Dallas Police officer fired for adverse conduct

  
Via:  cjfrommn  •  2 years ago  •  52 comments

Dallas Police officer fired for adverse conduct

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Dallas police officer Amber Guyger was fired Monday, officials said, weeks after a racially-charged shooting in which the off-duty white cop killed her black neighbor, Botham Jean.

An investigation determined Guyger “engaged in adverse conduct when she was arrested for manslaughter,” Dallas police Chief Renee Hall said in a statement, adding Guyger may appeal her termination.

Guyger was arrested on a manslaughter charge after she shot and killed Jean earlier this month. An arrest affidavit obtained by Fox News said Botham allegedly ignored Guyger’s “verbal commands” before she opened fire.

Guyger had recently ended a 15-hour shift when she returned in uniform to the South Side Flats apartment complex. She parked on the fourth floor, instead of the third, where she lived, according to an affidavit filed for the officer’s arrest warrant, possibly suggesting she was confused or disoriented at the time of the shooting.

She said she entered the apartment -- which she allegedly believed to be her own -- after realizing the door was unlocked and slightly ajar and then saw a figure in the darkness. Guyger allegedly gave verbal commands, because she believed her apartment was being burglarized, and then drew her weapon and fired twice, the affidavit said.



When she turned on the lights, she realized she was in the wrong unit, according to the document, which appeared to be based almost entirely upon the officer’s account.

Jean’s family disputes Guyger's version of events. Lawyers for Jean’s family also questioned why it took three days for Guyger to be charged and why Guyger was so quick to use deadly force in her encounter with Jean.

Lee Merritt, an attorney for Jean’s family, also slammed the investigation into the shooting, saying officials were seeking evidence to discredit Jean.

Police executed multiple search warrants at Botham Jean’s apartment in the aftermath of the killing, and investigators said they found several items, including a small amount of marijuana,  FOX4 News  reported.

Merritt said the search “highlights just sort of the nefarious nature of [the police] investigation.”

“They went in with the intent to look for some sort of criminal justification for the victim,” Merritt said, according to  USA Today . “It's a pattern that we've seen before...we have a cop who clearly did something wrong. And instead of investigating the homicide — instead of going into her apartment and seeing what they can find, instead of collecting evidence relevant for the homicide investigation — they went out specifically looking for ways to tarnish the image of this young man.”

Fox News’ Katherine Lam and the Associated Press contributed to this report.



Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
cjfrommn
1  seeder  cjfrommn    2 years ago

Well it will be interesting to see what an arbitrator decides. But it is probably the best move the chief could make. Hopefully this will change the on-duty work time policies.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
2  The People's Fish    2 years ago

Awful situation.  I have many questions about this but the Dallas Police department issued a search warrant looking for drugs on the victim right after the murder which is highly offensive. They attempted to use a little weed found in the department to defame the victim which i find abhorrent.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
2.1  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  The People's Fish @2    2 years ago

sadly you are right. And if she thought she was in her own apartment i bet she now wishes she would have walked over to a light switch to turn it on. WOW just wow!

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3  XDm9mm    2 years ago

While I gave her the benefit of the doubt initially, as I do all LEO involved shootings, I'm much more skeptical of any innocence now.   I say that as she apparently gave conflicting statements to the DPD and later to the Texas Rangers.  It might have been a minor semantic discrepancy, but since the DPD obviously believes otherwise, they likely have much more information than we do.

I still don't believe it was intentional as in premeditated, but I feel it is more than accidental.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
3.1  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  XDm9mm @3    2 years ago

yes it might have been accidental but she took on a unneeded risk by not confirming that deadly use of force was required. That all comes down to need to know. Did she have a need to know that her life was in danger or did she decide it was a good time to use her fire arm. I think she decided this was a good time to use it vs thinking was it necessary based on her being familiar with her surroundings. Along with determining the so called suspects threat level. I dont think she cared enough to want to know. 

 
 
 
Ender
3.1.1  Ender  replied to  cjfrommn @3.1    2 years ago

If she was off duty, she should have done what everyone else would have done.

If she thought it was her apartment, back out when she saw someone and call for backup.

