Jump to content

4th and 5

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3079
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 4th and 5

  1. The state's case is going up in flames on day 2.

    Her entering the wrong apartment is so forseeable.

    The argument that if everybody is doing it why wasn't she more careful?!?! doesn't hold water because everyone doesn't know everyone else is doing it. In other words, if it happened 90 times, did every person who did it know 89 others did it too? so they would be more careful?

    The only chance the state has is the use of deadly force being shown to be unreasonable after their interaction begins.

    Dr. Green is going to crush the state's case

  2. 15 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

    I don't believe mistake of fact works when invoking defense of others. Meaning, you have the right to "step into" someone else's right to self-defense, but if you're wrong (i.e., they couldn't have invoked self-defense themselves) then you're going down regardless of how reasonable you thought your actions to be. 

    Negative, sir. 

    Sec. 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third person if:

    (1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

    (2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

  3. 9 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

     

    Right, difference between a surprise entry to the house, and my wife waking me up to say "time to get up to take the kiddo to cross country" in the reasonableness of my response.

    I saw the car there, intentionally rammed it, but state it was my belief that the car was empty.

    That is a fact issue for the jury to decide.

    "I intentionally ran in to a parked car I thought was unoccupied." Known and substantial risk: it is not. Manslaughter.

    If your hypo was you ran over some one because you were defending yourself or another, and your belief was wrong, that would be a better example. It would be murder either way, but one would be justified under Ch. 9.

     

    If the jury finds your belief not credible, it is murder.

    Here, she intentionally shot him. She may have been wrong about the true facts, but her intent is the same regardless: to intentionally (conscious objective or desire) cause the death of an individual.

  4. 3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

    Maybe this has been discussed earlier in this thread, but for criminal attorneys, can the prosecution argue that because she was a trained law enforcement argue that the "reasonableness" of her actions should be a higher standard (as compared a regular small female with a CHL)?   In other words, even assuming the mistake of fact, that shooting what turned out to be an unarmed person was not a reasonable response to the situation for a trained law enforcement officer?   As it relates to the shooting itself, it seems like the evidence of exactly how far away he was at the time of the shooting, whether he was approaching, the lighting, etc. are all going to be pretty damn important.

    They can argue that. And they should. 

    And as I stated before, the lighting and issues of perception and attention, distance and reaction time will be huge in this trial

  5. 3 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

    I intentionally run a red light and t-bone someone and kill them.  Murder or manslaughter?

    Or see my example above. I intentionally shot my wife, but was confused as to the exact circumstances, and my actions were unreasonable, all facts considered. To me, those combination of facts mean I took an intentional act recklessly. The intent to shoot makes murder chargeable, but doesn't seem to bar manslaughter as a matter of law.

    Did you intentionally run the red light? That's conscious disregard of a known and substantial risk, and hence, manslaughter.

    Or did you intentionally t-bone that person? That's murder, because it was your conscious objective or desire to cause the death, or at least cause serious bodily injury and commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes a death.

    • Like 1
  6. On 9/22/2019 at 11:51 PM, NeverMarryAStripper said:

    She would be locked up for that year and half though, right

    Yes

    On 9/23/2019 at 9:54 AM, Vic Mackey said:

    Are you able to be released on bond when filing an appeal after a guilty conviction? 

    NO. No bond pending appeal for a murder case. She would be in jail the whole time

    On 9/23/2019 at 10:40 AM, TwiceHorn said:

    Yes.  Up to the judge, but pretty likely, I think.  Especially if the appeal is strong, as in judge made a tough decision that might be reversible and doesn't want to stick someone in jail for 18 months if s/he made a mistake.

    No

    On 9/23/2019 at 11:08 AM, bigup2dahorns said:

    I haven’t heard all of the discussions so far but didn’t hear any objections yet about the weed info on this case. Sounds like it will absolutely be a part of this case, from both sides. The prosecution already previewed a point they will make that Guyger should have recognized that the apartment smelled of weed, and this is another reason why she should have known that she was not inside her unit.

    That's dumb. This is a split second event. No time to stop and smell the roses. See everything there is to see, etc.

    Easy for you guys to Monday morning quarterback though.

    22 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    Prosecution says that that Jean’s door was not locked and possibly opened (didn’t fully close).

    This is huge for the defense

    22 hours ago, CHEF DIESEL said:

    Really horrible if she did not offer first aid and comfort to the victim in his last moments. Sounds like she was trying to cover her own tracks in the last moments that the victim was struggling to stay alive.

    This is not good for the defense. It disturbs me the most but not relevant to self defense, it is what she reasonably believed at the time, not after

    21 hours ago, Lobo said:

    There is no way in the world a Black man in a middle-class apartment building in the South would get out weed, let alone smoke it, with his fucking door ajar.  Even the highest, most stoned black man is gonna close the door, lock it, close the patio door, close all the vents, put towels down at the bottom of the doors, and breathe through a paper towel roll with a dryer sheet shoved inside it.  This is not the movie "Friday", your honor---where Black men just sit on their patio and smoke to their hearts content with no regard for neighbors, nearby children, or law enforcement.  The victim was completely innocent, not a Chris Trucker charicature.  

    Anyway, curious to see how the rest of the day shakes out.  

    People do stupid shit all the time. This post is dumb.

    21 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    Defense saying it’s a confusing apartment building and they have evidence of tenants trying to enter wrong apartment units many times.

    Huge for the defense.

    21 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    Defense says the door locks were defectively installed and sometimes the doors do not fully close.

    Huge for the defense. And civil liability for the apartment.

    21 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

    How many of the jurors do they need to convict and can they convict her on a manslaughter charge? If not, why didn't the city charge her with manslaughter? 

