- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Dallas PD Guyger Trial: Guilty of Murder..Sentence to 10years in prison
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:38 pm to crash1211
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:38 pm to crash1211
quote:
I bet if it was your family you wouldn't be quick to say oh yes not murder
Okay? How does that negate the fact that it would be emotional thinking, not logical? Courts are supposed to be logical, not emotional.
1
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:39 pm to Cold Drink
Was there supposed to be a point with that?
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:46 pm to TH03
quote:
Okay? How does that negate the fact that it would be emotional thinking, not logical? Courts are supposed to be logical, not emotional.
I never said it wasn't emotional thinking. It's just what a normal person would do.
My other question is what if this person wasn't a cop. Lets say someone from your street was confused your house was their house, and walked into your house and killed you. Would it still be a mistake and not murder?
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:50 pm to crash1211
quote:
Would it still be a mistake and not murder?
It should be manslaughter, but that also depends on the state. In general murder requires premeditation.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:55 pm to Centinel
quote:
In general murder requires premeditation.
But 19.02 murder in Texas does not. People are getting way too hung up on the semantics of the charge in TX. It carries 5 years and up not outside the realm of many of the "charges" people are using from other jurisdictions as the correct one.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:56 pm to Cold Drink
quote:the black community doesn't want to be considered a group until it does.
Is it really that hard to understand that there’s a widespread perception that killing black people doesn’t carry the same amount of weight and that many ppl were afraid that the justice system would work for them (yet again) and are happy/relieved that it did?
"Hey, don't put us all together in a group like that. All of us aren't like that"
Posted on 10/1/19 at 1:56 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
But 19.02 murder in Texas does not.
Which is why I said it depends on the state, and used the term "in general".
Posted on 10/1/19 at 2:00 pm to Restomod
You hear that pigs? If you want to kill someone and get off scot free you gotta do it during a routine traffic stop like you used to!
Posted on 10/1/19 at 2:03 pm to Eric Nies Grind Time
quote:
You hear that pigs? If you want to kill someone and get off scot free you gotta do it during a routine traffic stop like you used to!
Posted on 10/1/19 at 2:08 pm to Centinel
quote:
Which is why I said it depends on the state, and used the term "in general".
My point is the semantics of the charge are irrelevant. Despite one being a first-degree felony and the other a second degree they still have the same impact on one's life except for the sentence. Because the Texas murder statute is so wide-reaching the possible sentence is wide-ranging too and overlaps the majority of the manslaughter sentences. The assumption can be made if the sentence ends up from 5 to 20 years the outcome would have been little or any different with a manslaughter conviction in TX. All the handwringing over the charge is likely for naught.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 2:58 pm to Restomod
So she actually admitted on the stand that she intended to kill him? What a dumbass.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 2:59 pm to Korin
quote:
So she actually admitted on the stand that she intended to kill him? What a dumbass
Yea. Which is funny because a ton of people butthurt about the murder conviction keep arguing she didn't have intent to kill.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:00 pm to Korin
quote:
So she actually admitted on the stand that she intended to kill him? What a dumbass.
Why else would you shoot someone you think is attacking you? That's a pretty stupid "gotcha" moment.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:04 pm to Eriq Killmonger
quote:
Yea stop pandering for upvotes. You cannot prove whether or not this was a racially motivated murder. To watch you speak in absolutes without any proof is pitiful and this is coming from a black man.
Go frick yourself
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:11 pm to nerd guy
quote:
Why else would you shoot someone you think is attacking you? That's a pretty stupid "gotcha" moment.
Except no one believed that she was threatened nor was in any danger with his ice cream spoon. She easily messed up her wording and instead of admitting she intended to kill (as she double tapped) the victim, she should've simply said she was trying to neutralize a potential threat.
NEUTRALIZE works much better than "intended to kill"
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:14 pm to JG77056
quote:
IMO, if that was a 10 year old white boy, or even a 65 year old black gentleman, she would not have even drawn her weapon.
So yes, this was about race
Sounds to me like you think it was about age...
Somewhat, that,too.
I'd say, especially since she was a cop in a large metro area, she is quickened to respond to the following, in order:
Black males, ages 16-30
Hispanic male, ages 16-30
White males, age 16-30
Then it starts dropping way off from here to virtually negligent difference
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:27 pm to nerd guy
quote:
So she actually admitted on the stand that she intended to kill him?
quote:
That's a pretty stupid "gotcha" moment.
Not really. If you actually know what the definition of murder is in the Texas penal code, you'll see that it's the exact reason she was convicted.
quote:
(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual;
Actual legal professionals in the state of Texas, specifically Dallas, have been harping on this since she said it, pointing at it as the very reason this verdict came down.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:40 pm to TH03
Yea it's pretty clear that's why they decided on Murder.
All the ones I saw on fox4 and channel 5 didn't harp on it. I'll ask it again, why else would you shoot someone you think is threatening you? You'd be lying if you said to injure or stop. And you know damn well her team went over that answer multiple times with her in preparation and that was the best answer to the question. That's clearly not something she pulled out of her arse. This is why the castle doctrine for mistake of fact was brought up since she could use deadly force if she truly thought she was in her own home. Her whole defense was she mistook his apartment for hers.
All the ones I saw on fox4 and channel 5 didn't harp on it. I'll ask it again, why else would you shoot someone you think is threatening you? You'd be lying if you said to injure or stop. And you know damn well her team went over that answer multiple times with her in preparation and that was the best answer to the question. That's clearly not something she pulled out of her arse. This is why the castle doctrine for mistake of fact was brought up since she could use deadly force if she truly thought she was in her own home. Her whole defense was she mistook his apartment for hers.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:41 pm to TH03
Watching the sentencing phase...how can I put this...Amber Guyger couldn't have picked a better guy to murder that's working against her if that makes sense. They are playing a video of him in church singing a gospel solo. He was a CPA for Price Waterhouse Cooper.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 3:41 pm to TH03
Well in that case every shooting in self defense is classified as murder, which makes no sense.
Page 37 of 49
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News