Not run in guns blazing.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
3.1.2  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    2 years ago

well she didn't need to back out but with her gun out and right to defend herself. She should have went through a progression where the asked questions would have determined her need to discharge her weapon. 

At this point thats all shoulda woulda coulda.  This now is a matter of watching how the system acts when it is clear to a lot of people that this was once again a unnecessary action by a police officer that took the life of a citizen. So really this is about an examination of fairness and justice. 

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.3  epistte  replied to  cjfrommn @3.1.2    2 years ago
well she didn't need to back out but with her gun out and right to defend herself. She should have went through a progression where the asked questions would have determined her need to discharge her weapon. 

She was in his apartment without permission so how did she have the right to defend herself when she was trespassing? She is too stupid to be a cop! The people who defend her are even more ignorant than she is.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
3.1.4  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  epistte @3.1.3    2 years ago

well i am suggesting that if she felt she was in her own place. But i also am suggesting that all she had to do is ask simple questions and yet she chose not to. And so you are correct her stupidity will cost her some jail time for sure. 

And i agree, ignorance is something that people thrive on so they dont have to be honest about what they know is the truth. 

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.5  epistte  replied to  cjfrommn @3.1.4    2 years ago

His only mistake was not locking the door, but that doesn't excuse her actions. 

The fact that she believed it was her apartment doesn't change the fact that it was not so she cannot defend herself from a situation that she own negligence caused.  She was trespassing.

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.6  MUVA  replied to  epistte @3.1.5    2 years ago

You are right someone not smart enough to figure out they are in the wrong apartment and the y are a police officer shouldn't be on the police force. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.7  Bob Nelson  replied to  cjfrommn @3.1.4    2 years ago
... if she felt she was in her own place.

We worry about judicial errors leading to incarceration or execution... but when a cop kills, we find all kinds of justification.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.8  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @3.1.3    2 years ago
She was in his apartment without permission so how did she have the right to defend herself when she was trespassing? She is too stupid to be a cop! The people who defend her are even more ignorant than she is.

You should always enter a conversation by calling anyone who might have even a slightly different view from yours "ignorant".  

This is especially true when everything you know about the topic comes from TV and the internet.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
3.1.9  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.8    2 years ago

its my seed and i totatlly agree that if you think there is some kind of wiggle room to this factually reported story, then you would be a person who is being ignorant. ( most of the police report is based on her own words)

There is no wiggle room and there is no reasonable excuse. Thus i cant tell if you are just commenting in a way to share something or if you actually believe what you typed. 

if you cant call the victim a victim and the officer a murderer, then i again think the word fits. 

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.10  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.8    2 years ago
You should always enter a conversation by calling anyone who might have even a slightly different view from yours "ignorant".   This is especially true when everything you know about the topic comes from TV and the internet.

Thinking that it was her apartment is ignorant. She went to the wrong apartment and klilled the rightful resident in her stupidity and yet you seem to be defending her. Her actions are depraved indifference.  The Dallas police aren't defending her but you are and I have to wonder why that would be?

Would it be ok with you if she walked into your home and shot your family member because she read the address on the warrant wrong? 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.11  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @3.1.10    2 years ago
Thinking that it was her apartment is ignorant. She went to the wrong apartment and klilled the rightful resident in her stupidity and yet you seem to be defending her.

Cite me defending her.  

I don't defend.  I'm attacking your trademark abusive, bullying assertions.  

Her actions are depraved indifference.  The Dallas police aren't defending her but you are and I have to wonder why that would be?

Cite me.  C'mon.  

Would it be ok with you if she walked into your home and shot your family member because she read the address on the warrant wrong? 

You've gone from an abusive comment to an asinine one in record time.  Congratulations.

She made a terrible, horrific, disastrous mistake.  Nothing she will ever be able to do will make up for that family's loss.  Why you feel the need to make that some sort of junior high school cafeteria "agree with me or you're ignorant" nonsense is something I don't really even want to understand. 

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.12  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.8    2 years ago
You should always enter a conversation by calling anyone who might have even a slightly different view from yours "ignorant".   This is especially true when everything you know about the topic comes from TV and the internet.

