ElephantRider said:

---

When did Michael Chiklis grow a ponytail and start working for DPD?

---

Holy ****

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus, is it safe to say that if she wasn't a white cop, you wouldn't care as much?

---

It's safe to say that if the DA went after bad guys, I wouldn't care AT ALL. It's also safe to say that I would have a lot more empathy for Jean's mother if she would stop claiming that Guyger shot Jean bc he was black. She's listening to the wrong people and they are making her look as bad as they are. Trying to give her a pass bc of her grief, but how can you not see that Merritt et al are using you?

---

I can agree with this. Wish the family/attorney was as upstanding as the unfortunate dead man appeared to be.

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus, is it safe to say that if she wasn't a white cop, you wouldn't care as much?

---

It's safe to say that if the DA went after bad guys, I wouldn't care AT ALL. It's also safe to say that I would have a lot more empathy for Jean's mother if she would stop claiming that Guyger shot Jean bc he was black. She's listening to the wrong people and they are making her look as bad as they are. Trying to give her a pass bc of her grief, but how can you not see that Merritt et al are using you?

---

I agree with all of that; I genuinely believe that his race had nothing to do with this and hate that it's being portrayed as such. But I feel like giving her a pass just because she's a white police officer and you want to counteract the race-baiting is just as bad.

Can you honestly say that you would feel the same way about this whole thing if it was a black man (not a cop, but let's say that he has an LTC) that walked into a white woman's apartment and the outcome were the same?

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

False imo. The contents of teh texts and her general mental/physical state go toward her ability to be cognizant of her surroundings which directly lead to her mistake of fact defense.

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

You're focusing on one section of my statement. I'm saying look at the totality of the events.

It has more to do with the red rug and would a reasonable person have made those mistakes. I'm not sure they would. Add that to all the other unreasonable things she did before during and after, and it's hard for me to say a reasonable person would have a mistake of fact with those circumstances . The other stuff, sexting and other statements of hers shows me she wasn't the most reasonable...so why give her a pass on the direct events that's led to his death?

Just because someone says "oops my mistake" does not make it a mistake of fact.

Ultimately, in my mind, her mistakes were careless and should not have been made by a reasonable person.

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus, is it safe to say that if she wasn't a white cop, you wouldn't care as much?

---

It's safe to say that if the DA went after bad guys, I wouldn't care AT ALL. It's also safe to say that I would have a lot more empathy for Jean's mother if she would stop claiming that Guyger shot Jean bc he was black. She's listening to the wrong people and they are making her look as bad as they are. Trying to give her a pass bc of her grief, but how can you not see that Merritt et al are using you?

---

I agree with all of that; I genuinely believe that his race had nothing to do with this and hate that it's being portrayed as such. But I feel like giving her a pass just because she's a white police officer and you want to counteract the race-baiting is just as bad.

Can you honestly say that you would feel the same way about this whole thing if it was a black man (not a cop, but let's say that he has an LTC) that walked into a white woman's apartment and the outcome were the same?

---

Again, I never said give her a pass. I would not give a damn about this entire case if the DA actually went after legitimate bad guys (career criminals and predators), she had not been charged with murder, and Jean's mom had not claimed it was bc he was black. I've said all along that I thought a manslaughter conviction and whatever the jury decided was a sentence for that would be appropriate.

You dodged my question.

It was a tragic series of events but dont kid yourself, it was not a tragic accident. She intentionally shoot him to kill him. Scared or not. His death was not an accident.

I'm no lawyer so I really don't know: mistake of fact applies even if it was a ridiculous mistake to make?

ElephantRider said:

---

I'm no lawyer so I really don't know: mistake of fact applies even if it was a ridiculous mistake to make?

---

I'm no criminal lawyer (so I also don't really know), but I believe the mistake has to be actual, but does not necessarily have to be reasonable.

ElephantRider said:

---

Ultimately, in my mind, her mistakes were careless and should not have been made by a reasonable person.

---

I would agree, and although I don't always expect people to be reasonable after a long shift at work, you should still be accountable for your actions which is why I felt manslaughter was appropriate.

ElephantRider said:

---

You dodged my question.

---

Which question?

A reasonable person would not have made mistake upon mistake that let to her shooting a man in his own apartment. I had a question a few posts up for the more law-savvy posters: is mistake of fact applicable if the mistake was not reasonable to make?

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

You dodged my question.

---

Which question?

---

Would your opinion of this whole thing be the same if it were a black man that wasn't a cop in a white woman's apartment and the outcome was the same? Same DA brought the same charges, same arguments, same jury outcome.

Dan 07 said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

I'm no lawyer so I really don't know: mistake of fact applies even if it was a ridiculous mistake to make?

