"Police-assisted involuntary suicide"
[News] The USA Police State will never satisfy its lust for beating, gassing, and imprisoning minorities
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
And now she has been Indicted for murder.Finally charges and arrest... From the Dallas Morning News, copied the story because they've gotten really weird about letting people read their articles.
The Dallas police officer accused of fatally shooting Botham Jean in his apartment Thursday night has been arrested, officials said Sunday.
A warrant was issued for Amber Guyger, 30, and she was arrested Sunday and booked into the Kaufman County jail on a manslaughter charge, the Texas Department of Public Safety said.
Guyger fatally shot Jean, 26, after authorities said she mistook his apartment at the South Side Flats in the Cedars for her own.
The Texas Rangers took over the investigation from the Dallas Police Department and the warrant was issued after "subsequent coordination with the Dallas County District Attorney's Office," DPS said.
—Patrick
Rightfully so.
I don't see a murder charge holding up in this case. Manslaughter seems the most likely verdict. If this goes to trail w/o manslaughter, she will likely walk.
Voluntary manslaughter IF her defense can make a strong enough case she did not deliberately enter the “wrong” apartment. And if she has been indicted for murder, that means the prosecution has shown someone that it believes it has enough evidence to pursue that charge.
But yeah, I see a trial for murder that ends up being bargained down to VM.
—Patrick
But yeah, I see a trial for murder that ends up being bargained down to VM.
—Patrick
figmentPez
Staff member
NYPD officers pry 1-year-old child from mother's arms in startling video
I didn't have it in me to actually watch the video, but in short: Woman takes off work and waits for 4 hours at a social services office, trying to get a renewal for the child care benefits that allow her to work. She spends that time sitting on the floor because there aren't enough seats, and finally the staff call the police because they don't like her sitting on the floor. Multiple police were involved in tearing the baby from her mother's arms.
I didn't have it in me to actually watch the video, but in short: Woman takes off work and waits for 4 hours at a social services office, trying to get a renewal for the child care benefits that allow her to work. She spends that time sitting on the floor because there aren't enough seats, and finally the staff call the police because they don't like her sitting on the floor. Multiple police were involved in tearing the baby from her mother's arms.
figmentPez
Staff member
Minority
4. a racial, ethnic, religious, or social subdivision of a society that is subordinate to the dominant group in political, financial, or social power without regard to the size of these groups
The word minority also applies to groups that are lacking in power, regardless of what percentage of the population they are. We've covered this before when talking about women as minorities.
Okay I should first mention that I don't think anything that happened to her was right, it was a gross misuse of justice.
However, painting her death as anything other then a suicide feels like gross misinformation. Of course she does not seem suicidal in the video, but she didn't die five minutes after this.
To break down what we know about the events after this, Sandra was taken to jail and locked in a solitary cell. Her bond was posted at $5000, of which she needed $500 to be released. She stayed in jail for three days as her family and the bondman was unable to get the required payment at that time, likely due to the family being in Illinois. The man she was living with in Texas (never mentioned if they were romantic) refused to take her calls, leaving her utterly alone hundreds of miles from any support network.
I know three days does not seem like a lot, but imagine how you would feel in that situation. You went to jail for something stupid. The event likely cost you your new job. The person you are living with won't even speak with you, let alone help you. Your family can't seem to get the bond payment needed to release you. After three days you may wonder if your family even wants you released. All the while the only person you can speak with is some muffled inmate in the adjacent cell (it was noted in investigation that the officers themselves failed to check in on her at the required hourly cycle), all that can really weigh on you.
In the end, we don't know all the details, but I know if I was in her shoes, with my wife not speaking with me, my family seemingly unable to get $500 to release me, police officers ignoring me, solitary, etc... I would probably consider killing myself too. It shows how terrible the system is in general, that we even allowed her to get that point.
However, painting her death as anything other then a suicide feels like gross misinformation. Of course she does not seem suicidal in the video, but she didn't die five minutes after this.
