Officer Invades Apartment, Shoots Resident

[RoyGBiv]

Seems to me that murder is going to be tough to find. Unless there is some kind of history between the two that I'm not aware of.
Manslaughter seems like the appropriate charge.

/MMQB

[03Lightningrocks]

Seems to me that murder is going to be tough to find. Unless there is some kind of history between the two that I'm not aware of.
Manslaughter seems like the appropriate charge.

/MMQB

You are likely correct. At least from what is reported so far.

[cirus]

There's a big difference between walking into a house that you think is yours, not kicking the door in and shooting someone you think is an intruder and knowingly kicking the door off the hinges on a house you know is not yours and knowing there may be somebody home with the intent to commit a crime.

Wrong analogy. The correct analogy would be, MS13 member walks into residence, shoots and kills man. MS13 member claims he made a mistake by thinking it was his home and the dead man was an intruder. MS13 member says, "my bad".

Section 8.02 of the Penal Code does not distinguish between you, me, leo, nuns, priests, rabbis,MS13 members, etc.
The correct analysis, at least somewhat, is whether the mistake is "reasonable" or not--that will depend on a whole host of factors most of which we do not know at this point.
Stay tuned.

[cirus]

Seems to me that murder is going to be tough to find. Unless there is some kind of history between the two that I'm not aware of.
Manslaughter seems like the appropriate charge.

/MMQB

[Killadocg23]

There's a big difference between walking into a house that you think is yours, not kicking the door in and shooting someone you think is an intruder and knowingly kicking the door off the hinges on a house you know is not yours and knowing there may be somebody home with the intent to commit a crime.

Wrong analogy. The correct analogy would be, MS13 member walks into residence, shoots and kills man. MS13 member claims he made a mistake by thinking it was his home and the dead man was an intruder. MS13 member says, "my bad".

Thats the point I am trying to make to cirrus but as humans we see things differently and he has a different point of view. How on earth can you walk into somebodys residence kill them and be like oh my bad ,sorry to kill you. It doesn't matter if his door was unlocked its his own APARTMENT. And it is pathetic to see people making excuses for the officer because she had a 10 hr shift as to say her behavior should be excusable because she was tired.She should be charged with MURDER plain and simple. Would she be charged with murder? High percentage that she wouldnt be.

[cirus]

There's a big difference between walking into a house that you think is yours, not kicking the door in and shooting someone you think is an intruder and knowingly kicking the door off the hinges on a house you know is not yours and knowing there may be somebody home with the intent to commit a crime.

Wrong analogy. The correct analogy would be, MS13 member walks into residence, shoots and kills man. MS13 member claims he made a mistake by thinking it was his home and the dead man was an intruder. MS13 member says, "my bad".

Thats the point I am trying to make to cirrus but as humans we see things differently and he has a different point of view. How on earth can you walk into somebodys residence kill them and be like oh my bad ,sorry to kill you. It doesn't matter if his door was unlocked its his own APARTMENT. And it is pathetic to see people making excuses for the officer because she had a 10 hr shift as to say her behavior should be excusable because she was tired.She should be charged with MURDER plain and simple. Would she be charged with murder? High percentage that she wouldnt be.

What is the difference between murder and manslaughter? All I'm saying is put yourself in her shoes. What was her intent? That's the difference between the two. We know she killed him and she admitted to it. If you're texting and driving and run over someone and kill them did you murder them? If the victim was my son I would want to see her punished but not for murder if it all played out the way she says. Like you say we all have a different point of view. I try to look at it like it was me on trial. If that officer came to me after killing my son in tears and begging for forgiveness and was truly remorseful I could forgive her in time. I'm done.

[03Lightningrocks]

There's a big difference between walking into a house that you think is yours, not kicking the door in and shooting someone you think is an intruder and knowingly kicking the door off the hinges on a house you know is not yours and knowing there may be somebody home with the intent to commit a crime.

Wrong analogy. The correct analogy would be, MS13 member walks into residence, shoots and kills man. MS13 member claims he made a mistake by thinking it was his home and the dead man was an intruder. MS13 member says, "my bad".

Thats the point I am trying to make to cirrus but as humans we see things differently and he has a different point of view. How on earth can you walk into somebodys residence kill them and be like oh my bad ,sorry to kill you. It doesn't matter if his door was unlocked its his own APARTMENT. And it is pathetic to see people making excuses for the officer because she had a 10 hr shift as to say her behavior should be excusable because she was tired.She should be charged with MURDER plain and simple. Would she be charged with murder? High percentage that she wouldnt be.

Exactly.

[buzzkill]

She needs to be in jail in my humble opinion. Hopefully she gets what she deserves.

Which is what?

The same a black guy would get if he walked into a white cop's home and shot them dead.

[SewTexas]

she walked into an apartment that had a completely differently colored welcome mat than hers, his was RED, how do you miss it? His apt was completely differently decorated than hers, it should have been obvious it wasn't her apt and he wasn't an "invader". This is the right charge.

[C-dub]

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/mansl ... -592469274

While details about why Guyger was charged with manslaughter, specifically, have not been revealed, here's a breakdown of what a manslaughter charge means in Texas:

• A criminal homicide is charged as manslaughter when a person "recklessly causes the death of another individual," according to the Texas penal code. The charge is a second-degree felony, punishable by two to 20 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine. A prosecutor does not have to prove intent or premeditation to earn a manslaughter conviction.

