thought of it in those exact terms. But, it makes sense to me.. and I'm sure they have lawyers around there who know the law.
It is amazing they're taking the victim's side.
I'm hoping the same, Crunchy Frog.. I'm glad I saw your OP.
First, police sources are reportedly indicating that Guyger may actually try to raise the fact that Jean didnt obey her commands as a defense. Its not a defense. The moment she opened the door to an apartment that wasnt her own, she wasnt operating as a police officer clothed with the authority of the law. She was instead a criminal. She was breaking into another persons home. She was an armed home invader, and the person clothed with the authority of law to defend himself was Botham Shem Jean.
Which brings us to the second troubling element of the story. So far, Guyger is only charged with manslaughter. But all the available evidence indicates that she intentionally shot Jean. This wasnt a warning shot gone awry. The pistol didnt discharge during a struggle. She committed a crime by forcing open Jeans door, deliberately took aim, and killed him.
Texas law defines murder quite simply as intentionally or knowingly caus[ing] the death of an individual. Manslaughter, by contrast, occurs when a person recklessly causes death. Guygers warning and her deliberate aim scream intent. She may have recklessly gone to the wrong apartment, but she very intentionally killed Jean. There is a chance that the grand jury will increase the charge to murder, so the early manslaughter charge is tentative. But I ask you: If Jean had mistakenly gone to Guygers apartment and then gunned her down in cold blood after demanding that she follow his commands, would he face a manslaughter charge?
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/amber-guyger-botham-jean-shooting-police-must-face-impartial-justice/