Texas cop goes home to wrong address, shoots occupant

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.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

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.

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

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.

Yet she was sacked for racism Rags. In other words it was engineered to look racist

The guy posted this, with the view. "This is what happens to Black people in America"

Sorry Rags, but to me, that was him playing the race card and it worked so well, she has now been basically ostracized by a swathe of American society

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:


Yet she was sacked for racism Rags. In other words it was engineered to look racist

The guy posted this, with the view. "This is what happens to Black people in America"

Sorry Rags, but to me, that was him playing the race card and it worked so well, she has now been basically ostracized by a swathe of American society

Where did the guy say that?

Thor wrote:Toles posted the videos to his Facebook page and they've been viewed almost 8 million times. He wrote that the videos show what it's like "to be a black man in America" and "this is America in 2018."

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

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:Toles posted the videos to his Facebook page and they've been viewed almost 8 million times. He wrote that the videos show what it's like "to be a black man in America" and "this is America in 2018."

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

I can't find his video where he says that.

Raggamuffin wrote:Page not found. However, the fact that he recorded it and put it on Facebook does suggest that he was playing the race card.

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Page not found. However, the fact that he recorded it and put it on Facebook does suggest that he was playing the race card.

Agreed, espcially as he calls a woman insecure, over the security of the building she lives in

The reality is security firms, constantly warn people over the real problem of criminals who gain entry, through someone leaving the building.

He should be well aware of that and like I say, should have put her mind at rest, by showing he had a security fob to enter the building. In fact he made it far worse to being as obstructive as possible.

Seems he wants to be in the limelight, with no due care of the consequences of his actions

Raggamuffin wrote:

*~[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.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

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

I’m must admit, i did think you were talking about the video you watched rather than the topic matter.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

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

I’m must admit, i did think you were talking about the video you watched rather than the topic matter.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

I’m must admit, i did think you were talking about the video you watc

hed rather than the topic matter.

Having bounced up the thread, I was aware of both topics.  So I knew what's up with Ragg's comments immediately.  Ben lives in the Dallis/FW area, so quite naturally he was thinking the Guyger case.

Anyway, I'm much more interested in the Guyger murder, as charged.  It gets a lot more interesting now that we know there is some back-story (you don't just gun down a man without a reason).  I'll be posting any updates as they arise.  Her original story is obviously false, but what was the real story?  I'm anxious to hear.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Having bounced up the thread, I was aware of both topics.  So I knew what's up with Ragg's comments immediately.  Ben lives in the Dallis/FW area, so quite naturally he was thinking the Guyger case.

Anyway, I'm much more interested in the Guyger murder, as charged.  It gets a lot more interesting now that we know there is some back-story (you don't just gun down a man without a reason).  I'll be posting any updates as they arise.  Her original story is obviously false, but what was the real story?  I'm anxious to hear.

It's not my fault that Ben wasn't following the thread properly.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not my fault that Ben wasn't following the thread properly.

It's nobody's fault.  Ben was picking up the conversation where I left it.  Quite naturally, his head was in the original story.

You were the one who detoured.

Thor wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It's nobody's fault.  Ben was picking up the conversation where I left it.  Quite naturally, his head was in the original story.

You were the one who detoured.

Wrong

Jules posted the video to the more recent event at the apartment

Syl replied to the video

Rags replied to Syl

Ben jumped in and replied to Rags, based on the previous thread story

Which made zero sense to Rags reply to Syl

Rags did not detour, but simple replied to posters. Where the thread had branched out into two stories by those posters. With the view, that they were similar. Yet as seen they were as far removed as could possible be the stories.

eddie wrote:Does it even matter? Misunderstanding. It happens. Nobody got hurt.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not my fault that Ben wasn't following the thread properly.

It's nobody's fault.  Ben was picking up the conversation where I left it.  Quite naturally, his head was in the original story.

You were the one who detoured.

eddie wrote:Does it even matter? Misunderstanding. It happens. Nobody got hurt.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

It is Texas...

She breaks into someone's home and executes him..

They should give her a lethal injection, if they uphold Texas law.

And, I would expect Tommy, gelico and Raggamuffin all to be supporting her possible death sentence, going on their previous stances on home invasions..

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It's nobody's fault.  Ben was picking up the conversation where I left it.  Quite naturally, his head was in the original story.

You were the one who detoured.

No I wasn't, Jules was.  Now it's your fault for telling porkies.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:Does it even matter? Misunderstanding. It happens. Nobody got hurt.