Do you know her personally? Do you have family members on the local police force?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.13  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @3.1.12    2 years ago
Do you know her personally? Do you have family members on the local police force?

No.  I've got a few friends in the Dallas Fire Department, but that's it.

The closest connection I have is one of the kids I used to coach now attends his alma-mater...which isn't much of a connection at all, actually.

It's just a really, really sad situation.  This kid was doing things right and building his life here and she just made a terrible, terrible mistake.  We've lost two lives over it.  

 
 
 
Ender
4  Ender    2 years ago

Why do they need a search warrant for an active crime scene? Seems like they are trying to cover their bases, maybe for protection for themselves. I don't care if they found the victim with a heroin needle in his arm, there is zero justification for this. The fact that she is trying to get her job back and thinks it is all ok should ring major alarm bells.

Note to people, lock your door.

Here we had a woman cop that took her very young daughter with her in her police cruiser, to her lovers house. She left her daughter in the cruiser alone while she had her tryst. The poor child died in the car.

 
 
 
epistte
4.1  epistte  replied to  Ender @4    2 years ago
Why do they need a search warrant for an active crime scene? Seems like they are trying to cover their bases, maybe for protection for themselves. I don't care if they found the victim with a heroin needle in his arm, there is zero justification for this. The fact that she is trying to get her job back and thinks it is all ok should ring major alarm bells.

Note to people, lock your door.

The investigation possibly turned up something in the apartment that could be used to attack the victim'scredibilityy andf turn the publc support for her, even after she was in the wrongg apartment and then killed the homeowner. Apparently in the minds of many cops can't possibly commit crimes because of the fact that they wear a badge. I saw someone claim that he refused to obey her commands and that uis why she shot and killed him.

When will she be charged for his murder?  

Here we had a woman cop that took her very young daughter with her in her police cruiser, to her lovers house. She left her daughter in the cruiser alone while she had her tryst. The poor child died in the car.

Did they blame the daughter for unauthorized conduct in a cruiser?

 
 
 
cjfrommn
4.1.1  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  epistte @4.1    2 years ago

you are correct the police did try to change the narrative with attempting to blame the apartment owner. And she is charged with manslaughter. 

And i am not familiar enough with lovers/ daughter part of this situation but in the end. she set herself up to fail because she decided to not do the right thing by determining the threat level.  by asking the right questions and verifying the threat was real. 

As far as some folks, well those folks i wish could have some of the same experiences they disregard because there response to this would be clearly different. And yet those folks would be screaming from the roof tops if any thing close happened to them that happens to some of there fellow citizens everyday. 

its sad all the way around. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.1.2  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.1    2 years ago
When will she be charged for his murder?

When prosecutors think they can establish intent.

 
 
 
cjfrommn
4.1.3  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.2    2 years ago

she has been charged. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.1.4  Jack_TX  replied to  cjfrommn @4.1.3    2 years ago
she has been charged. 

She was charged with manslaughter several days ago.  Has it been upgraded to murder?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.4    2 years ago

No.

She MIGHT be after a Grand Jury, but as of now, the manslaughter charges stand.

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.6  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.2    2 years ago
When prosecutors think they can establish intent.

The lawyers do not have the establish positive intent to commit a crime. Her actions were criminally negligent when she didn't make sure that she was in her own apartment and not that of another person before she pulled the trigger.   She doesn't seem to understand that as a private person she cannot act in the same way that she does on-duty.  Shooting first and asking questions later is not tolerated when she is off-duty and the situation isn't duty related. 

Her actions took the life of an innocent person just as the same as a drunk driver kills someone, even when they didn't intend to do so. The fact that she was a cop doesn't allow her to act in that manner. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.1.7  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.1.6    2 years ago
The lawyers do not have the establish postive intent to commit a crime.

You said murder.  Murder requires intent.  Otherwise it's manslaughter.

Her actions were criminally negligent

I'd agree with that.  That doesn't make it murder.

She doesn't seem to understand

Have you spoken with her?  Why do you think you know what she understands?

Shooting first and asking questions later is not tolerated when she is off-duty and the situation isn't duty related. 

I'm pretty sure it's not actually tolerated on duty, either.  cj can speak to that better than I.