---

I'm no criminal lawyer (so I also don't really know), but I believe the mistake has to be actual, but does not necessarily have to be reasonable.

---

Nevermind. Here's the applicable portion of the Tx Penal Code (bold is mine):

Sec. 8.02. MISTAKE OF FACT. (a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.

(b) Although an actor's mistake of fact may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of any lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact were as he believed.

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

You're focusing on one section of my statement. I'm saying look at the totality of the events.

It has more to do with the red rug and would a reasonable person have made those mistakes. I'm not sure they would. Add that to all the other unreasonable things she did before during and after, and it's hard for me to say a reasonable person would have a mistake of fact with those circumstances . The other stuff, sexting and other statements of hers shows me she wasn't the most reasonable...so why give her a pass on the direct events that's led to his death?

Just because someone says "oops my mistake" does not make it a mistake of fact.

---

If it was not a mistake, then she intentionally parked on the wrong floor and carried all her stuff to the wrong apartment in order to kill a complete stranger. Why did she do that?!!

---

Nobody is arguing iif she made mistakes that put herself in that position. The question is was the mistake reasonable. I say "No" and some say "Yes". You are leaving out was the mistake "honest and reasonable".

That's where the gray area is. It was obviously a mistake but one that I think only she makes because she was not being reasonable in her actions.

There you go; I don't think it was reasonable for her to believe she was in her apartment by the time she shot him.

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

A reasonable person would not have made mistake upon mistake that let to her shooting a man in his own apartment. I had a question a few posts up for the more law-savvy posters: is mistake of fact applicable if the mistake was not reasonable to make?

---

Wasn't there a post above about a guy coming home after work and walking into a second floor apartment that was not his father's bc his brain kept excusing the things that did not look right? It is a mistake that is more common than most like to admit. Luckily, most of the time the outcome is not tragic.

---

Yes. However everything was the same in that event.

There is a bright red rug in front of his door....only one on the floor.

Also, in every other mistaken apartment entrance, there was no injury let alone a death involved.

Everything was not the same in this event.

Apples and Oranges.

This is where I think she was unreasonable in her mistake. All the other stuff that was allowed (her texts, her actions during and after the event) show me she was unreasonable in many other situations.

What does everyone agree about? Here's my tally:

1. Guyger thought she was in her own apartment.
2. Guyger committed a homicide.
3. When the homicide was committed, Guyger was acting intentionally to kill Botham Jean.

The only question is whether the homicide was justifiable.

I think there's enough reasonable doubt on the reasonableness of her belief that she was in her own apartment. The question then becomes whether the homicide she intentionally committed while believed she was in her own home was justifiable. I believe the jury rejected the castle doctrine and concluded that she was not reasonable in using lethal force even if the prosecution had failed to disprove the mistake of fact defense.

I think that's where the defense's expert being disallowed is a viable appellate point. If the point of that expert's testimony was to establish positioning that would suggest Guyger was being confronted as opposed to encountering a "non-threat", then that's a pretty important piece of information the jury didn't get to consider.

Reasonable or unreasonable shouldn't even matter in this case, because an unreasonable mistake can still be a mistake of fact because it negates the intent of the crime of murder.

It was the prosecution's duty to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted with criminal intent, and I think we can all agree they did not. Yes she admitted to intentionally shooting him, but did she intentionally go to his apartment to shoot him?..No...there was no criminal intent.

Am I wrong?

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

You're focusing on one section of my statement. I'm saying look at the totality of the events.

It has more to do with the red rug and would a reasonable person have made those mistakes. I'm not sure they would. Add that to all the other unreasonable things she did before during and after, and it's hard for me to say a reasonable person would have a mistake of fact with those circumstances . The other stuff, sexting and other statements of hers shows me she wasn't the most reasonable...so why give her a pass on the direct events that's led to his death?

Just because someone says "oops my mistake" does not make it a mistake of fact.

---

If it was not a mistake, then she intentionally parked on the wrong floor and carried all her stuff to the wrong apartment in order to kill a complete stranger. Why did she do that?!!

---

Nobody is arguing iif she made mistakes that put herself in that position. The question is was the mistake reasonable. I say "No" and some say "Yes". You are leaving out was the mistake "honest and reasonable".

That's where the gray area is. It was obviously a mistake but one that I think only she makes because she was not being reasonable in her actions.

---

But here is the issue: the prosecution had to PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that her mistake was NOT reasonable. You yourself say it is a gray area. By definition, that is not beyond reasonable doubt, correct?

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

You dodged my question.

---

Which question?