Yes it does matter. I object to Quill saying I was confused when he lives his life in a state of confusion.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes it does matter. I object to Quill saying I was confused when he lives his life in a state of confusion.

Eds is correct: it doesn't matter.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:



Eds is correct: it doesn't matter.

yes it does

a misunderstanding of this sort could have huge consequences for all

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No I wasn't, Jules was.  Now it's your fault for telling porkies.

That was back in September.  All bets are off til this weekend.

But yes, the Hallway Hilary story was brought in for comparison in September.  But I revived this thread, for the express purpose of news about Officer Guyger.  Once I did, posters picked up, some on one story, some on the other.  You detoured from my pick-up, is all I'm saying.

But, no matter.  I don't mind whatever y'all want to talk about.  I was just explaining to Ben the course of events.  We can move on.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That was back in September.  All bets are off til this weekend.

But yes, the Hallway Hilary story was brought in for comparison in September.  But I revived this thread, for the express purpose of news about Officer Guyger.  Once I did, posters picked up, some on one story, some on the other.  You detoured from my pick-up, is all I'm saying.

But, no matter.  I don't mind whatever y'all want to talk about.  I was just explaining to Ben the course of events.  We can move on.

You should have told Ben that he was confused, not me.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You should have told Ben that he was confused, not me.

Awww...now you want revenge.    No, you were the one who detoured back to the Hallway Hilary story.  Ben and I were on the same page.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Awww...now you want revenge.    No, you were the one who detoured back to the Hallway Hilary story.  Ben and I were on the same page.

I'm not having that. You also posted about Hallway Hilary. However, if you didn't like Jules' post you should have said so. I was perfectly free to reply to the issue of Hallway Hilary, and it was Ben who got confused, even though I quoted Syl's post, which was clearly about Hallway Hilary.

NEWSONE wrote:Amber Guyger Is Blaming Botham Jean For Getting Shot And Killed In His Own Home

The cop's story gets messier by the hour.

Written By NewsOne Staff
September 10, 2018

Amber Guyger, 30, who has been a police officer for 4 years, entered Jean’s apartment, first claiming she thought it was her own home before she started shooting. Now she has claimed she gave Jean commands and he didn’t listen, The Associated Press reported.

“David Armstrong of the Texas Rangers wrote in an arrest affidavit released Monday that Officer Amber 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,” the AP wrote. “He says Guyger said the person ignored her verbal commands and she fired twice. One struck Jean in the chest and he later died.”

So basically, Guyger is pointing the finger at the dead man for ignoring her “verbal commands”? If it was “nearly completely dark,” then Jean, who was unarmed, may not have been able to see she was a police officer. Even if he could, where was Guyger’s deescalation techniques? Moreover, the AP reported Jean’s door was slightly ajar, contrasting with earlier reports that the door was locked.

But it gets even worse…

Guyger has also claimed she saw “a large silhouette,” the Dallas News reported, which to her apparently meant it was time to start shooting. In addition, Guyger framing it as if she just saw a “silhouette” will be her excuse to pretend she did not know she was shooting a Black man, which will almost certainly be used as an excuse at a trial if the case progresses past the grand jury.

Guyger will also probably be framed as an overworked police officer who just made a tragic mistake — therefore, there should be no punishment. She has reportedly already hired a public relations firm to spin that narrative.

Raggamuffin wrote:Quill, you said I was confused. I was not confused, I knew perfectly well that two incidents were being discussed, and I chose to comment on one of them. You were in the wrong, and all you had to do was say sorry.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Quill, you said I was confused. I was not confused, I knew perfectly well that two incidents were being discussed, and I chose to comment on one of them. You were in the wrong, and all you had to do was say sorry.

What do you think about Amber's many curves and switchbacks in her story?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What do you think about Amber's many curves and switchbacks in her story?

No apology then?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No apology then?

Maybe she will think about her apology at her sentencing.  Right now she seems to be high on sandpapering her story to fit the facts, as they come out.

An attorney for a former Dallas police officer says he isn’t surprised by the murder indictment of his client given the political pressure surrounding the case.

Robert Rogers says there has been a wave of “vindictive emotion” from people looking to indict Amber Guyger, who fatally shot her unarmed neighbour Botham Jean in his own apartment.

Rogers argued that emotion was injected into the grand jury process, particularly because Jean’s mother testified.


Rogers says having a family member give testimony during a grand jury process is highly unusual. He says “it’s time to work towards getting her a fair trial.”

