Re: Dallas cop claims self-defense in apt. mix-up murder trial
Posted: Wed Oct 02, 2019 3:38 pm
That was extremely moving.
dedicated to the discussion of the chinese internal martial arts of xingyiquan, baguazhang, taijiquan, related arts, and anything else best discussed over a bottle of rum
http://rumsoakedfist.org/
Chris Krok: Pete Schulte – An Unprecedented Act
Posted on October 3, 2019
Pete Schulte joined the Chris Krok show to discuss the sentence handed down by the jury. He says what happened during sentencing is something he’s never seen in his career…
Steve James wrote:They're both minorities too. I didn't know there were 8 women. I need to readjust my perspective once again, though I won't. What the female juror said about the emotions and considerations of remorse, etc., in the jury room is exactly what I said it would be like. They admit it, but that's why there are juries --they are not expected to leave their feelings at the door because they are there to seek Justice.
Steve James wrote:The Black? woman even said that she couldn't imagine giving Guyger 28 years. The man (a minority in the jury and in the world) said he was shocked about the 5 to 99 year possible sentence. They all acknowledged that what Guyger did was a mistake, an accident. Any reasonable (unprejudiced) person will see that. Yes, as you said, "regardless of race," and now we can add sex.
Steve James wrote:Afa Pete Schulte, his speculations are as good as anyone else's. Guyger's reaction at trial was that she wishes she had died, instead of Jean. I think her reaction, the reaction of Jean's brother, and the Jean family is a better takeaway from this incident than Schulte's claim of a "compromised jury." Otoh, we can learn something from that too.
It was a "mistake of fact" which was in the jury instructions. Since all the jurors acknowledged Amber acted in self defense by mistake, the correct decision by following the law is not guilty.
Schulte did not claim "compromised jury."
Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:It was a "mistake of fact" which was in the jury instructions. Since all the jurors acknowledged Amber acted in self defense by mistake, the correct decision by following the law is not guilty.
This is your interpretation, which is a stretch as I have pointed out. I pointed out what murder is according to Texas law. Manslaughter would be reasonable if she killed him by accident. But, she didn't accidentally shoot him. She murdered him.
marvin8 wrote:Published on Sep 24, 2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wpQQKwbXD8
Published on Sep 23, 2019 8:59 PM
Former police officer, prosecutor, and now criminal defense attorney Pete Schulte joined the Chris Krok Show to talk about the Amber Guyger trial; he doesn't think the prosecution has much of a case...
https://omny.fm/shows/chris-krok/chris- ... ber-guyger
marvin8 wrote:Right. However, Judge Kemp included "mistake of fact" in the jury instructions which if not disproved gave Amber the legal right to believe it was her own house and defend herself.
Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:I was talking with my wife about the sentence yesterday. Ten years seems reasonable. I thought the family asking for 26 years was interesting. But, I do recognize she made a mistake. It wasn't premeditated even if she did shoot him.
Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Do you think ten years is reasonable in this case (murder and manslaughter aside for the moment)?
Steve James wrote:Well, first, "mistake of fact" like "self defense" are only defenses that the jury considers among the possible verdicts they are given. A jury can reject those defenses.
Steve James wrote:Schulte did not claim "compromised jury."
You're right. He said in that the "verdict" was compromised, and then he talks about the jury.
But, they agreed with Amber's defense of "mistake of fact." They "all agreed it was a mistake (at 1:35).
No, he did not say that. He said that if the jury renders a manslaughter verdict, there would be a compromised verdict.
Steve James wrote:But, they agreed with Amber's defense of "mistake of fact." They "all agreed it was a mistake (at 1:35).
They agreed it was a mistake; they obviously didn't agree that it was a defense.
Steve James wrote:marvin8 wrote:No, he did not say that. He said that if the jury renders a manslaughter verdict, there would be a compromised verdict.
Ok, here's the link to the clip you provided. The first thing he mentions is the speed of the sentencing deliberation, then what does he say next with the word "compromised"? Anybody, start at .35 seconds http://www.wbap.com/2019/10/03/chris-kr ... ented-act/
http://www.wbap.com/2019/10/03/chris-krok-pete-schulte-an-unprecedented-act/
marvin8 wrote:Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:It was a "mistake of fact" which was in the jury instructions. Since all the jurors acknowledged Amber acted in self defense by mistake, the correct decision by following the law is not guilty.
This is your interpretation, which is a stretch as I have pointed out. I pointed out what murder is according to Texas law. Manslaughter would be reasonable if she killed him by accident. But, she didn't accidentally shoot him. She murdered him.
It's not "my" interpretation. I included videos (1st page) of attorneys explaining, posted a link to the "mistake of fact" penal code and explained it the same way. You did not point out a stretch in self defense by "mistake of fact" which is a legal defense in TX.
“Mistake of fact” is explained by these two attorneys starting at 3:56 and 1:05, respectively. If you think these attorneys' explanations are "a stretch," please post your own explanation and argument.marvin8 wrote:Published on Sep 24, 2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wpQQKwbXD8
Published on Sep 23, 2019 8:59 PM
Former police officer, prosecutor, and now criminal defense attorney Pete Schulte joined the Chris Krok Show to talk about the Amber Guyger trial; he doesn't think the prosecution has much of a case...
https://omny.fm/shows/chris-krok/chris- ... ber-guygermarvin8 wrote:Right. However, Judge Kemp included "mistake of fact" in the jury instructions which if not disproved gave Amber the legal right to believe it was her own house and defend herself.Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:I was talking with my wife about the sentence yesterday. Ten years seems reasonable. I thought the family asking for 26 years was interesting. But, I do recognize she made a mistake. It wasn't premeditated even if she did shoot him.
Right, she made a "mistake of fact" which is a legal defense making her not guilty.Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Do you think ten years is reasonable in this case (murder and manslaughter aside for the moment)?
By following the law, no. She should be found not guilty and serve no time given the laws of TX. As all the jurors acknowledged, the prosecution did not disprove Ambers claim of justified self defense.
We can not follow the law and decide verdicts by speculating or using our gut feelings. It may work at times. But, it may not work at other times. May be laws need to be changed to address this rare situation. However, that is another subject.
Steve James wrote:Anyway, 12 people decided the way they did. I'm not interested in debating why. My complaint is that their ethnic and gender composition is given to support the opinion she should have been acquitted, or that they caused the verdict to be compromised.
Steve James wrote:I don't know what he means by compromised, but I note that he was discussing it with the podcaster before the verdict. Thing is, if they'd acquitted her, nobody would change their opinion about them anyway.
marvin8 wrote:Schulte did not claim "compromised jury." He said they gave a correct verdict (either murder or not guilty) but, apparently did not understand "mistake by fact" in the jury instructions. Schulte said that convicting Amber on the lesser charge of manslaughter would be a "compromise verdict" inconsistent with Texas law.