snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Police Blotter

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old 25 September 2018, 07:59 PM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,444
Default

I believe the investigation of the shooting was done by the Texas Rangers, a section of the Department of Public Safety i.e. the highway patrol, and not by the Dallas Police Department.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 25 September 2018, 08:08 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,374
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alarm View Post
Did they have her take a breathalyzer, or a drug test? Have they released her work schedule so the question of how many hours she'd been working that day could be settled?
IMO, how many hours she'd been working that week, and whether she'd been on the same shift for at least several weeks or had recently been moved to a different shift, are also relevant.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 25 September 2018, 08:24 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,088
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL View Post
you're concerned maybe a white woman can't get a fair trial for murdering a black man in this country?
I was speaking hypothetically as if I were Guyger's defense attorney. IE, "[If I were her attorney,]I would be worried that that could backfire..."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alarm View Post
Did they have her take a breathalyzer, or a drug test? Have they released her work schedule so the question of how many hours she'd been working that day could be settled?
Toxicology screenings have been done. They have not released them, nor have they (AFAIK) released her work schedule. Nor should they as release of that information could contaminate the jury pool for the trial.

erwins, for the prosecution to make their case, they only need to prove that Guyger was in the apartment illegally? If they can do that, then the jury (absent jury nullification or such) can't find for justified homicide, correct?
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 25 September 2018, 09:12 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,159
Default

I'm not familiar enough with Texas law to say. It's my understanding that she can't claim defense of property or the castle doctrine if she was illegally in his home. It might matter for some of these issues if she was inside the apartment or just outside the door. I'm not sure if she could claim straight up self defense. I'm assuming not, because she would be the instigator, but like I said -- not familiar enough with Texas law.

And if imperfect self defense can apply, then it would not be a justified homicide, but would be partially excused, so she would be convicted of a lesser offense.

I think this will be a volatile case in terms of the jury's emotions. If the prosecution is seen as over charging, and the jury sympathises with the poor worn out cop, she might be acquitted (via jury nullification). If the jury sympathises with the poor guy who got shot in his own home by the cop too whacked out to find her own apartment, (or other possible narrative themes) then she could be convicted. There are a lot of variables in play. In general, I think juries follow their instructions. But, in some circumstances, they will tend to find the facts to support what they want to do, or just flat out go against instructions. (I think the former happens much more often than the latter.).
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 25 September 2018, 10:48 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,374
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
nor have they (AFAIK) released her work schedule. Nor should they as release of that information could contaminate the jury pool for the trial.
That makes sense.

However, I was thinking more in terms of the police department's responsibility to both its members and the general public: in that, if they really are putting armed police out on the street, either while still on shift or immediately after, in a state of such exhaustion that it risks their shooting people because they don't know where they are or what's going on: then they ought to cut that out.

I'm not entirely sure that it reduces the specific officer's responsibility, even though it increases the department's responsibility, if that turns out to be a significant part of the cause of this mess (please note the if, in both this paragraph and the preceding one.) If one kills somebody because one's driving drunk, the drunkeness isn't considered an excuse. If one kills somebody because one's driving exhausted, it apparently varies state by state, but in some states is also legally penalized -- just as people should know if they're too drunk to drive and not do it, people should know if they're too tired to drive and not do that. Shouldn't shooting while exhausted be treated the same way?

Texas law may have a different opinion, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 26 September 2018, 11:45 AM
Alarm's Avatar
Alarm Alarm is offline
 
Join Date: 26 May 2011
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 5,692
Soapbox

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
Toxicology screenings have been done. They have not released them, nor have they (AFAIK) released her work schedule. Nor should they as release of that information could contaminate the jury pool for the trial.
I understand that. My point was more about them releasing information about the victim, that they can use to paint him in a bad light, and then claiming they can't release info about her, because it would compromise the investigation.

If potential jurors find out that the victim had drugs, they might conclude the killing was justified. How is that not as contaminating as releasing info about the officer?
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 26 September 2018, 02:32 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,088
Default

I agree with you, I think the arrest warrant, which was filed by a detective from the Dallas police force, was the first step in protecting their officer by smearing the victim of the shooting. I was answering your (possibly retorical) question and stating why the results of the test weren't released. I don't think the search warrant findings should have been released either, but that's a case of two wrongs not making a right.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 26 September 2018, 02:51 PM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
, if they really are putting armed police out on the street, either while still on shift or immediately after,
Most of the message was cut out because that is not what I am responding to. Rather, the impression that seems to be that police are armed only when on duty. thorny locust, I'm not sure if that is what you think or not so this is not a response to you directly.

