Texas cop goes home to wrong address, shoots occupant

First topic message reminder :

Newshub wrote:Texas cop enters wrong house, shoots man dead
08/09/2018

A Texas police officer returning home from work walked into the wrong apartment and shot the occupant dead, believing it was her own place.

The officer called dispatch to report that she had shot the man Thursday night, Dallas police said.

She told responding officers she believed the victim's apartment was her own when she entered it.

The responding officers administered first aid to the victim, whom the Dallas County medical examiner's office identified as 26-year-old Botham Jean, a native of the Caribbean island country of St Lucia who attended college in Arkansas and worked for accounting and consulting firm PwC.

Mr Jean, who was black, was taken to a hospital and pronounced dead.

Police haven't released the name or race of the officer, who arrived home in-uniform and wasn't injured. She will be placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation, police said.

Authorities haven't said how the officer got into Mr Jean's home, or whether his door was open or unlocked. The apartment complex is just a few blocks from Dallas' police headquarters.

At a Friday morning news conference, Sgt Warren Mitchell acknowledged there are many questions about what happened that he couldn't answer.

"We still have a lot to do in this investigation. So there's a lot of information I understand you guys want but this is all we can give you at this time," Mitchell said.

When asked if anyone else had witnessed the shooting, Warren replied, "We have not spoken to anyone else at this time."

APTN / Newshub.

So now they are breaking into private homes and killing innocent residents?

And why won't the Dallas Police release the name of the cop? (Authorities identify the cop as female, tho they won't identify by name)  They release names in every other criminal report.  What are the they trying to cover up?

Why did they wait for the responding police to administer first aid?  If the killer was a proper policeman, as alleged, why did the cop let the guy die?  Why no immediate first aid?  Did she know the guy?  Did she want him dead?  Smells like rotten fish in Texas.

Southerners!!

So I guess Quill does not want to take on my points, which is a shame

I shall leave the forum open to others, if they wish to take up the many points I raised, that Quill was unable to answer.

Didge wrote:So I guess Quill does not want to take on my points, which is a shame

I shall leave the forum open to others, if they wish to take up the many points I raised, that Quill was unable to answer.

I have answered all your points. You have nothing left to say.

I win. Let's go home.

Open for others to answer

So i am going to put a test to everyone here.

Only one case has aroused such anger when someone white was shot

And she happened to be a woman an Asutralian in the US.

Why?

There has been 278 people classed as white and 98 classed as hispanic shot by the Police in 2018

Why is it that not one has, bar the Australian woman, caused as much outrage and media attention, unless the individual shot is black?

I mean surely the view point on either Police incompetance or Police brutality or racism. Why is never the same rule applied to white and latino people shot by the Police and only black people?

So when people say thought process. There is in fact no process at all. What we have is a situation as to what can incense people and how the media can manipulate a certain situation. To the point that it becomes near impossible to have a fair trial. As when the person shot is black, the media hold a line, that they would never hold towards white or latino people shot by the Police.

In other words, shootings are held to account and judges not by due process, but by the media.

That is seriously wrong.

Whilst I do not discount the raicst problems in the us or even shootings by the Police that clearly were racial. But the moment people declare the Police continually as racist in any shooting of a black person as racist. Then there is no thought process. There is only emotional thought process and denies any rational thinking.

There is no doubt in my mind some black people have been executed by the Police. Yet in no situation does this even enter the mind when the person shot is white or Latino. Which shows how badly racism has effected people.

Every case should be looked at indidually and not collectivelly based on the colour of the skin of those shot.

What causes this problem and pontentially a higher risk of people possible being shot. Is again the high numbers of crimes in the US, that leads to fear in cops facing a criminal situation. Plus th fact many are clearly poorly trained and tha some should never be given licence to carry firearms.

Its the entire US system and its warped gun ho attitude on guns, with also a massive problem with relative poverty that is leading to people ending up killed in confrontations with the Police.Espcially when US cops are also killed in the line of duty.

People never question how in reality there is millions of police arrests and confrontations with US cops each year. To me, its incredible that there is not more people shot in fear, panic etc in such confrontaional situations. Because the reality is, you can never factor the fear factor and adrenaline, that an officer may feel facing a given situation.

