Happened near me, on a road I ride frequently. He veered across the double yellow line and killed two cyclists. One was a top athlete, an Olympic hopeful. They never had a chance.
Needless to say, he didn’t serve a minute of prison time. People who kill cyclists never do.
Shooting a person for (supposed) burglary is vigilantism, pure and simple. We do not have the death penalty for burglary, and if we did, an individual police officer wouldn’t be the judge, jury and executioner. There isn’t even any allegation that he was doing something that would have threatened her life. She had no justification for shooting.
If I were to walk into “my house” to find a stranger inside, I would hightail outta there as fast as I can and call for reinforcement… even if I was a LEO. It is not like a hot pursuit is going to happen. The “burglar” is cornered, stuck inside with no other place to go. Just wait for your coworkers to get him and haul him away. Job done.
This is such a bizarre story. The young man killed was apparently such a nice guy. Terrible. Irreversible. Just awful.
Will she be subject to the lie detector test to verify the story of “apartment being dark, burglary in progress, she started shooting”. Agreed that shouldn’t be most people’s first reaction.
The delays in arrest must have allowed her to get $300,000 bail money really quickly. She is out already. Who has $300k laying around??
Bail usually costs one ten (10%) per cent of the bail amount. So the amount the officer would need for a bail bondsman would be $30,000–not the entire $300,000. But unlike the actual bail money, the bail bondsman’s fee is not returned to the accused who fully complies with all bail requirements set by the court.
@“Cardinal Fang” Unfortunately in Texas you may be able to get away with shooting someone for burglary. I wish I could remember the the details but there was a case some years back of a neighbor seeing someone burglarizing another neighbor and he shot the person and was not charged with anything. Mind you, it was not his house nor was he in danger.
@partyof5 : You are correct as I recall that incident.
^ That was the Joe Horn shooting in Pasadena, TX (suburb of Houston): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy
I’ve got a big problem with this Dallas shooting. The officer was never in danger, because she could have simply slipped away down the hall and called for reinforcements. In addition, she was not even in her own home (and it’s unclear how far she was into the apartment - not far if the reports are to be believed because I’d think you would turn on the light pretty quickly before walking too far).
However, if you are in your own home, and someone breaks in? I have no problem with anyone shooting first and asking questions later. There could be accomplices, and there is always the risk that a burglar could grab your weapon or pull one of her own if you were to announce a threat to shoot. There is no need to put that burden of decision on the resident, who is entitled to enjoy safety in her home. This isn’t vigilantism, this is the basic right of self defense. There is no need for proportionality in response and no need to retreat in your own home (or vehicle in the case of a carjacking).
@Publisher Im so glad someone else remembers that case. I remember thinking this is the craziest law ever! It’s not the castle doctrine if it’s not your castle, and he wasn’t defending anyone but he got away with it.
I think she may get convicted but serve the bare minimum.
Not so sure about that in this case. Local news is completely saturated with nothing but praise for the victim: his character, his standing in the community, his professional status, his education. His mother is seen on every news report talking about him and her heartbreak. There has been no coverage whatsoever that I have seen offering any sympathetic angle about the officer.
Not true in Texas. We have the Castle Doctrine here, where it would be permissible to shoot a burglar in one’s own home. However, this was NOT her home, he was not burglarizing it, nor was he burglarizing anyone else’s home.
I did have an acquaintance here in Texas who walked in on a burglary in progress. She was unarmed, and the intruder beat her to death, quite brutally. He received the death penalty and was indeed executed.
Castle Doctrine is not going anywhere here. But it absolutely has no place in any defense argument in this case.
As to this terrible incident, I did see a pair of videos allegedly taken by a neighbor. In one, paramedics are taking the victim out of his apartment on a stretcher, doing chest compressions. In another, the shooter, in police uniform, is pacing back and forth, talking on her cell phone, and sobbing.