However, I think but don't know for a fact, most police officers are allowed to and some are required to have a firearm with at all times except when otherwise prohibited from having a firearm i.e. on an a commercial airplane.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 26 September 2018, 03:28 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,374
Default

I did think that that was a possibility, RichardM; but I also think that there should be standard precautions meant to be taken when a given officer is too tired to think clearly, or is going to be drinking, etc. It's unreasonable to expect police officers, or anyone else, to be always fit to do their jobs even during every minute of their off duty hours; but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the police force, in general, to come up with some way of dealing with this.

A truck driver who drives the truck home after work is responsible for being sober and awake on the drive home, as well as when they're on the job; and, if they get drunk after work hours, they're not supposed to then get back in the truck and drive it around.

And again, if the police force is insisting that officers routinely work 15 hour shifts, they're IMO endangering both the officers and the public not only after the end of such shifts, but also during the latter part of the shifts. I can see it happening in an emergency -- sometimes there aren't any better choices. But it shouldn't be a standard or frequent practice.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 26 September 2018, 09:50 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
I agree with you, I think the arrest warrant, which was filed by a detective from the Dallas police force, was the first step in protecting their officer by smearing the victim of the shooting. I was answering your (possibly retorical) question and stating why the results of the test weren't released. I don't think the search warrant findings should have been released either, but that's a case of two wrongs not making a right.
I'm not sure the search warrant findings could have been withheld. The warrant and the return are filed as court documents. They are not exactly public records, but often have to be released to the press when requested, AIUI.

I wonder if there is an issue with the shooter's blood draw. I believe blood was drawn while Dallas PD was investigating as if it were an officer involved shooting. At some point they realized that was wrong and called in the Rangers to take over. But, I wonder if a blood draw is required for an OIS, and she was told that, vs. being asked to voluntarily provide one and if not, trying to get a warrant. I wonder if the blood was even analyzed.

Also, there is an article out now that is based on the warrant return -- that's a report that gets filed in court to say what was found and seized when the warrant was executed. It mentions the marijuana, and says that a source said it was found on the kitchen table. I still have issues with how the warrant application asked to search for drugs, but it sounds like the fairly small amount of pot might have been in plain view when officers were in the apartment just after the shooting. If that's the case, then I still think the application was not well filled out, but it would make sense to have seized the pot as contraband, and may have made sense to search for more, depending on the circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 26 September 2018, 10:06 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,598
Devil

Consider also, that if they wanted to assume the worst motives for the former officer (or at least not buy her story wholesale) it would be wholly appropriate to investigate other motives than what she put forth. Why else would she be in the apartment if not on accident? Well...

Maybe she was a crooked cop and liked to rob/blackmail drug users? It’s happened before. Are (g)you saying that the officer couldn’t possibly have been out to blackmail her victim by running an unauthorized "raid" on his residence, maybe even looking for drugs to get high herself? If so, I appreciate your newfound faith in the police.

Last edited by ASL; 26 September 2018 at 10:13 PM. Reason: Sp
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 26 September 2018, 10:15 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,088
Default

Or maybe Guyger was a Jedi Master and a large planet had just been destroyed. The resulting mind blast from millions of voices crying out in terror and then being suddenly silenced caused her to be severely disoriented.

And why not, there's as much known evidence for my theory as there is for yours.

ETA: You're right erwins. This article says that the information was from records obtained from the court.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 26 September 2018, 10:20 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,598
Flame

Eh, no. One is something that has actually happened before and would provide an alternative explanation to why she ended up in the victims apartment and why she shot him. It is not put forward as a likely scenario, much less the most likely scenario, but rather as an example of why it would make perfect sense to search the (desceased) victims apartment to look for holes in the accused's story. It is an example of what sort of evidence might be looked for and why, not an assertion that the evidence has been found (hence the search warrant). It would also mean that manslaughter is grossly undercharging.

The other is, frankly, beneath you.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 26 September 2018, 10:27 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,159
Default

ETA: Just to be clear, because I've seen criticism about them searching Jean's apartment at all: It was absolutely necessary to search his apartment, and appropriate to get a warrant to do so. It was the scene of the shooting. They needed to collect evidence. Once the scene was secure and no more emergency need to be there, it was appropriate to get a warrant to go in and take photos, document the scene, collect the shooter's stuff that was inside the apartment, the spent cartridge casings, take measurements of trajectories, etc. It would be grossly inappropriate to fail to do those things. It also makes sense to me that they wanted to know if the two were acquainted. It's one of the first things I mentioned as potentially destroying her story.


