But I can say that given that I do not know, that means there is reasonable doubt, and therefore I would not have been able to convict based off the evidence presented.
You wont get anywhere.

You are arguing with someone who wants her dragged into the streets and shot and has wanted this from the beginning.
Reply Quote
4
HouseDivided06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to powerbelly • 3:46p, 10/1/19
AG
I know and yet I cannot seem to bring myself to stop trying to just get him to admit that MAYBE he is wrong. That's all I want. To just get SOME movement that MAYBE her version is possible.
Reply Quote
1
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nai06 • 3:47p, 10/1/19
AG
nai06 said:
Ed Carter said:
nai06 said:


When a friend of ours was murdered a awhile back, I definitely felt like clapping when that POS was found guilty


So were those circumstances the same as the circumstances in this case?


Not in the least bit. She was sexually assaulted, beaten to death, and set on fire. All I'm saying is that I could see a close frit or family member clapping after the verdict because you feel some justice has been realized


This was not the case in Bryan was it?
Reply Quote
ElephantRider
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 3:48p, 10/1/19
AG
lda6339 said:
These texts are bad! I read them last week, glad the judge let them in.


Can't watch right now. Summary/examples?
Reply Quote
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ElephantRider • 3:49p, 10/1/19
AG
ElephantRider said:
lda6339 said:
These texts are bad! I read them last week, glad the judge let them in.


Can't watch right now. Summary/examples?
A flippant attitude towards racism, telling another cop to "just pepper spray them" while that cop was complaining about the MLK Parade.

The social media posts they are reading now are probably worse, however.
Reply Quote
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HouseDivided06 • 3:50p, 10/1/19
AG
HouseDivided06 said:
I know and yet I cannot seem to bring myself to stop trying to just get him to admit that MAYBE he is wrong. That's all I want. To just get SOME movement that MAYBE her version is possible.
If you had asked me 5 hours ago, I would have said you were most likely right. Once the sentence was handed down, I sided with the courts.

Edit to Add: I always wanted her to be guilty, but I always expected her to be found innocent.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Guitarsoup
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:51p, 10/1/19
AG
Tom Fox is one of the best news photographers in the world. He and Smiley Pool are two of the best in Texas and both work for the DMN.



Tom is also the guy that took the pics of the shooter at the federal courthouse earlier this year.
Reply Quote
2
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to culdeus • 3:52p, 10/1/19
AG
culdeus said:
powerbelly said:
culdeus said:
powerbelly said:
lda6339 said:
powerbelly said:
lda6339 said:
500,000ags said:
Don't be too hard on one another. It's the latest political flavor of the decade to say someone that disagrees with you is simply too stupid to understand the facts or too illogical to see beyond their own fallacy.
I'm just getting frustrated because somehow me saying, the jury got it right today means no jury has ever been wrong ever. Its a massive strawman coupled with insults.
People are remembering this post:

https://texags.com/forums/37/topics/3062473/replies/55034504


And realizing you can't possibly have a rational discussion at this point.
Is this the part where you finally argue your own position? Or do we just keep changing topics. I stand by that statement and the courts do too.
As someone who really didn't care one way or the other, I can't see how the jury would find guilty of murder if they were trying to stay within the boundaries of the law. I can see how they went guilty of murder if their decision was based on emotion and not what happened in court.

Also, she is not an assassin and will not be shot. So the court definitely doesn't stand by your statement.


She intended to kill a person that was not a threat to her. That's how the jury applied the law. That's murder.
I don't believe the state proved a case beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not perceive him as a threat.


State showed that if she did perceive him as a threat should have called for backup either as a cop or citizen. Neither was done. She advanced on this threat with intention to kill.

I suppose bowls do look menacing in the wrong hands. He maybe was lining up an oddjob throw.