---

Would your opinion of this whole thing be the same if it were a black man that wasn't a cop in a white woman's apartment and the outcome was the same? Same DA brought the same charges, same arguments, same jury outcome.

---

Black man vs woman makes it harder bc it's hard to argue a woman is as much of a physical threat to a man to cause the fear of death or serious bodily injury. Better question is black female cop vs white man. Or black female cop vs black man. With a black female cop we would not have anywhere near the media circus. If it was just a black female vs white man or black man, this is NEVER a murder charge.

I don't care about the skin color involved here. My issue is the district attorney's office not prosecuting criminals with the same vigor as this particular officer.

HouseDivided06 said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

You're focusing on one section of my statement. I'm saying look at the totality of the events.

It has more to do with the red rug and would a reasonable person have made those mistakes. I'm not sure they would. Add that to all the other unreasonable things she did before during and after, and it's hard for me to say a reasonable person would have a mistake of fact with those circumstances . The other stuff, sexting and other statements of hers shows me she wasn't the most reasonable...so why give her a pass on the direct events that's led to his death?

Just because someone says "oops my mistake" does not make it a mistake of fact.

---

If it was not a mistake, then she intentionally parked on the wrong floor and carried all her stuff to the wrong apartment in order to kill a complete stranger. Why did she do that?!!

---

Nobody is arguing iif she made mistakes that put herself in that position. The question is was the mistake reasonable. I say "No" and some say "Yes". You are leaving out was the mistake "honest and reasonable".

That's where the gray area is. It was obviously a mistake but one that I think only she makes because she was not being reasonable in her actions.

---

But here is the issue: the prosecution had to PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that her mistake was NOT reasonable. You yourself say it is a gray area. By definition, that is not beyond reasonable doubt, correct?

---

I'm saying it's a gray area in general.

I have already stated why I do not believe the t was a reasonable mistake beyond a reasonable doubt.

I have no reason to doubt that a person acting reasonably would notice a red rug at the front of an entrance of your apartment. I noticed it without knowing it was there in the video of the police entering the hallway. First thing I noticed.

Given all the other items introduced, I believe it's reasonable to believe she was consistent in acting unreasonable during the events that led up to, during and after his death.

I have no doubt that if she would have acted reasonable, Botham would be alive right now.

Enviroag02 said:

---

Reasonable or unreasonable shouldn't even matter in this case, because an unreasonable mistake can still be a mistake of fact because it negates the intent of the crime of murder.

It was the prosecution's duty to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted with criminal intent, and I think we can all agree they did not.

Am I wrong?

---

I think you are conflating having a plan to commit a homicide with the intent the law requires when the homicide is done.

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

ElephantRider said:

---

You dodged my question.

---

Which question?

---

Would your opinion of this whole thing be the same if it were a black man that wasn't a cop in a white woman's apartment and the outcome was the same? Same DA brought the same charges, same arguments, same jury outcome.

---

Black man vs woman makes it harder bc it's hard to argue a woman is as much of a physical threat to a man to cause the fear of death or serious bodily injury. Better question is black female cop vs white man. Or black female cop vs black man. With a black female cop we would not have anywhere near the media circus. If it was just a black female vs white man or black man, this is NEVER a murder charge.

I don't care about the skin color involved here. My issue is the district attorney's office not prosecuting criminals with the same vigor as this particular officer.

---

The last two sentences of the first paragraph make it sound like you do care about the skin color involved.

Let's say Dallas County has a good DA that you don't have an issue with, and the same charges are brought. Would you feel differently?

I guess what I'm getting at is that your biases that are fueling your strong opinions here.

hypeiv said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Here's the thing. If she's not a badass cop with a gum and she thinks that someone broke into her apartment she calls 911.

And a police officer should be able to determine what is and is not a threat to their lives.

A stoned accountant eating ice cream is not a threat to her.

She was ill trained, panicked, and killed a man.

As a police officer, she had a higher accountability to not make this mistake, panic, and kill someone.

Honestly, the failure is with the DPD for giving her a badge and gun.

---

If anything the fact she was a cop helped her case... i.e. some argue the victim should have shown his hands and not moved when he saw a uniformed officer.

As pointed out above, if she was just a LTC holder and made the same mistake it would have clearly been murder. Or worse... if the male was a LTC holder and he went into an off duty police officer's apartment by mistake and killed her, they would have been seeking the death penalty.

---

I'm no Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer, but I dont think the death penalty would be on the table in that scenario. It only applies if you kill a cop while they are in the course of performing their duties right?

Bocephus said:

---

tysker said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

False imo. The contents of teh texts and her general mental/physical state go toward her ability to be cognizant of her surroundings which directly lead to her mistake of fact defense.