• Manslaughter is a lesser charge than murder, which is a first-degree felony. According to the penal code, murder is committed when a person "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," or "intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits and act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."

• Manslaughter is a stiffer charge than criminally negligent homicide, a state jail felony that is committed when a person "causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence," according to the penal code.

Bold red emphasis is mine. It seems to fit to me. Will her defense that she believed Jean was an intruder into her apartment? We'll have to wait and see. Ear witnesses seem to contradict her statements so far.

[03Lightningrocks]

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/mansl ... -592469274

While details about why Guyger was charged with manslaughter, specifically, have not been revealed, here's a breakdown of what a manslaughter charge means in Texas:

• A criminal homicide is charged as manslaughter when a person "recklessly causes the death of another individual," according to the Texas penal code. The charge is a second-degree felony, punishable by two to 20 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine. A prosecutor does not have to prove intent or premeditation to earn a manslaughter conviction.

• Manslaughter is a lesser charge than murder, which is a first-degree felony. According to the penal code, murder is committed when a person "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," or "intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits and act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."

• Manslaughter is a stiffer charge than criminally negligent homicide, a state jail felony that is committed when a person "causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence," according to the penal code.

Bold red emphasis is mine. It seems to fit to me. Will her defense that she believed Jean was an intruder into her apartment? We'll have to wait and see. Ear witnesses seem to contradict her statements so far.

Well if a cop doesn't know that shooting a person will cause death, nobody does. According to the bold type, she knowingly caused the death of the man. Her excuse for it does not come close to being justification.

[C-dub]

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/mansl ... -592469274

While details about why Guyger was charged with manslaughter, specifically, have not been revealed, here's a breakdown of what a manslaughter charge means in Texas:

• A criminal homicide is charged as manslaughter when a person "recklessly causes the death of another individual," according to the Texas penal code. The charge is a second-degree felony, punishable by two to 20 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine. A prosecutor does not have to prove intent or premeditation to earn a manslaughter conviction.

• Manslaughter is a lesser charge than murder, which is a first-degree felony. According to the penal code, murder is committed when a person "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," or "intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits and act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."

• Manslaughter is a stiffer charge than criminally negligent homicide, a state jail felony that is committed when a person "causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence," according to the penal code.

Bold red emphasis is mine. It seems to fit to me. Will her defense that she believed Jean was an intruder into her apartment? We'll have to wait and see. Ear witnesses seem to contradict her statements so far.

Well if a cop doesn't know that shooting a person will cause death, nobody does. According to the bold type, she knowingly caused the death of the man. Her excuse for it does not come close to being justification.

I don't think so either, but we'll see.

[ELB]

As far as I know every police officer - and every good student of self-defense - is taught to shoot to stop a threat, not to shoot to kill. Thus there is no intention to cause death even though that is a possible outcome of using deadly force. I would guess her academy training and her in-service training was oriented to shoot-to-stop. There should be training records on this.

Note that while on duty she previously had shot a suspect who survived, and took him into custody. In other words, a shoot-to-stop.

Thus the prosecution will have to show that she not only intended to stop what she perceived to be a threat, but she actually intended to kill him, that death was the desired outcome.

Now if she posted on various gun forums that she personally equated firing a handgun in self-defense to be the equivalent of intending to kill someone, that shooting someone will cause death (versus death being a side effect of stopping a threat), and the DA finds these posts, then that could go a long way towards showing intent to kill. Recall that Charles Cotton once pointed out that those who equate any unintended discharge with a negligent discharge have effectively set a higher bar for their own defense If they are ever prosecuted for an unintended discharge... and their forum posts come to light. I would bet a similar effect would be in play here.

[C-dub]

In order to use deadly force don't there have to be justifications?

Whether she intended to kill or stop the "intruder" she did intend to use deadly force. Her justification is that she thought she was in her apartment. She wasn't. If she had been we wouldn't be discussing this at all. So,we'll have to wait and see if the jury believes her and if that makes a difference.

[srothstein]

As far as I know every police officer - and every good student of self-defense - is taught to shoot to stop a threat, not to shoot to kill. Thus there is no intention to cause death even though that is a possible outcome of using deadly force.

I think you missed part (b)(2) of the law. It is not only the intent to kill. It can be the intent to cause serious bodily injury and then performing an act which is dangerous to human life. She intended to shoot someone, which is an intent to cause serious bodily injury. The standard for serious bodily injury is not as high as most people think. Section 1.07 of the Penal Code defines it as:

(46) "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.

It would be hard to argue that shooting someone does not cause an impairment to some organ. And it is likely to cause a scar, which would be a permanent disfigurement.

But more importantly, 1.07(a)(17) defines a firearm as a deadly weapon, which is also anything that is designed or adapted or used to cause death or serious bodily injury. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, this means that using a firearm, in and of itself, is enough to prove intent to cause death or serious bodily injury. That makes shooting at someone, pretty much a case of murder or attempted murder. I know that a lot of prosecutors will not take this as a legal presumption but it can be taken that way, based strictly on the written word of the law. This is something all of us who carry might want to keep in mind. The politics of this case are also something we need to keep in mind, just in case.

As I said, I don't agree with the prosecution this way, but I do see how the law can applied this way.