State effectively got the jury to dislike her and vote against her. Congrats. Still not murder but whatevs.
Reply Quote
2
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J.P. 03 • 3:54p, 10/1/19
AG
J.P. 03 said:
If this is her...yikes:



People have completely lost their sense of humor
Reply Quote
4
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bocephus • 3:55p, 10/1/19
AG
Bocephus said:
J.P. 03 said:
If this is her...yikes:



People have completely lost their sense of humor
"Kill first die last" (the post previous) was pretty relevant though isn't it?
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
HouseDivided06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 3:55p, 10/1/19
AG
And if they had come back not guilty, would you have sided with the courts and decided that THIS jury after hearing all the testimony clearly could not have gotten it wrong to be logically consistent?
Reply Quote
6
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bocephus • 3:57p, 10/1/19
AG
Bocephus said:
J.P. 03 said:
If this is her...yikes:



People have completely lost their sense of humor

I'm guessing your possible state of mind matters when you end up f-ing up and killing an innocent man in his own apartment.
Reply Quote
1
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HouseDivided06 • 3:57p, 10/1/19
AG
HouseDivided06 said:
And if they had come back not guilty, would you have sided with the courts and decided that THIS jury after hearing all the testimony clearly could not have gotten it wrong to be logically consistent?
I would have said something to the extend of: the way the law is written it is broken and she benefited from it, I hope the law is rewritten so this doesn't happen again.
Reply Quote
ElephantRider
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 3:57p, 10/1/19
AG
lda6339 said:
ElephantRider said:
lda6339 said:
These texts are bad! I read them last week, glad the judge let them in.


Can't watch right now. Summary/examples?
A flippant attitude towards racism, telling another cop to "just pepper spray them" while that cop was complaining about the MLK Parade.

The social media posts they are reading now are probably worse, however.


The Pinterest stuff, or others?
Reply Quote
HouseDivided06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 3:59p, 10/1/19
AG
Fair enough. Just curious.
Reply Quote
1
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jefe95 • 3:59p, 10/1/19
AG
jefe95 said:
The state argued her marijuana usage was relevant because the defense brought up the victim's marijuana usage. Judge agreed to allow it.
Her social media postings are NOT good. Yikes..


When did the defense bring up the weed? Only mention I ever saw of it was Jean's sister claiming he used it to treat his ADD. I don't think the state even cross examined her.
Reply Quote
The Collective
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:00p, 10/1/19
AG
Yea, that was not good for Guyger at all. Damn.
Reply Quote
1
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to culdeus • 4:00p, 10/1/19
AG
culdeus said:
wbt5845 said:
culdeus said:
So no bond, and no parole. This is as high stakes as it gets. Minimum 5 years?
Minimum 5 years, but she can be paroled after 2.5 minimum.
Just said on news that there is no parole option for this type of murder?


What time of murder is that?
Reply Quote
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ElephantRider • 4:00p, 10/1/19
AG
ElephantRider said:
lda6339 said:
ElephantRider said:
lda6339 said:
These texts are bad! I read them last week, glad the judge let them in.


Can't watch right now. Summary/examples?
A flippant attitude towards racism, telling another cop to "just pepper spray them" while that cop was complaining about the MLK Parade.

The social media posts they are reading now are probably worse, however.


The Pinterest stuff, or others?
Bold was text messages. Everything else was pinterest.

No one has her other social media because she was able to delete it all during the three days it took her to get arrested by the corrupt police force trying to protect their own.

Italics to show when facts end and my opinion begins.
Reply Quote
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bocephus • 4:01p, 10/1/19
AG
Bocephus said:
jefe95 said:
The state argued her marijuana usage was relevant because the defense brought up the victim's marijuana usage. Judge agreed to allow it.
Her social media postings are NOT good. Yikes..