Robert Rogers says there has been a wave of “vindictive emotion” from people looking to indict Amber Guyger, who fatally shot her unarmed neighbour Botham Jean in his own apartment.

Rogers argued that emotion was injected into the grand jury process, particularly because Jean’s mother testified.

Raggamuffin wrote:I see no reason to disbelieve her story. The problem is that she meant to kill the chap, or at seriously injure him - hence the murder charge. On the other hand, the defence will say that she acted in good faith, given the circumstances of her thinking it was her apartment. The issue is what she said to him, how much time she waited for him to respond, and what she believed he was going to do.

This can't end with a slap on the wrist. A man is dead because of her, and he shouldn't be dead.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I see no reason to disbelieve her story. The problem is that she meant to kill the chap, or at seriously injure him - hence the murder charge. On the other hand, the defence will say that she acted in good faith, given the circumstances of her thinking it was her apartment. The issue is what she said to him, how much time she waited for him to respond, and what she believed he was going to do.

This can't end with a slap on the wrist. A man is dead because of her, and he shouldn't be dead.

Which story would that be?

If we are summing up, it's not only that she intended to kill from the start, but the 'mistake' defense absolutely doesn't work.  Wrong floor?  Wrong doormat?  Wrong guy...or any guy?  Then there are the changes in story.  Door locked/door open?  Empty apartment?  Who was she talking to before shooting?  With talking...there also goes the element of surprise.  Now we have a cop, well trained in reasonable use of force, spraying bullets all over the place??

She would be a disaster as a client to represent, but I would love to have the case as a prosecutor.  She would be great fun to cross-examine: you forgot where your home is, have you ever forgotten your way to work?  

Ben wrote:If they can't absolutely prove she went in there and didn't just react poorly, but seriously murdered him, she could walk.

Ben wrote:I think murder is a risky charge, to be fair. I certainly hope that grand jury heard convincing evidence and didn't simply cave to public pressure.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I see no reason to disbelieve her story. The problem is that she meant to kill the chap, or at seriously injure him - hence the murder charge. On the other hand, the defence will say that she acted in good faith, given the circumstances of her thinking it was her apartment. The issue is what she said to him, how much time she waited for him to respond, and what she believed he was going to do.

This can't end with a slap on the wrist. A man is dead because of her, and he shouldn't be dead.

Which story would that be?

If we are summing up, it's not only that she intended to kill from the start, but the 'mistake' defense absolutely doesn't work.  Wrong floor?  Wrong doormat?  Wrong guy...or any guy?  Then there are the changes in story.  Door locked/door open?  Empty apartment?  Who was she talking to before shooting?  With talking...there also goes the element of surprise.  Now we have a cop, well trained in reasonable use of force, spraying bullets all over the place??

She would be a disaster as a client to represent, but I would love to have the case as a prosecutor.  She would be great fun to cross-examine: you forgot where your home is, have you ever forgotten your way to work?  

*~[THE Ben Reilly]~* wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Which story would that be?

If we are summing up, it's not only that she intended to kill from the start, but the 'mistake' defense absolutely doesn't work.  Wrong floor?  Wrong doormat?  Wrong guy...or any guy?  Then there are the changes in story.  Door locked/door open?  Empty apartment?  Who was she talking to before shooting?  With talking...there also goes the element of surprise.  Now we have a cop, well trained in reasonable use of force, spraying bullets all over the place??

She would be a disaster as a client to represent, but I would love to have the case as a prosecutor.  She would be great fun to cross-examine: you forgot where your home is, have you ever forgotten your way to work?  

Well, obviously lots will come out in the trial that we don't know yet, but here's the problem.

If they can't absolutely prove she went in there and didn't just react poorly, but seriously murdered him, she could walk.

I think murder is a risky charge, to be fair. I certainly hope that grand jury heard convincing evidence and didn't simply cave to public pressure.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Which story would that be?

If we are summing up, it's not only that she intended to kill from the start, but the 'mistake' defense absolutely doesn't work.  Wrong floor?  Wrong doormat?  Wrong guy...or any guy?  Then there are the changes in story.  Door locked/door open?  Empty apartment?  Who was she talking to before shooting?  With talking...there also goes the element of surprise.  Now we have a cop, well trained in reasonable use of force, spraying bullets all over the place??

She would be a disaster as a client to represent, but I would love to have the case as a prosecutor.  She would be great fun to cross-examine: you forgot where your home is, have you ever forgotten your way to work?  

Are you suggesting that she knew the guy, that she went there to kill him, and then concocted this story about the wrong apartment? Do you have a theory as to motive?