It almost like people are saying the victim is wrong from getting up and inquiring about who is walking in HIS house. Since it is HIS house, he does not have to retreat.

I guarantee if you went through a high level shoot - don't shoot simulator 90% of you would fail miserably.....you're continually ignoring what the law says because "you feel, or you think" it should be this or that. The law is the law, period. You don't get to ignore it because it's not going to punish her enough.

Guyger took eight hours of de-escalation training in April before shooting Botham Jean, according to evidence presented by Jason Hermus, Dallas County prosecutor.

Hermus suggested that Guyger used none of the de-escalation training she received during her encounter with Jean. Hermus asked Guyger if she had changed any of the ways that she did business after taking the de-escalation training.

“Do you remember them saying take advantage of time so that additional resources can be routed to you?” Hermus asked.

“I don’t remember,” Guyger said. “It’s been awhile since I took that class.”

After mistakenly opening the door to Jean’s apartment, Guyger had choices, Hermus pointed out during his cross-examination.

“Your options were go in and find the threat or wait outside and call for backup?” Hermus asked. “Your training says that to maximize your safety, do not go inside that apartment. For your safety, you should have taken a position of cover and concealment and called for help.”

Guyger said that she could have.

Hermus said that backup, SWAT units, would have been to her location in two minutes, and Guyger indicated that they would have.

Read more here: https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/crime/article235512537.html#storylink=cpy

I wonder, if Amber Guyger had been in any other profession, and this exact same scenario had played out. Would Botham Jean be dead?

I wonder, if Amber Guyger had been in any other profession, and this exact same scenario had played out. Would Botham Jean be dead?

Exact same scenario, including that she would be carrying mace, a taser, and a hand gun?

I know. Somehow his rights were transferred over to her.

I can understand all of it. Much of what you addressed can be explained by understanding how the brain works. It prioritizes certain functions over other functions...it has to make choices. She most likely couldn’t have noticed any of the things you mention. She was too vested in her mistaken assumption.

If you listened to her testimony, her all-in belief was that it was her apartment. She was 100% vested in that belief. As such, she found herself awakened from auto-pilot mode and instantaneously thrust into a “an intruder is in my apartment” situation. Her brain was trying to help her navigate an extremely volatile/dangerous situation, focused on preserving her life...it was already dialed-in to “fight or flight” mode.

Any channels for processing non-essential (as determined by the brain) information would be closed...or perhaps cleared and made exclusively available for achieving the unconscious “stay alive” objective. Tunnel vision to the nth degree. And in her testimony, she mentioned being aware of the things you mention...but only well after she had shot him. And then she described it and mentioned “being confused”. She almost seemed still confused...almost like “how did this happen?”

Not only is it plausible...it’s +/- not a whole lot of exactly how our brains are wired to work. To me, the crux of this case is in that one phrase she said on the tape, and she said it over and over and over and over...almost as though it was only her brain talking - “I thought it was my apartment”.

Would we have to walk into a wrong apartment in this simulator? If she doesn’t walk into the wrong apartment a person wouldn’t be dead. She is 100% liable and deserves 100% of the consequence

Not answering any more stupid [censored] questions either....some [censored] sure keyboard boys up in here.