When did the defense bring up the weed? Only mention I ever saw of it was Jean's sister claiming he used it to treat his ADD. I don't think the state even cross examined her.
Because the defense brought up that Botham had weed in his apartment/system, as well as the weed smell because he had smoked the night he was killed.
Reply Quote
The Collective
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:03p, 10/1/19
AG
One of the quotes sounded like something from the Marine Corps.
Reply Quote
Guitarsoup
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 4:03p, 10/1/19
AG
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
And if they had come back not guilty, would you have sided with the courts and decided that THIS jury after hearing all the testimony clearly could not have gotten it wrong to be logically consistent?
I would have said something to the extend of: the way the law is written it is broken and she benefited from it, I hope the law is rewritten so this doesn't happen again.
Considering you previously called for her to be shot, I kind of doubt that.
Reply Quote
14
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Guitarsoup • 4:05p, 10/1/19
AG
Guitarsoup said:
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
And if they had come back not guilty, would you have sided with the courts and decided that THIS jury after hearing all the testimony clearly could not have gotten it wrong to be logically consistent?
I would have said something to the extend of: the way the law is written it is broken and she benefited from it, I hope the law is rewritten so this doesn't happen again.
Considering you previously called for her to be shot, I kind of doubt that.
That's like, your opinion man
Reply Quote
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 4:05p, 10/1/19
AG
lda6339 said:
Bocephus said:
jefe95 said:
The state argued her marijuana usage was relevant because the defense brought up the victim's marijuana usage. Judge agreed to allow it.
Her social media postings are NOT good. Yikes..


When did the defense bring up the weed? Only mention I ever saw of it was Jean's sister claiming he used it to treat his ADD. I don't think the state even cross examined her.
Because the defense brought up that Botham had weed in his apartment/system, as well as the weed smell because he had smoked the night he was killed.

Yeah they said it was yet another sign that should've helped Guyger realize she was in the wrong apartment.
Reply Quote
500,000ags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HouseDivided06 • 4:09p, 10/1/19
AG
My issue with your line of thinking is that it implies his reaction to someone entering his residence with a gun, could have given her the grounds to justifiably shoot him AND get off free-and-clear.

If he had shot her, I assume you would say he was within his right because, accident or not, she entered his residence while armed and a danger to him. But instead he doesn't do that and is the one shot and killed, but that possibly transfers the fault to him?
Reply Quote
FDXAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:10p, 10/1/19
AG
**I posted this in the other thread but thought I'd put it here too. This case hit home for me based off this experience**

Having walked into the wrong apartment on accident many years ago, I can totally believe her story in that respect.

It was late one night. I had NOT been drinking and was not under the influence of anything (except possibly lack of sleep) and I mistakenly walked into the apartment one floor below mine late one night. I thought I had climbed 3 flights of stairs, but I only climbed 2. I was living with my dad at the time after my parents divorce.

I remember finding the door already cracked open and thinking that was odd, but in the moment I thought my dad forgot to close/lock it. Then I opened the door and the lights were all off. I could faintly see the furniture and noticed the couch in the wrong place. Again, in the moment, I registered it as odd....But idiot me then thought maybe my dad rearranged the furniture while I was gone. I actually took more steps into the apartment (didn't flip on a light) and after about 5 steps, I saw a figure of a big, black guy sleeping on another couch in the corner. ONLY THEN did the light bulb finally go off in my head that I was in the wrong apartment. I have never been more scared in my life than I was in that moment when it clicked in my head. The guy didn't wake up and I slowly and quietly backed up until I was out the door, and I pulled the door slightly closed like I had found it. Crept upstairs and once in my still apartment, I was shaking.

I could easily have been shot dead from the guy inside. To this day, I'm terrified how many "clues" my brain ignored before I finally realized my mistake and how long I was in the apartment not recognizing my error. SO MANY CLUES!