Her actions took the life of an innocent person just as the same as a drunk driver kills someone, even when they didn't intend to do so.

Right.  That's a manslaughter.

The fact that she was a cop doesn't allow her to act in that manner. 

I'm not aware of anyone, including her, suggesting it does.  What have I missed?

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.8  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.7    2 years ago
You said murder.  Murder requires intent.  Otherwise it's manslaughter.

Killing in the heat of passion/the moment is emotional does not require prior intent. Having prior intent to kill is 1st-degree murder.

She did shoot him twice in the chest so it wasn't a defensive shot and she fired twice. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.9  XDm9mm  replied to  epistte @4.1.8    2 years ago
She did shoot him twice in the chest so it wasn't a defensive shot and she fired twice. 

She apparently aimed and fired as TRAINED.

Anyone who has ever had any form of defensive training is instructed to 1 - aim for center mass (and the chest area is center mass), 2- fire often enough to STOP THE THREAT...  most instructors will tell the trainee to fire twice and if the target still appears to pose a threat, fire again.

(that old 2 in the chest 1 in the head bullshit is just that, a made up movie bullshit line.)

 
 
 
arkpdx
4.1.10  arkpdx  replied to  XDm9mm @4.1.9    2 years ago
that old 2 in the chest 1 in the head bullshit is just that, a made up movie bullshit line.)

That is what I was taught when I got training to be a reserve deputy. One or two in the center of mass and one to the head in case the bad guy is wearing a vest. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.1.11  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.1.8    2 years ago
Killing in the heat of passion/the moment is emotional does not require prior intent.

I didn't say "prior" intent.  It requires intent.

Having prior intent to kill is 1st-degree murder.

Sometimes.  Depends on the extent of the "prior".  

She did shoot him twice in the chest so it wasn't a defensive shot and she fired twice.

If she thought it was her apartment, and she mistook him for an intruder, then it's certainly plausible that it was a defensive action.  Had she intended to kill him she might not have stopped at two shots.

It's important to remember that prosecutors are going to want very much to avoid an acquittal.  A great way to lose a case is to overdo the charges.

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.12  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.11    2 years ago
If she thought it was her apartment, and she mistook him for an intruder, then it's certainly plausible that it was a defensive action.  Had she intended to kill him she might not have stopped at two shots. It's important to remember that prosecutors are going to want very much to avoid an acquittal.  A great way to lose a case is to overdo the charges.

It doesn't matter what she took him for when she was in the wrong apartment. She was the intruder, despite any emotional arguments to the contrary.

If he wasn't dead we would know what he said and did when she barged into his apartment, before she shot him in the chest for being in his own apartment.  Maybe she should claim self-defense for her actions as an armed intruder. The jury will be amused. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.1.13  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.1.12    2 years ago
It doesn't matter what she took him for when she was in the wrong apartment. She was the intruder, despite any emotional arguments to the contrary.

That does not establish intent.

If he wasn't dead we would know what he said and did when she barged into his apartment, before she shot him in the chest for being in his own apartment.  Maybe she should claim self-defense for her actions as an armed intruder. The jury will be amused. 

If he wasn't dead, we wouldn't be talking about manslaughter vs. murder.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Ender @4    2 years ago
The fact that she is trying to get her job back and thinks it is all ok should ring major alarm bells.

Is she?  I hadn't seen that.  On what grounds can she possibly think she should be rehired?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.2  Jack_TX  replied to  cjfrommn @4.2.1    2 years ago

Interesting.

It doesn't actually say she's trying to get her job back, just that she was fired before they finished the investigation.  Which is fair enough, I guess.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.3  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.2    2 years ago
Interesting. It doesn't actually say she's trying to get her job back, just that she was fired before they finished the investigation.  Which is fair enough, I guess.

Her lawyer is saying it was unfair.

https://www.localsyr.com/news/national/lawyer-firing-of-officer-who-killed-neighbor-is-premature/1472904128

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.4  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.2.3    2 years ago
Her lawyer is saying it was unfair.

Well that's his job, though.  Of course he's going to say that.   He's going to be dredging up sympathy for her wherever he can find it.