I expect a guilty plea in this case. Manslaughter penalty range is 2 years to 20 years in Texas. There will be no aggravating factors or circumstances found here. Admit wrongdoing & accept a plea deal.
Concerning that an officer could work a 15 hour shift. Has to affect one’s judgment. No excuse, but is something that needs to be changed.
If there is any defense mounted, I believe it will be that as a result of her past incident where someone tried to take her taser and she shot the individual (which would in most circumstances be considered to be a justified shooting), there will will a claim that she suffers from PTSD, explaining her reaction in this case. My personal response to that is that if she was indeed suffering from PTSD, she was not currently in the correct state of mind to be working in normal capacity, certainly not for extended shifts, and with a weapon. JMO.
That type of defense might inflame the public.
The officer was exhausted & committed a felony. An innocent angel is dead.
Best to accept responsibility & save the mitigating arguments for the sentencing phase.
Will the Dallas Police Department (and other police departments) review their shift assignment policies to minimize fatigue that could make police officers worse at their jobs?
Multiple errors, small by themselves but deadly in combination, plus chance circumstances, occurred:
A. Guyger returned home and parked on the wrong level of the parking structure without noticing things like signs and different cars parked nearby. *
B. Guyger walked into the fourth floor instead of the third floor of the apartments without noticing that it was the wrong floor (based on signs that may be present). *
C. The apartment building had the same layout on each floor.
D. Guyger did not notice differences like the apartment numbers or the red carpet or differences in how other neighbors decorated their entries. *
E. Jean left his front door unlocked.
F. Guyger, incorrectly believing that she walked into a burglary in progress in her apartment, shot first instead of possibly taking other action. *
Note that some other professions like truck and bus drivers and airline crew have time limits and minimum rest time between shifts to minimize the risk of fatigue and errors that may result from fatigue.
“Lie detectors” don’t work.
Texas Penal Code 9.42 may be the relevant law in the Horn case (non-“castle doctrine” use of deadly force against burglars):
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/StatutesByDate.aspx?code=PE&level=SE&value=9.42&date=9/1/2018
There is obviously room for controversy in “reasonably believes”.
Is it really relevant that she had just finished a long shift? People have all sorts of reasons for being tired, including working or playing until you’re too tired to think clearly. And plenty of people carry weapons - we joke that it’s required in Texas (but it’s not funny).
The bottom line is that she’s responsible for her actions and needs to be held accountable.
Trouble is, the questions you ask might be to your wife about why she didn’t tell you your daughter was out late and might be sneaking in. People shoot “intruders” that turn out to be family members.
@ucbalumnus, Texas Penal Code 9.42 refers to 9.41. The person using deadly force has to “reasonably believe the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.” In this case, force, not to mention deadly force, was not necessary. All she had to do was step out the door, alert him that she was a police officer, and call for backup.
“Police, come out with your hands up.” He’d come stumbling out with his hands up, confused, asking what was going on. She’d have a gun on him. She’d tell him he was burglarizing her apartment. He’d say it was his. That would be the point where she realized her mistake, and a death would be prevented.
In terms of police department policy on shift assignments, it is. Would you rather your local police department have officers who are frequently fatigued, reducing their effectiveness at stopping crime without making errors that negatively impact people in general, or officers who are at their best because they are not fatigued? While Guyger had just gotten off duty when this incident occurred, it is likely that she was less effective near the end of her 15 hour shift than at the beginning.
Is anyone disagreeing here?
My reference to Texas Penal Code 9.42 was in reference to the Horn case mentioned in replies #105 through #108, not the Guyger case (where it is irrelevant, since no actual burglary was occurring).
I agree that even in a theoretical actual “castle doctrine” case (i.e. if it really were Guyger’s apartment and she walked into an actual burglary in progress), it would be reasonable for a police officer to do what you write (and call for backup), since the theoretical burglar would be the one trapped inside with police blocking the escape (unlike the typically-envisioned “castle doctrine” situation where the resident may be trapped by the burglar or robber who has entered his/her home).