That means the US cops need to stop training cops on diet of cop killing videoes, that lead them into a view to fear many situations

Once again, this story is in the news.  The Dallas PD is trying to smear the victim, claiming they found a 1/2 oz of marijuana in the victim's home.

These days marijuana is legal in many states, and 1/2 oz is laughable.  But the more pertinent question is, what were the Dallas PD doing executing a search warrant on the victim's home?  How many victims do you know that are treated like the subject of a crime?

Continuing questions reveal that Officer Guyger is still on paid vacation, even though being indicted on Manslaughter.  Damn...good job, eh?  But they say she would have got a $1-million payout for 3 or more victims.  Keep at it, Amber.

It has been learned that she occupied the apartment immediately below Mr. Jean. The neighbors have been re-interviewed and the persist in claiming that someone was pounding and shouting on Mr. Jean's door just before the murder. Guyger says that she has never seen or met Mr. Jean, but authorities have fund the computer records of the pass keys, which might reveal that Ofc. Guyger entered here own apartment before going upstairs to Mr. Jeans.

Ofc. Guyger has been caught in many lies. First, she claimed she entered Mr. Jean's apartment, claiming the door was ajar. Then It was pointed out that the door is a fire door, and would immediately close if ajar. Then she claimed she used her cey. But her key wouldn't fit another apartment. Then she claimed he let her in, which would verify the pounding the neighbors heard, but would contradict her story of seeing a shadowy figure in the hall, which naturally impelled her to draw and shoot.

This little girl is quite busy, from running from apartment to apartment, so making up stories to cover her ass. FCS...let her enjoy her paid vacation.

Original Quill wrote:Once again, this story is in the news.  The Dallas PD is trying to smear the victim, claiming they found a 1/2 oz of marijuana in the victim's home.

These days marijuana is legal in many states, and 1/2 oz is laughable.  But the more pertinent question is, what were the Dallas PD doing executing a search warrant on the victim's home?  How many victims do you know that are treated like the subject of a crime?

Continuing questions reveal that Officer Guyger is still on paid vacation, even though being indicted on Manslaughter.  Damn...good job, eh?  But they say she would have got a $1-million payout for 3 or more victims.  Keep at it, Amber.

How are facts smearing?

Of course its blatantly obvious they would use a warrant to search to find out if there is any connection between the officer and the victim. That is just basic common sense

They found 10.4 grams of marijuana , which is about a handful of weed, which is substancial

I do not have anything against people personally using drugs.

Many people smoke weed, so what, how is that then smearing if its legal in many states?

You can read the actual search warrant on here

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/dallas/article218411020.html

This is simple normal policy after a shooting

Ben, a follow-up on what the computer records reveal about the use of her door key, will show which version of her lies were lies, and which one was the truth.

Sounds like there might have been some prior complaint she started a dispute over, and she ran upstairs to kill the guy.

Original Quill wrote:Ben, a follow-up on what the computer records reveal about the use of her door key, will show which version of her lies were lies, and which one was the truth.

Sounds like there might have been some prior complaint she started a dispute over, and she ran upstairs to kill the guy.

lol, I see the conspiracies are out in force on this

Nobody claimed she ran up any stairs

Her car was parked on the same floor, as the victims flat

Didge wrote:You can read the actual search warrant on here

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/dallas/article218411020.html

This is simple normal policy after a shooting

  No...it's not normal to treat a victim as a suspect.  They were looking for details to construct a cover story.

Why else swear out a warrant asking to search for narcotics? The issue is murder. WTF...does narcotics have to do with her lying stories.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:You can read the actual search warrant on here

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/dallas/article218411020.html

This is simple normal policy after a shooting

  No...it's not normal to treat a victim as a suspect.  They were looking for details to construct a cover story.

They never treated him as a suspect

I suggest you read the warrant

So you are saying the Police should never investigate a crime scene and that they should not need a warrant to do so with a private residence?

And you claim to be a Lawyer and a Judge?

Didge wrote:They never treated him as a suspect

Then why ask for a warrant for narcotics?

