Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She can claim anything she wants, but fact is she was not lawfully in the apartment, and killed the person who was lawfully, and the resident, of the apartment.
Everything the defense are throwing up is just an attempt to knock some years off the sentencing.
What is the sentence that it should be? I think 25, minimum 10 to serve. I do not know, maybe opinion change as the trial happens, but any lying in my opinion just adds time to me. If she just came out and stated exactly what happened, then that is one thing, but adding BS (even from her lawyer) into it just irks me and I want even more jail time for her.
There's no evidence that she told anything but maybe one story that the Texas Rangers have in the arrest warrant. From what I've seen she seems to be contrite, forthcoming and only told one story to the Rangers.
Shooting first and asking questions later is not acceptable. Entering the wrong apartment might have been an honest mistake, but she chose to pull that trigger.
She could claim she fired her gun twice for a bunch of reasons, but the obvious reason was to cause serious bodily injury to the person she shot at. She hit the mark, causing his death. That fits right into one of the definitions of murder.
She hasn't admitted to manslaughter or any other crime.
I was commenting/responding to the other poster who had said in the article she read, that the officer had admitted to recklessly firing her weapon.
Either way, as badly as many of us want it (and keep arguing in circles). She will not be found guilty of murder. Manslaughter, I can definitely see. Murder, no. As much as I think she probably deserves murder, there is not the evidence, and you can't convince me (I've read your and everyone else's comments). Everyone will just have to wait and see since we are arguing in circles.
There's no evidence that she told anything but maybe one story that the Texas Rangers have in the arrest warrant. From what I've seen she seems to be contrite, forthcoming and only told one story to the Rangers.
A search warrant states she was confronted at the door by an unknown male. The arrest warrant states she saw a large silhouette, nothing about a confrontation at the door.
None of us know whether or not she's been forthcoming or told one story to the Rangers. Until her statements to local LEO and Rangers are public, there's no 'evidence' either way. Of course she seems and probably is contrite; only the worst and dumbest criminals don't seem contrite.
A search warrant states she was confronted at the door by an unknown male. The arrest warrant states she saw a large silhouette, nothing about a confrontation at the door.
None of us know whether or not she's been forthcoming or told one story to the Rangers. Until her statements to local LEO and Rangers are public, there's no 'evidence' either way. Of course she seems and probably is contrite; only the worst and dumbest criminals don't seem contrite.
The "confrontation" at the door makes more sense since, again, those are heavy fire doors, and there is no way she could have forced her way in with her key, and they do not stay ajar. Were I to guess, I'll go along with she didn't realize she was parking on the 4th floor, she didn't realize she walked down to where her door would be on the 3rd floor but was actually on the 4th floor. And really, that's giving a lot, but whatever, I'll give it.
Where I draw the line is when she a) did not see the bright red rug outside the front door - that she had to stand on to put her key into the door and b) the lights on the door will turn red (like a hotel door) if the wrong key is inserted into the lock, and it will not open.
So she's jiggling her key around in the lock, the innocent man in his own home hears this, comes to the door and opens it, and there she is, in uniform, trying to get into his apartment.
That makes more sense than her claiming that she forced the "ajar" door open with her key. (You don't have to force a door open if it's already ajar.)
A search warrant states she was confronted at the door by an unknown male. The arrest warrant states she saw a large silhouette, nothing about a confrontation at the door.
None of us know whether or not she's been forthcoming or told one story to the Rangers. Until her statements to local LEO and Rangers are public, there's no 'evidence' either way. Of course she seems and probably is contrite; only the worst and dumbest criminals don't seem contrite.
It was reported she was not interviewed for the search warrant, only the arrest warrant.
You should contrast that with Officer Noor after shooting Justine Damond wouldn't answer any questions or cooperate with investigators and let his lawyer do all the talking, and wasn't arrest for 8 months.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
