Video: Police, Judicial and Moral Perspectives on Case

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Apparently all of my instincts regarding this case seem to be accurate. According to this video Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger is planning "Mistake of Fact" defense to escape conviction in this case:

Texas Codes > Penal Code > Title 2 > Chapter 8 > § 8.02
Texas Penal Code 8.02 – Mistake of Fact
Current as of: 2016 | Check for updates | Other versions
(a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.
(b) Although an actor’s mistake of fact may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of any lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact were as he believed.

Terms Used In Texas Penal Code 8.02

• Actor: means a person whose criminal responsibility is in issue in a criminal action. See Texas Penal Code 1.07
• Law: means the constitution or a statute of this state or of the United States, a w

​

 

[whitehall]

Maybe the crazy left needs to read the Constitution in addition to the Texas Penal Code where it says a person is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

 

[miketx]

All that matters to the OP is that a black man was shot by a non black cop. Nothing else matters, nothing.

 

[SavannahMann]

All that matters to the OP is that a black man was shot by a non black cop. Nothing else matters, nothing.

Great. So tell me under what circumstances someone can enter your house uninvited, without a warrant, or probable cause, and shoot you without committing a crime.

 

[miketx]

All that matters to the OP is that a black man was shot by a non black cop. Nothing else matters, nothing.

Great. So tell me under what circumstances someone can enter your house uninvited, without a warrant, or probable cause, and shoot you without committing a crime.

Troll, I never said no crime was committed, it clearly is or may be a crime. I stated that all that matters to the OP is a non black cop shot a black man. Stop trying to deflect.

 

[SavannahMann]

All that matters to the OP is that a black man was shot by a non black cop. Nothing else matters, nothing.

Great. So tell me under what circumstances someone can enter your house uninvited, without a warrant, or probable cause, and shoot you without committing a crime.

Troll, I never said no crime was committed, it clearly is or may be a crime. I stated that all that matters to the OP is a non black cop shot a black man. Stop trying to deflect.

So it is a crime. Great. Now, we have that established. It was obviously a big leap for you to admit that, and I am pleased with your honesty.

Now, let’s see if you can continue this trend, or if we are going to see you go off the rails again. If it was a crime, and you admit it was, then any attempt to minimize it, or to diminish the severity of the crime, is at the minimum unethical. Let’s put it in terms you would identify with shall we?

Let’s say for the sake of argument, that a cop was killed in his own home by someone who had entered it “mistakenly”. Would the police wait for three days before arresting the individual? Would the charge be simple manslaughter? Or would the police, their supporters, and especially the union be pushing for Murder in the First, with special circumstances for the Death Penalty?

We already know the answer to that question. When a police officer was assaulted, and the Judge set the bail for the defendant at $1,000 the union and the supporters were outraged at the damned Liberals for making the cops jobs harder and more dangerous. The baddie was charged with assaulting the police officer, but the bail was too low for the pleasure of the Cops, and the bail was later amended upwards to $50,000.

Again, the baddie was charged with the crime, and “public” outcry demanded a higher bond. For some reason, that kind of “Public” outcry is perfectly acceptable. Why is it that public outcry is not acceptable in the reverse?