Think more about the situation, and less about excuses for 'your side'. The Dallas PD story is ridiculous.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:They never treated him as a suspect

Then why ask for a warrant for narcotics?

Think more about the situation, and less about excuses for 'your side'.  The Dallas PD story is ridiculous.

Its an investigation to garner evidence, hence why the warrant was issued

As its a crime scence and all factors maybe relevant

Maybe she was his drug dealer, who knows, but it could be vitally important to uncovering what did actually occur on the night.

Again a warrant is needed to investigate a private residence that is a crime scene

Evidence of what crime??  Read the US Constitution, Amendment IV:

US Constitution wrote:...no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

You can't state probable cause without declaring what crime is at issue.  After all, probable cause for what?

The fact that you don't know that shows you are just reaching for anything to absolve your party.  Your approach to due process of law leaves something to be desired.  Pray, don't ever come to America.

Original Quill wrote:Evidence of what crime??  Read the US Constitution, Amendment IV:

US Constitution wrote:...no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

You can't state probable cause without declaring what crime is at issue.  After all, probable cause for what?

The fact that you don't know that shows you are just reaching for anything to absolve your party.  Your approach to due process of law leaves something to be desired.  Pray, don't ever come to America.

You do not offer a link and we both know why, because you left out some very important information

Care to post and look very silly?

Someone was shot and died did they not?

You claim it was murder, I claim manslaughter

The view is to find out what was the cause

Doh

So you are absolutely talking nonsense and why I do not buy many things that you claim Quill and this is proving this glaringly

Now are claiming that when a person has been shot, its not a crime scence?

Yes or no?

I mean how else where they able to obtain the shell casings fired by the officer, if not by a warrant Quill.



So spare me your attempts to distort the fourth ammendment

Didge wrote:You do not offer a link and we both know why, because you left out some very important information

You don't know the US Constitution?  How embarrassing, particularly since I literally quoted it.  What's to verify?  

Besides, you can google it, anytime, anywhere.

Very sad performance, didge.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:You do not offer a link and we both know why, because you left out some very important information

You don't know the US Constitution?  How embarrassing, particularly since I literally quoted it.  What's to verify?  

Besides, you can google it, anytime, anywhere.

Very sad performance, didge.

I love this

So you are saying, that the shell casings are not worthy evidence and that a warrant is not necessary to obtain them in a shooting?

This is how you expose someone who claims to be a Lawyer

Watch this space

Didge wrote:So you are saying, that the shell casings are not worthy evidence and that a warrant is not necessary to obtain them in a shooting?

Exactly. The bullet casings were picked up as a part of the crime scene investigation, although they were probably also listed in the return of warrant just to be safe.

So, why go back to get a warrant after a CSI? They were looking for something extra, eh? Perhaps something to make the victim look bad??

We saw this in the Treyvon Martin murder and again in the Michael Brown murder. And again, when South Carolina cop, Michael Slager, murdered Walter Scott, don't you remember Slager ran back toward where the initial scuffle occurred and picked his taser up off the ground, moments later dropping the Taser beside Scott's body? He was staging the crime scene.

Despite the fact that the victim is dead, with these racially tinged murders you go looking for something/anything incriminating to besmirch the victim, to taint him so as to make him appear 'not so innocent'. It's called smearing the victim.

Original Quill wrote:So you are saying, that the shell casings are not worthy evidence and that a warrant is not necessary to obtain them in a shooting?

I never claimed they were not worthy. They are an importance piece of evidence

I asked you, how could they be obtained without a warrant?

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:So you are saying, that the shell casings are not worthy evidence and that a warrant is not necessary to obtain them in a shooting?

I never claimed they were not worthy. They are an importance piece of evidence

I asked you, how could they be obtained without a warrant?

That was my quote of you, beginning my response.  The screen went blank and when it came back, forumotion treated it as the post, missing the quote function.

Look above.

Brief update please!
What's the story so far, investigation-wise?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


I never claimed they were not worthy. They are an importance piece of evidence

I asked you, how could they be obtained without a warrant?

That was my quote of you, beginning my response.  The screen went blank and when it came back, forumotion treated it as the post, missing the quote function.

Look above.