To break down what we know about the events after this, Sandra was taken to jail and locked in a solitary cell. Her bond was posted at $5000, of which she needed $500 to be released. She stayed in jail for three days as her family and the bondman was unable to get the required payment at that time, likely due to the family being in Illinois. The man she was living with in Texas (never mentioned if they were romantic) refused to take her calls, leaving her utterly alone hundreds of miles from any support network.
I know three days does not seem like a lot, but imagine how you would feel in that situation. You went to jail for something stupid. The event likely cost you your new job. The person you are living with won't even speak with you, let alone help you. Your family can't seem to get the bond payment needed to release you. After three days you may wonder if your family even wants you released. All the while the only person you can speak with is some muffled inmate in the adjacent cell (it was noted in investigation that the officers themselves failed to check in on her at the required hourly cycle), all that can really weigh on you.
In the end, we don't know all the details, but I know if I was in her shoes, with my wife not speaking with me, my family seemingly unable to get $500 to release me, police officers ignoring me, solitary, etc... I would probably consider killing myself too. It shows how terrible the system is in general, that we even allowed her to get that point.
I like how you think it was her behaviour in the video that made me think that...
You be suprised. I see that argument a lot on Twitter today.
Involuntary manslaughter implies there was no intent to kill. I highly doubt that is the case here. I think it's yet another case of white police knowing they could get away with murdering a black person, like they so frequently do.
So, no, you did not fucking fix that for me.
You know, I thought you might argue this. I know you WANT the charge to be one of "murder," but there are actual examples suggesting that involuntary manslaughter would be the more appropriate charge due to a lack of mens rea., i.e., nobody was intentionally trying to kill her, so therefore, criminally, a charge of "murder" could not be levied.
--Patrick
figmentPez
Staff member
"I highly doubt that is the case here." - Null
I'm with Null on this one. Most likely these cops had every intention of causing death, and may have in fact been the direct cause of death, and tried to cover it up by faking a suicide.
I think it's absolutely baffling that you believe that's the case. Once again, we are dealing with a black person in police custody that had no support. I am positive they actively caused her death intentionally, and then covered it up. You know, like suppressing video evidence of wrongful arrest for years.
And I'm not denying the possibility that you are both correct in your read(s) of the situation. But you're still both going to have a hard time convincing a prosecutor to bring a charge of murder if you can't show how any of the cops actively participated in the process that ended her life. The Conrad Roy case has already shown that even if a person stations himself outside her cell and spends 8 straight hours repeating stuff out loud like "You suck. Your family hates you. You'd be better off dead. Did you know the pipes in the ceiling could easily bear your weight? I hear it only takes 7 minutes to die, and you black out in the first 90 seconds..." and so on, the most that person can be charged with is involuntary manslaughter, because that's exactly what Michelle Carter did, just over text.
It's called "burden of proof," and I believe in murder cases must be "beyond a reasonable doubt," because I'm pretty sure I remember that's why O. J. Simpson was not convicted (because the prosecution could not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that he was the murderer).
I have no doubt that the reason for suppressing the evidence was because they knew they'd be found guilty of SOMEthing, and didn't want to get in that kind of trouble, and therefore tried to hide it to avoid culpability. They should've surrendered the footage immediately, owned up to what happened, and taken their lumps (or terminations, or whatever), but that's not what happened. Because they were bad cops. Of this, at least, there is no doubt.
--Patrick
Last edited:
figmentPez
Staff member
I don't care what the courts say. That's murder. If the law says otherwise, the law needs to be changed.
figmentPez
Staff member
No, not exactly. There's a huge difference, namely that a police officer has a much greater amount of control over someone physically constrained in their custody. Regardless of Michelle Carter's psychological influence over Conrad Roy, she did not have legal or physical control over him. That alone makes the two cases incomparable.
"Infuriatingly fair," I think I described it, once. Everyone's assumed innocent until proven guilty, everyone, even people you hate. Even people you want to hate.
I'm not even attempting to be Devil's advocate, here. I'm just laying out the stuff you'd better have answers for if you want to make your case.