---

So you think she intentionally went to the wrong floor and wrong apartment? If she did not intentionally go to the wrong floor and wrong apartment, then it was a mistake and mistake of fact applies. You could say that she made a mistake bc she was texting and never reveal the content of those texts. You could say she was distracted bc she was busy texting and it would be just as effective. They reveal the content to bias the jury against her and it worked. This is also a viable reason to appeal

---

You have it backwards, imo. Her sex life and the context of the texts has at least something to do with the events that led to the shooting and are relevant, again imo, if she's claiming innocence due to mistake of fact. Her mental/physical/emotional state are the basis for her mistake. I guess the jury didnt find it to be convincing enough.

HouseDivided06 said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

uneedastraw said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

I Am Mine said:

---

Totally disagree. If anything, her training should've prevented this from happening.

She panicked.

---

So she never has the right to be a human and make a mistake?

---

Removing the law, how many mistakes are you allowed when it results in the death of an innocent person?

She went to the wrong floor
She went to the wrong door
She didn't notice a bright red rug...only one on that floor
She was sexting a married man on that day and the day after
She entered an apartment knowing there was an intruder
She shot the man in the chest when she had an opportunity to retreat
She did not administer CPR
While he was dying, she was worried about her job status.

Let's face it, it was a horrible mistake but there were a lot of mistakes that happened in the totality of events. This wasn't just an oops one time. A lot happened that led up to her panic moment and a lot happened after that doesn't paint her in the greatest of light. Yet people want to give her a complete pass because they put themselves in only one or two of those scenarios and understand it could have happened to them. But there are numerous situations to where you start to question whether it was reasonable to assume the average person would respond the same way.

---

What does texting a married man have to do with anything? Is that a crime?

There is no duty to retreat in Texas.

Doing CPR would have been pointless but I agree that is a bad look if she did not do any. I try not to judge people for what they do after traumatic events like shooting another person.

NO ONE has said she deserves a free pass even though in this case that is what the law says with the way it is written with re: to mistake of fact. Everyone thinks she deserves to be punished.

The issue that a lot of people are having is that the evidence presented by the state does not prove that this was not a mistake.

The issue I am having is that they will convict an officer for murder for this mistake, yet you kill a child and you get pled out to a lesser charge than murder.

---

If my son is dead, and I knew a woman went to the wrong floor, went to the wrong door that had a bright red rug in front of it and I knew the person who made the mistake of recognizing that was distracted due to potential unethical behavior, in going to have a problem with that.

Look, obviously people went to the wrong apartment. But did they do so based on a simple mistake or did they do so when there were several indicators leading up to the event that a reasonable person wouldn't do it.

The red rug is the key.

The fact that she was "tired" but sexting a married man shows you she wasn't reasonable in her actions that day (in my opinion).

It's my opinion that If you kill an innocent man and you want to use some vague subsection of law that is never used, then you better be squeaky clean. She wasn't.

---

So you have never texted anyone when you were tired? I don't think her sex life has anything to do with the crime. The fact that she didn't turn around is why she deserves to be punished. The content of the texts have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. That those were entered as evidence were just an attempt to bias the jury and public sentiment against her and it worked

---

You're focusing on one section of my statement. I'm saying look at the totality of the events.

It has more to do with the red rug and would a reasonable person have made those mistakes. I'm not sure they would. Add that to all the other unreasonable things she did before during and after, and it's hard for me to say a reasonable person would have a mistake of fact with those circumstances . The other stuff, sexting and other statements of hers shows me she wasn't the most reasonable...so why give her a pass on the direct events that's led to his death?

Just because someone says "oops my mistake" does not make it a mistake of fact.

---

If it was not a mistake, then she intentionally parked on the wrong floor and carried all her stuff to the wrong apartment in order to kill a complete stranger. Why did she do that?!!

---

Nobody is arguing iif she made mistakes that put herself in that position. The question is was the mistake reasonable. I say "No" and some say "Yes". You are leaving out was the mistake "honest and reasonable".

That's where the gray area is. It was obviously a mistake but one that I think only she makes because she was not being reasonable in her actions.

---

But here is the issue: the prosecution had to PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that her mistake was NOT reasonable. You yourself say it is a gray area. By definition, that is not beyond reasonable doubt, correct?

---

I don't think that's correct (but welcome any correction from a criminal lawyer, which I am not). I believe the defense had the initial burden of proving (by a preponderance of the evidence a/k/a more likely than not) that a mistake of fact occurred, and that the mistake was reasonable.

Upon the defense meeting this initial burden, the burden of proof then shifted to the state to disprove the mistake of fact beyond a reasonable doubt.