All I see is you tying yourself up in knots and proving you have never been a lawyer or judge

Quite remarkable how you managed to do this all by yourself

Jules wrote:Brief update please!
What's the story so far, investigation-wise?

She's charged with only voluntary manslaughter, which assumes no malice aforethought. She claims she thought the apartment was her's, and when she entered the apartment she encountered someone she thought was a burglar and shot him.

However, neighbors say she was shouting to someone inside, and that would suggest that she knew the person inside. If she knew the person inside, it wasn't a case of mistaken apartment. That means something more was going on than just being at a wrong address.

If she knowingly shot an unarmed person, whom she knew was inside, there is more to her story. At a minimum, she knew it wasn't her apartment, so why the lie? And if she knew who was inside, what's the story behind the relationship? Why was she at that apartment, demanding entry? What is it she's not telling us about a murder she admittedly committed?

The Dallas PD just wants to cover up a crime by one of it's own (despite an indictment, she's still on the payroll). But America want's answers. What was she doing there, and why did she have to commit murder?

Well the view on one neighbour claiming her shouting is easily explain by the Police officers claim, that she shouted to the victim to identify themselves.

Not sure why that is so difficult to understand

Also, this witness, simple heeard people

That does not mean this came from this situation, but from any other flat

See how people decide they think they know what they have heard and then decide to make it fit?

Didge wrote:Well the view on one neighbour claiming her shouting is easily explain by the Police officers claim, that she shouted to the victim to identify themselves.

The claim of the neighbor was that the police officer was shouting 'open up, let me in.'  No neighbor said she was asking for him to identify himself.  A witness says Ofc. Guyger simply demanded to be let in:

Inside Edition wrote:“There are witnesses who said that before the gunshots, they heard the officer knocking at the door and repeatedly saying, ‘Let me in,’..."

https://www.insideedition.com/botham-jean-shooting-familys-attorney-claims-witnesses-contradict-amber-guygers-account-46735

So, why didn't she ask who he was, and why he was in the apartment, instead of demanding entry and blazing away?  She could have cleared it up without the gun.  Instead she goes in firing her weapon, with nary a question.  She really deserves the death penalty, which Texas is so fond of dishing out.

If you think the facts are different, provide the precise quote and cite the source below, as I have done.

So we have people who claimed to have heard but not seen

In other wordds, did they hear the officer or someone else?

Which if she was knocking, then the view would be she must have known him. Which as seen does not have any evidence what so ever.

Hence how realible is that witness claim

Didge wrote:So we have people who claimed to have heard but not seen

In other wordds, did they hear the officer or someone else?

Which if she was knocking, then the view would be she must have known him. Which as seen does not have any evidence what so ever.

Hence how realible is that witness claim

Stop being evasive.  We are beyond knowing she knew someone was inside; the question is, why was she not asking him to identify himself or what he was doing?   If this were all due to her mistaking his apartment for her's, that would have cleared things up.

It's not just that they were speaking, but why wasn't she following protocol?  Until we get answers to that, we don't really know what she was up to.  If cops were able to assume crimes, weapons free, half the population of Texas would be dead.  Quite clearly, she didn’t care about who he was, or why he was there--she wanted to shoot.  It draws into question whether she was up to something more than just a mistaken apartment.

I asked you to substantiate your claim as to her questions, and you didn't...clearly, you can't.  We know witnesses heard her yelling, Let me in...  So, we're back to square one: why wasn't she following her training?  What was she up to that led to the murder of an innocent man?

She should be charged with intentional homicide, and let her come back with corroborating evidence of her stuporous claim of error.  At this point, it’s her obligation to convince us that reduced charges are appropriate..  After all, a man is dead and she has yet to claim any reasonable fear of injury or death from him, to herself or others.  Yet, she pulled the trigger and took a life.

Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.



This lady PHYSICALLY blocks entry to a man entering his own flat cos his …..erm ….. face did not fit.   



His pithy replies plus his grace under fire impressed me totally, awwwesome!    >

Jules wrote:Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.

Yes, she's dubbed "Hallway Hilary".  It occurred in Missouri...like Oklahoma, a borderline southern state.