It doesn't say they've filed a motion or sought an injunction or anything.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.5  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.4    2 years ago
Well that's his job, though.  Of course he's going to say that.   He's going to be dredging up sympathy for her wherever he can find it. It doesn't say they've filed a motion or sought an injunction or anything.

The police union aren't backing her so it appears that she is SOL. Her lawyer should focus on his legal defense of her instead of trying to claim that she was fired unfairly.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.6  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.2.5    2 years ago
The police union aren't backing her so it appears that she is SOL. Her lawyer should focus on his legal defense of her instead of trying to claim that she was fired unfairly.  

I'm sure he's doing both.  

It certainly doesn't look good for her.  But hell, if OJ can get an acquittal, there is no telling.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.7  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.6    2 years ago
I'm sure he's doing both.   It certainly doesn't look good for her.  But hell, if OJ can get an acquittal, there is no telling.

He was black, an immigrant with a bit of weed in his apartment. She is white and a cop, so in the eyes of many people he deserved it. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.8  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.2.7    2 years ago
She is white and a cop, so in the eyes of many people he deserved it. 

I haven't heard anybody say that.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.9  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.8    2 years ago
I haven't heard anybody say that.

The trial hasn't started yet. We have yet to hear what her defense will be. 

 
 
 
Skrekk
4.2.10  Skrekk  replied to  epistte @4.2.9    2 years ago
We have yet to hear what her defense will be. 

"There was a black guy in my apartment!"

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.11  epistte  replied to  Skrekk @4.2.10    2 years ago

Or he was high on weed and refused her order to leave.................

 
 
 
Skrekk
4.2.12  Skrekk  replied to  epistte @4.2.11    2 years ago

The Castle Doctrine protects me even when I shoot someone in their apartment.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.13  epistte  replied to  Skrekk @4.2.12    2 years ago

It's emotionally impossible for her to divorce herself from the job so she was acting as a cop when she shot him. He was high and resisted arrest......

Maybe she will claim extreme emotional disturbance because she had a bad day. 

 
 
 
Skrekk
4.2.14  Skrekk  replied to  epistte @4.2.13    2 years ago

I usually keep the front door unlocked just in case a disoriented woman might wander in but it looks like I'll have to rethink that strategy.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.15  epistte  replied to  Skrekk @4.2.14    2 years ago
I usually keep the front door unlocked just in case a disoriented woman might wander in but it looks like I'll have to rethink that strategy.

They will blame him for not locking the door and therefore inviting her in. He was asking for it because he didn't lock the door.

I shouldn't have to mention the possible immigrant angle in conservative Texas.

 
 
 
Skrekk
4.2.16  Skrekk  replied to  epistte @4.2.15    2 years ago

The entire case seems bizarre.   Do we even know if the door was locked or how she got in?    Was she too inebriated to think an unlocked door was strange?

This is why I live in the countryside - I only need to worry about mice and coyotes wandering in.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.17  epistte  replied to  Skrekk @4.2.16    2 years ago

Something is fishy. The door was unlocked and the apartment was dark so how was she able to shoot him twice in the chest in a dark room while he was watching football on the TV. Why would you break into to an apartment and they casually watch football on the TV?  He's dead so we only get her side of the story.

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – Dallas police officer Amber Guyger, now charged with manslaughter in the death of a man in his own apartment, walked through an unlocked door she mistook for her own. According to the arrest affidavit CBS11 obtained Monday afternoon, Guyger said it was nearly completely dark inside the apartment when she entered it Thursday night and she thought she was encountering a burglar in her home.

But other witnesses are saying this.........

Attorney Lee Merritt, who is representing Jean’s family, said two witnesses had different accounts of what happened. “They heard knocking down the hallway, followed by a woman’s voice that they believe to be Officer Guyger saying, ‘Let me in, let me in.'”
 
 
 
cjfrommn
4.2.18  seeder  cjfrommn  replied to  epistte @4.2.17    2 years ago

well i would be interested if the did a breathalyzer on her. i haven't noticed in the reports on this story if they did. If she was intoxicated that might have been a courtesy on why they didn't take her to jail that night. 

humm

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Ender


73 visitors