    Jury verdicts must be unanimous

    And we have been over the appropriateness of the charge for the last year

    21 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    Defense says once inside his apartment she had tunnel vision on what she thought was the intruder in her place and she didn’t look around a dark apartment to notice any differences between her place and his.

    Exactly. This is how it works. It is supported by science.

    20 hours ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    Defense says Jean was shot 13-15 feet away from the door, per the Texas Rangers investigation and report. Defense says this is evidence of Jean moving from the couch towards her and the door.

    We will see.

    19 hours ago, Helobious said:

    What an unbelievably shitty apartment number display design. What the fuck. FWIW I think this bitch murdered the guy and should rot in prison for many years at least. But damn.

    Agreed. The lighting is distracting from the message attempted to be conveyed. 

    18 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

    Wow...so her boyfriend deleted the text messages too. Unfreakingbelievable...

    Not good. 

    18 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    They were clearly marked, he punched one, presumably it illuminated, and he still got off on the wrong floor and then went to the wrong room, when presumably all of them were marked, and probably better than than horrid sign depicted above.  Just because there's a sign doesn't mean anyone's paying attention.

    Also, I don't think they said everyone's confused all the time.  Just that some residents had made the same mistake.  That's a simple point that makes sense.  Trying to turn it into all residents should be on red alert may make some kind of sense, but it's hard to convey to a jury.

    This guy gets it.

    17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Also, Toby Shook is the biggest name on the defense team, and the chonker bald guy is an appellate specialist (meaning you might expect him to argue motions, but not examine witnesses).  Rogers is fairly well known, but not Shook's caliber, at least by reputation.

    It appears, though, that Shook hasn't done any of the witnesses?  Yes? No?

    Other guy is Michael Mowla, super smart appellate attorney.

    17 hours ago, TXSooner518 said:

    The text said it was still happening in Feb but there was no evidence as to when it stopped.

    Also I think the conduct meets the elements of murder but also could meet the elements of manslaughter. The act of discharging the firearm there could be reckless. She may have taken an intentional act while recklessly believing she had a defense.

    Negative. It was an intentional act. We have been over this. You can't claim it was accidental and claim self defense too. Think about how that makes no sense at all.

    16 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    Fucking spoliation of evidence like a motherfucker.

    We call it Tampering With Evidence, a felony

    15 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    In that context, it's  . . .  wait for it . . .  obstruction of justice.

    see above

    2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Schulte is an ex-cop, but the burden of proof thing is legit.

    It seems that there ought to be a threshold burden of proof for the defendant to assert mistake of fact, and once met, it's the state's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.  But it doesn't seem to work that way.

    There is not.  

    2 hours ago, Lou said:

    What does it cost to hire a defense team like she has?

     

    A lot

    2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Probably 100k+ per lawyer.  Higher for Shook.  The police union is paying, though.  And there may be some discounting involved due to the notoriety and novelty of the case.  Reputations might be made here.

    Exactly. I'd take this case on a discount just for notoriety alone. And the awesome fact pattern. Cases like this come along once in a career.

    But that expert is going to cost her though. He is an all star.

     

    1 hour ago, hookem17 said:

    They’re showing the body cam footage. The doormat in the hallway was clearly visible and almost neon red looking. Inside, there was a lot of shit on the counter, an ironing board out in the middle of the room, and a series of pictures hanging behind the couch. Seems like things a reasonable person could pick up on. 

    Just cause it's there doesn't mean she saw it. Or that if she saw it, it entered her attention.

    their expert, Dr. Marc Green will explain all that

    1 hour ago, BigDHornfan said:

    If the lights were on.  Who knows.  Has that come out at all?

    Exactly. Stop assuming.

    40 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    I still think that this guy's family had political enemies and someone blackmailed this chick to do their dirty work. They likely agreed to pay her legal fees to try and get off, but if she's convicted, sorry bitch. If you snitch the blackmail material comes out. I just don't see how one can make a mistake like that when there is a red fucking floormat to tell you it's not your floor.

    This is dumb.

    26 minutes ago, CHEF DIESEL said:

    Not only that in the bodycam video shown this morning she did nothing to help the victim other than call 911. When the other officers arrived they immediately started full CPR and started rummaging around in the victim's apartment for paper towels and clothes to try and stop the bleeding by applying direct pressure. They kept up CPR the entire time until paramedics arrived. One officer testified when they began CPR that the vicitim still had a pulse. Guyger did none of that other than waving her hands around hysterically saying she was in the wrong apartment.

    Bad for her.

    22 minutes ago, cattail said:

    The failure to attempt to render any sort of first aid is some cold blooded shit.

    Indeed it is.

    • Like 4
  7. On 9/19/2019 at 3:47 PM, MNLonghornFUKM said:

    Hanging pictures with my wife is the worst. Im always the one awkwardly holding up the pic, she stands there and tells me it needs to be 1/64th of inch to the left


    And then down 1/32nd of an inch


    Ok take this pencil so you know where to put the nail.

     

     

    It’s not about the nail.

     

    Except when it’s about the nail.

    • Like 1
  8. I did some research on G43 vs. P365 and chose the Sig a few months ago

    Last week I got lucky and got a G43 for free. 

    We will see how it stacks up vs. the Sig, which I really like.

    I have a feeling the G43 will be more accurate in my hands. But the Sig is smaller and has a higher capacity.

    Organic_Featured_4-28-2019.jpg

    • Like 4
  9. On 9/14/2019 at 8:43 AM, Lat22 said:

    The speaker in the planter outside the big window. People on the sidewalk flinching when they’d throw a pickle slice at them only to have it stick on the window. 

    If I didn’t spend that portion of the 80s high, I could remember things like this without my recollection being refreshed.

×
×
  • Create New...