The problem might begin with the building management.  A similar thing happened in my office building in San Francisco: the management told everyone who worked in the building on weekends not to let people in without keys.

Realizing the position this put my employees in, I told them (employees) to ignore the instruction.  Then I wrote the building management that if they want to employ security guards at their doors, fine.  But don't try to extort free labor from my employees by instructing them to guard entrances to the building...it was not their job.  I threatened to report them to the Department of Labor for wage and hour violations.  They promptly rescinded the policy.

When I saw this story I immediately thought this might be a similar situation, where building management tried to extort guard services from residents.  It's a wonderful class-action lawsuit, and were I not so busy I might pursue it.

Jules wrote:Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.



This lady PHYSICALLY blocks entry to a man entering his own flat cos his …..erm ….. face did not fit.   



His pithy replies plus his grace under fire impressed me totally, awwwesome!    >

That made my blood boil. The entitlement that woman thought she had over him for the simple reason she is white and he is black.
I honestly cannot see this happening in the UK. In case I was somehow out of touch with todays climate I just watched this with my 18 year old grandson, he was as appalled as I was.

Jules wrote:Brief update please!
What's the story so far, investigation-wise?

Great and timely question.

Originally charged only with manslaughter, after a week of hearing evidence in the case a grand jury on Friday [November 30th] indicted Officer Amber Guyger on a charge of murder.  Authorities properly left it up to the grand jury this week to decide what charge she would face, or if she would be indicted at all.  As I predicted, fully explaining the reasons in detail above, the grand jury decided to up the charge to murder.

The Dallas County District Attorney's Office is now saying they believed the shooting was a murder case "all along," but said it was the Texas Rangers who made the initial decision to file it as a manslaughter charge.  

Guyger's lawyer was equally forgiving: “It’s a tragic mistake. You don’t prosecute people that one make a mistake that don’t’ have criminal intent and two their actions are justified by the laws that are in place.”

"Mistake?"  WTF??  "Actions are justified?!"  I look forward to hearing the real story.  What was she about, going to the victims apartment?  Why was she demanding entry, guns drawn?  What was her relationship with the victim?  Why did she murder him?

We'll keep you posted.

I’m sure Ben told me a couple of nights ago that this woman had been sentenced?

Nope, just indicted, for murder. Whole trial to go.

Oh, and Quill, they did bring the Rangers in for an independent investigation, and the Rangers went with manslaughter.

Syl wrote:

Jules wrote:Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.



This lady PHYSICALLY blocks entry to a man entering his own flat cos his …..erm ….. face did not fit.   



His pithy replies plus his grace under fire impressed me totally, awwwesome!    >

That made my blood boil. The entitlement that woman thought she had over him for the simple reason she is white and he is black.
I honestly cannot see this happening in the UK. In case I was somehow out of touch with todays climate I just watched this with my 18 year old grandson, he was as appalled as I was.

There's no indication that it was because she's white and he's black. She thought he didn't live there because he had no fob for the front door.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Jules wrote:Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.



This lady PHYSICALLY blocks entry to a man entering his own flat cos his …..erm ….. face did not fit.   



His pithy replies plus his grace under fire impressed me totally, awwwesome!    >

That made my blood boil. The entitlement that woman thought she had over him for the simple reason she is white and he is black.
I honestly cannot see this happening in the UK. In case I was somehow out of touch with todays climate I just watched this with my 18 year old grandson, he was as appalled as I was.

There's no indication that it was because she's white and he's black. She thought he didn't live there because he had no fob for the front door.

Wait, what?

The Dallas Morning News wrote:Dallas police obtain a search warrant for Jean's apartment. The warrant states Guyger went to the apartment and was confronted at the door by an unknown male who she may have thought was an intruder. A neighbor said he heard an exchange of words immediately followed by two gunshots.

I doubt they had time to talk about key fobs.

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:Nope, just indicted, for murder. Whole trial to go.

I stand corrected.

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:Oh, and Quill, they did bring the Rangers in for an independent investigation, and the Rangers went with manslaughter.

Southern state.  Sorry my friend...killing a black in the south is a freebee for a cop.  Or at least a negligible sentence.