This sounds like something worth including in your proposal, something that would spell out the additional expectations and responsibilities that should apply to any sort of custodian (Parent, Guardian, Peace officer, Military, Medical, etc.).
--Patrick
figmentPez
Staff member
You're avoiding the issue, and you know it. Having someone in your custody already carries a standard of care that does not apply to someone who is not physically present. If someone's LDR girlfriend doesn't provide them with food and water, that's not legally anything. If anyone who has a person detained in their custody (jail, prison, hospital, or otherwise) doesn't provide them food and water, that's a huge issue legally.
Trying to compare words sent to someone via text, when that person has the option to not receive the texts, and has the option to seek help, is
fundamentally different than words spoken to someone who has been detained and is actively being blocked from seeking assistance. Girlfriends are not expected to be on suicide watch for their boyfriends, that's why there was reasonable doubt as to if she really knew that telling her boyfriend to kill himself would result in his death. However, police officers know that they are expected to keep an eye on distressed prisoners. If a police officer knowingly exacerbated the situation, and then proceeded to ignore standard checks, then that goes a long way to removing any reasonable doubt that they knew exactly the result their actions would have.
That's not even getting into the likelihood that more than words were used to kill Sandra Bland.
Last edited:
Fuck you, you pedantic ass. It's all well and good to be fair when it's an abstract situation, but what we have here is evidence that someone was arrested without grounds and recorded it, protested her rights, and wound up dead. Given that we have literally dozens of pages discussing the abuses people of color receive at the hands of the police, it's beyond playing Devil's Advocate to pretend there was no malice involved. It's fucking delusional.
I am not pretending there was no malice involved, not even a little. You obviously have a grudge, and that grudge is interfering with your ability to think clearly. Racism is not a zero-sum game, there is no mandatory pound of flesh which must be extracted 'ere the scales can finally be balanced and the specter of racism be laid to rest, and the longer and louder you proclaim otherwise, the more you are perpetuating the issue instead of working to end it.
Pez has a point that the expectation of a standard of care is higher in the case of custody, but I still feel like it would at most end up being a charge of negligent homicide, still not one of murder.
--Patrick
I wouldn't.
Americans have pretty much been conditioned to pay more attention to the victims behaviour when the perpetrator is a cop.
It's one of the big reasons why cops get away with it. Not as big as the thin blue line, but it's up there.
Post automatically merged:
And you'd be right!
I mean just look at this clear involuntary manslaughter this other cops did:
And anyone care to guess what charges where pressed before the video got leaked?
Last edited:
Once again miscommunication in action, really.
Patrick is saying that, no matter your personal views and beliefs, going to court with "murder" is more likely to get thrown out because clear intent couldn't be proven beyond a doubt.
Pez is saying that it is murder, no matter what the law says or one can prove.
Both can be true simultaneously. This may feel like it should be straight-up murder by your personal ethical system and feeling, yet in practice going to court and claiming homicide or manslaughter might be the far better choice because it has a much higher chance of actually getting a conviction.
The result of this dichotomy might, indeed, mean you think the law should be changed. Fair enough, there are ways of doing that. It won't change the fact that these cops are pretty likely to walk away free if they only get charged with murder.
Patrick is saying that, no matter your personal views and beliefs, going to court with "murder" is more likely to get thrown out because clear intent couldn't be proven beyond a doubt.
Pez is saying that it is murder, no matter what the law says or one can prove.
Both can be true simultaneously. This may feel like it should be straight-up murder by your personal ethical system and feeling, yet in practice going to court and claiming homicide or manslaughter might be the far better choice because it has a much higher chance of actually getting a conviction.
The result of this dichotomy might, indeed, mean you think the law should be changed. Fair enough, there are ways of doing that. It won't change the fact that these cops are pretty likely to walk away free if they only get charged with murder.
Thanks, @Bubble181 . I appreciate you taking the time to illuminate some of the nuances of what I'm saying, but I'm not sure those involved actually want to understand where I'm coming from. Their focus seems to be less about how to secure a conviction and more obsessing over how severe the punishment should be.
--Patrick
--Patrick