I feel for her and him and his family. Simply horrible. But based off my experience, I could never have convicted her of murder because I genuinely believe she thought she was shooting an intruder in her apartment.
Reply Quote
9
Bocephus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PlaneCrashGuy • 4:12p, 10/1/19
AG
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
Totally get that and do not blame you at all. Bottom line is no one knows because she was the only one there who is alive to give her side, which is a tragedy. But if the burden of proof is on the prosecution to proof beyond reasonable doubt that her version is false and that her mistake of fact is false, I do not think they reached that. Understand the verdict, but ultimately I do not believe the burden of proof was met, which is legally what matters.
Please explain to me how her recalling of the events and the Medical Examiners testimony can be reconciled?
If he was bent over moving forward that could happen. Crouched over. We have no way of knowing WHAT he was doing. He could have been on the couch. He could have been standing up from the couch. He could have already been standing when she came in, was surprised and crouched or ducked or was leaning forward advancing. But saying definitively that he could NOT have been doing one of those things and he MUST have ONLY been sitting on the couch is speculation. Now I remember you saying that the medical examiner stated there was no way he was moving toward her, but I do not remember being that their testimony. I remember them saying he was bent over. That is far from definitive of his position or his movement.
None of what you said was him walking towards her like she said? The bullet trajectory and him walking towards her just cant sync up.


We don't know that bc the judge wouldn't allow the expert to come in and re-constrict the scene. Yet another validation reason for appeal
Reply Quote
2
HouseDivided06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 500,000ags • 4:14p, 10/1/19
AG
Yes, he would have absolutely been within his right. And that's why it's so tricky. The argument is BOTH people acted in a reasonable manner but hers was based off mistake of fact. That is the crux of the trial that I do not believe the prosecution proved was not reasonable beyond reasonable doubt. This is why I have maintained I get the verdict given the circumstances but as a whole I think it is just a horrible horrible tragedy for both sides, although moreso for Botham Jean and his family. But it doesn't mean that IF her version of events is correct, even in her mind when she was in the moment, I think her reaction was reasonable.
Reply Quote
2
Rudyjax
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FDXAg • 4:15p, 10/1/19
AG
That's fine.

Did you kill the person that lived there?

To me, as a cop she needs to be held to a higher responsibility than the average person. She shot a guy in his own house.

If she had not been armed and a cop, she would've screamed and ran away.
Reply Quote
2
powerbelly
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rudyjax • 4:17p, 10/1/19
AG
I Am Mine said:
That's fine.

Did you kill the person that lived there?

To me, as a cop she needs to be held to a higher responsibility than the average person. She shot a guy in his own house.

If she had not been armed and a cop, she would've screamed and ran away.
I agree if she was on duty she should be held to a higher standard. But if she isn't then she should be treated as an average citizen.
Reply Quote
2
PlaneCrashGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bocephus • 4:18p, 10/1/19
AG
Bocephus said:
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
lda6339 said:
HouseDivided06 said:
Totally get that and do not blame you at all. Bottom line is no one knows because she was the only one there who is alive to give her side, which is a tragedy. But if the burden of proof is on the prosecution to proof beyond reasonable doubt that her version is false and that her mistake of fact is false, I do not think they reached that. Understand the verdict, but ultimately I do not believe the burden of proof was met, which is legally what matters.
Please explain to me how her recalling of the events and the Medical Examiners testimony can be reconciled?
If he was bent over moving forward that could happen. Crouched over. We have no way of knowing WHAT he was doing. He could have been on the couch. He could have been standing up from the couch. He could have already been standing when she came in, was surprised and crouched or ducked or was leaning forward advancing. But saying definitively that he could NOT have been doing one of those things and he MUST have ONLY been sitting on the couch is speculation. Now I remember you saying that the medical examiner stated there was no way he was moving toward her, but I do not remember being that their testimony. I remember them saying he was bent over. That is far from definitive of his position or his movement.
None of what you said was him walking towards her like she said? The bullet trajectory and him walking towards her just cant sync up.


We don't know that bc the judge wouldn't allow the expert to come in and re-constrict the scene. Yet another validation reason for appeal


There expert you're referencing never saw the scene and his testimony was based on speculation.

There was an expert reconstruction specialist that testified in favor the prosecution that did see the scene and mapped it with special tech.

Good try
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.