The only reason Officer Guyger was properly charged is the District Attorney of Dallas County is a black woman...Faith Johnson.



She was adamant about this case.  I already knew they brought in the Rangers...on the second or third day.  I'm not at all sure they didn't bring in the Rangers to go light on Officer Guyger.

Ben, Raggs is confused about this case, and that of Hallway Hilary...a Missouri case that was brought in for comparison. Raggs is referring to the Missouri case.

Jules wrote:Similar theme except that this time the woman is unarmed. Otherwise it may have been an identical story.



This lady PHYSICALLY blocks entry to a man entering his own flat cos his …..erm ….. face did not fit.   



His pithy replies plus his grace under fire impressed me totally, awwwesome!    >

https://abcnews.go.com/US/woman-defends-video-shows-refusing-black-man-apartment/story?id=58555536

So she was married to an african american and did what most people would do when they dot not buzz to get in a building

Ask who they are.

She states this is what residents are even advised to do

Considering he was already filming, I believe this was a complete set up by the supposed victim here

She said where she lived and he repeatedly refused to say where he did, why?

He refused to show her the key fob

He did everything to be as obstructive a possible, when if he showed the key fob, I have no doubt she would have let him in. He then pushed past her.

She has even been fired, for simple doing what many people that live in a complex, where they do not know someone, who has not the code to get in does. Ask who they are.

She will now know doubt face a bias in finding a new job, as she has been judged and convicted through the media

There is always two sides to every story

This is the problem with the absurd notion of intersectionality. Where groups are placed into a hierarchy of oppression.

Where if the man entering the building had been white and pushed his way through also, acted the same. The woman would have been perceived as the victim of sexism

This is how this intersectionality works, but because the man here is African American. His victimology status of oppression with race, trumps that of a white woman

Now if the woman was African American and the man white American pusing past. It would have been classed under intersectionality as both racism and sexism towards the woman.

This is how through a lens of victimology, situations are being engineered to the public

The reality is, if this was a white American man questioning another white American man entering the building, it would never have made the news. As they do not register on the victimology tree (bar those who are Jewish who would).

Hence intersectionality is a concept that promotes inequality, based on victimology

So what people need to do is look at this, in a nation, where there is high crimes rates. Look at this without gender, race etc and ask themselves, whether what she did was unreasonable?

I dont think it was

Original Quill wrote:

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:Oh, and Quill, they did bring the Rangers in for an independent investigation, and the Rangers went with manslaughter.

Southern state.  Sorry my friend...killing a black in the south is a freebee for a cop.  Or at least a negligible sentence.

The only reason Officer Guyger was properly charged is the District Attorney of Dallas County is a black woman...Faith Johnson.



She was adamant about this case.  I already knew they brought in the Rangers...on the second or third day.  I'm not at all sure they didn't bring in the Rangers to go light on Officer Guyger.

I've met Faith Johnson in person and I can assure you that the now ex-DA of Dallas County is not as brave as she wants to make out. As a Republican, she was always a bit too timid with law enforcement types.

@didge. I also think it was a set up too. That’s not the first video like this, I’ve seen all over Facebook and social media. Usually, when you look into them, they’re fake.

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Southern state.  Sorry my friend...killing a black in the south is a freebee for a cop.  Or at least a negligible sentence.

The only reason Officer Guyger was properly charged is the District Attorney of Dallas County is a black woman...Faith Johnson.



She was adamant about this case.  I already knew they brought in the Rangers...on the second or third day.  I'm not at all sure they didn't bring in the Rangers to go light on Officer Guyger.

I've met Faith Johnson in person and I can assure you that the now ex-DA of Dallas County is not as brave as she wants to make out. As a Republican, she was always a bit too timid with law enforcement types.

Is she the ex-DA?  Is she Republican?  How is it that last Friday I saw a clip of her on MSNBC, announcing the indictment and adding a few vigorous words of her own.  I identified her with the good guys.

I don't want to get involved with party politics in Texas.  I would just like to see a little justice for Mr. Jean.  No way with Officer Guyger going to the wrong apartment, demanding entrance, guns drawn, and without knowing the situation opening fire on the occupant, was this a righteous killing.  If it had been Mr. Jean going to Guyger's apartment and opening fire, you know he would be castrated by now--given it was in the south.