They were likely looking for evidence that the two of them knew each other. They seized photos and video, I think, from his apartment, which I assume was to see if there was evidence that they knew each other.

Her story would be a terrible cover story in some ways if she's lying, but that doesn't mean she isn't. I've seen worse. (Like the, "these aren't my underwear" defense to drugs, or a syringe, being found in the underwear that the person was wearing.) I don't think police should assume anything about either the shooter or the victim. They should investigate just as they would if this were a crime between any two people.

Last edited by erwins; 26 September 2018 at 10:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 26 September 2018, 10:29 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,088
Default

If there were searching for evidence that Guyger had motives besides the stated one, why stop at just narcotics? Why not evidence of illegal guns? Love letters or other correspondence between Guyger and Jean? Large amounts of cash from illegal drug sales? And why didn't they search Guyger's apartment too? If they suspected and had PC that this was something other than a mistake, why not search her apartment too?

ETA: erwins, where did you see that they seized photos and videos of a personal nature from his apartment? The search warrant only says surveillance video. It does talk about items that might have been used in a crime, would that cover personal correspondence?
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 26 September 2018, 11:16 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,598
Default

Hereís what Iíve found about Guyger's apartment re: a search warrant:
Quote:
No search warrants have been released for Guyger's home or car. It's possible she consented to the search, and in that case a warrant would not be required.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crim...d-amber-guyger

Lot's of articles claiming no warrant = never searched, but no mention of the above possibility.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 26 September 2018, 11:23 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,374
Default

Do we know that they didn't search Guyger's apartment?

And I agree that I'd expect them to search the crime scene. Whether they had legal reason to seize correspondence I don't know; but they certainly had reason to search the apartment with sufficient thoroughness to find cartridges, etc.; and may in the process of doing that have found reason to seize correspondence.

If it's unclear why someone was killed, it may be standard process to search for correspondence, electronic or otherwise, which may throw further light on the matter. I would hope that anything found which doesn't actually throw such light wouldn't be made public. I wouldn't count on that hope; but I would hope for it, and I expect that it does often work that way.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 27 September 2018, 12:31 AM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,159
Default

I may be misremembering. I'll have to look again to see where I got that idea (about photos, etc.).

They would need PC to search for guns. I haven't seen any reason for them to think there might be guns in the victim's apartment. As they searched, they could seize evidence that was in plain view if seen in the course of the authorized search if there's PC that it was evidence of a crime. It's really important to keep in mind as well that "evidence of a crime" doesn't just refer to evidence of a crime by the person the property belongs to. You can get a warrant to search the home of an entirely innocent person, acknowledged to be so, if there is PC to believe that evidence of a crime will be found there.

I strongly suspect that the shooter's apartment has been searched with her consent. If not, this would be a tremendous oversight. There is no reason the results of that search would be made public other than through leaks. Her story involved mistaking his apartment for hers. I think police would have sought to document the appearance of her apartment. They should have sought some of the same things as in the warrant, but may not have had PC for them. Remember they'd been in the victim's apartment.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 27 September 2018, 03:40 AM
Dark Blue's Avatar
Dark Blue Dark Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 June 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,335
Police

If the marijuana was on the kitchen table then I would think it was very likely in plain view of the officers that responded to the initial call. That would very easily explain why it would be on the search warrant affidavit. They would be remiss if they didn't seize illegal contraband they know is in the apartment. While it probably has no bearing on this case, they still can't just leave it there, and it's going to be on the warrant.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 01 October 2018, 01:10 PM
gopher's Avatar
gopher gopher is offline
 
Join Date: 06 January 2005
Location: Sunderland, Northumbria, UK
Posts: 2,154
Default

Anyone other than a cop doing this would be up for murder and looking at a death sentence.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Judge fatally shoots himself after a lengthy standoff with police. Hostages are safe E. Q. Taft Police Blotter 1 24 August 2018 09:33 PM
White St. Louis police officer shoots off-duty black officer Psihala Police Blotter 31 29 June 2017 03:17 AM
Man fatally shot trying to break in apartment A Turtle Named Mack Police Blotter 1 04 January 2015 04:37 AM
Resident Shoots Masturbating Burglar Breaking Into Pennsylvania Apartment A Turtle Named Mack Police Blotter 15 31 December 2014 07:55 PM
Father charged after 2-year-old fatally shoots herself snopes Police Blotter 0 23 October 2013 07:27 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.