Didge wrote:She states this is what residents are even advised to do

By whom? Certainly not the police. The police advise citizens to avoid confrontation. They certainly don't recommend vigilantism.

I know certain landlords try to enlist residents to challenge others, but when they do they are inviting a lawsuit, or worse. They are in the awkward position of advocating violence, and they are not in any way authorized. They certainly don't pay residents to perform guard duty.

If any landlord tells you to challenge people on the premises, ask for it in writing, and ask him how much the job pays.

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

There's no indication that it was because she's white and he's black. She thought he didn't live there because he had no fob for the front door.

Wait, what?

The Dallas Morning News wrote:Dallas police obtain a search warrant for Jean's apartment. The warrant states Guyger went to the apartment and was confronted at the door by an unknown male who she may have thought was an intruder. A neighbor said he heard an exchange of words immediately followed by two gunshots.

I doubt they had time to talk about key fobs.

I'm referring to the video to which I replied.

Original Quill wrote:Ben, Raggs is confused about this case, and that of Hallway Hilary...a Missouri case that was brought in for comparison.  Raggs is referring to the Missouri case.

I'm not confused. Anyone can see which post I replied to - it's quite clear. It's Ben who got confused.

eddie wrote:@didge. I also think it was a set up too. That’s not the first video like this, I’ve seen all over Facebook and social media. Usually, when you look into them, they’re fake.

Its completely a set up to me Eddie and he has been banned from facebook by the way for a spat he is involved with some other African Americans on youtube. He has plenty of videos and would seem to suggest its more about publicity for him

Many people within work or housing associations, neighbourhood watch. Are advised to challenge people who they do not recognize on their premises

Its standard practice

Do you know what is the worst part about this?

Is also going to now happen sooner or later Criminals who are also African American can capitalise on this and gain entry to properties tail gaiting. To then play the race card if challenged. People will end up being too scared to challenge people who they do not know on their premises, due to again a fear of being cast as racist. 

The reality is this and again nobody could answer.

Is it unreasonable for someone to challenge someone gaining entry not using the door entry system, they do not know with a shared premises entry?

Of course its not unreasonable and the only reason this blew up, was because it was engineered to look racist

Nobody seems to be concerned that he pushed past her

That is assualt

Didge wrote:Is also going to now happen sooner or later Criminals who are also African American can capitalise on this and gain entry to properties tail gaiting. To then play the race card if challenged. People will end up being too scared to challenge people who they do not know on their premises, due to again a fear of being cast as racist.

That surpasses tommy in racist expectations. I believe that's the most racist statement ever made on NewsFix.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Is also going to now happen sooner or later Criminals who are also African American can capitalise on this and gain entry to properties tail gaiting. To then play the race card if challenged. People will end up being too scared to challenge people who they do not know on their premises, due to again a fear of being cast as racist.

That surpasses tommy in racist expectations.  I believe that's the most racist statement ever made on NewsFix.

How is it racist?

When for years in this country, the Police, social services and councils did not act on grooming gangs, based on a fear of being cast as racist?

If the view, became, which it already has elsewhere, that people fear to do what is right, based on a fear of racism. To point this out being a possibility, based on evidence, where it already has. How is that then racist?

Are you claiming this would never happen?

Then prove how it could not happen, if a generation of fear is placed on people not to act, through a fear of being labelled racist?

That is not being racist at all

I am sure you want to shout racism, as I guess the view point is too difficult for you to understand or even answer

Hence its far easier for you to simple shout racism

You do realise that some criminals are African American and could thus being that they are criminals. Capitalise on this?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Is also going to now happen sooner or later Criminals who are also African American can capitalise on this and gain entry to properties tail gaiting. To then play the race card if challenged. People will end up being too scared to challenge people who they do not know on their premises, due to again a fear of being cast as racist.

That surpasses tommy in racist expectations.  I believe that's the most racist statement ever made on NewsFix.

Not really. Some people did just assume that the white woman in the video was being racist when there was nothing to suggest that. The guy didn't play the race card, but some people on here did.