Grand Jury returns murder indictment for ex-Dallas officer

A Dallas grand jury has returned an indictment against Amber Guyger, the ex-Dallas PD officer accused of killing her neighbor Botham Jean.

For those who don't remember, in September, Jean was killed in his own apartment by Guyger, who claimed that she was on her way home after a shift and went to the wrong apartment, then shot Jean because she believed he was in her apartment and wasn't complying with her supposed verbal commands.

Texas Rangers arrested Guyger after an investigation and charged her with manslaughter. The grand jury, however, returned an indictment for a murder charge. The grand jury hearing is sealed, which I believe is standard in Texas, so we don't know what evidence was presented. What we do know is that the indictment was a "grand jury referral" which means the prosecutor asked the jury to return a true bill for murder rather than manslaughter.

I think this was a good move by the prosecutor, because a murder charge still includes manslaughter as a lesser included offense. Manslaughter's lesser included offenses are variations of aggravated assault. Criminally negligent homicide has no lesser included offenses whatsoever.

I couldn't find a date for the trial.

Dallas News article.

To bad they never searched her apartment and let her move out of it without ever searching it. But of course they searched his apartment and found some weed OMG .

They have done everything they can to assure a not guilty verdict.

a reply to: notsure1

Yea, yea. We did this in the last thread about this shooting.

They pulled her cell records, everything from text and calls to GPS information in apps, pulled her social media, pulled the data from her door lock, and pulled video from nearby surveillance cameras.

They searched his apartment because it's a crime scene. They listed finding weed because they found it, and if they hadn't listed finding weed, people like you would've been screaming about what else they found but hadn't listed. If they were going to lie about finding weed or were trying to smear Jean, I feel confident that they would've managed to find a lot more than ten grams of it.

a reply to: Shamrock6

They pulled her cell records, everything from text and calls to GPS information in apps, pulled her social media, pulled the data from her door lock, and pulled video from nearby surveillance cameras.

But they didnt search her apartment . Why?

They searched his apartment because it's a crime scene.

But they didnt search the one being charged with murder, Why?

Why dont we know what was found in her apartment? Oh yeah because they didnt bother to search it. Why?

They tried to cover for her in every way and will still try. they didnt even effing fire or charge her.

It took the Rangers to do it.

a reply to: Shamrock6

people like you

LOL. Racist

a reply to: Shamrock6

Wish we had a bit more info on this case. It's tough to say if the jury made the right decision.

I would never want to be a police officer in America. Most don't make enough money for an often tough and dangerous job.

Check out the great Youtube channel PoliceActivity.
Tons of epic videos that show how crazy the job can be.

Respect for the majority who wear the badge and serve properly!

originally posted by: Illumimasontruth
a reply to: Shamrock6

Wish we had a bit more info on this case. It's tough to say if the jury made the right decision.

I would never want to be a police officer in America. Most don't make enough money for an often tough and dangerous job.

Check out the great Youtube channel PoliceActivity.
Tons of epic videos that show how crazy the job can be.

Respect for the majority who wear the badge and serve properly!

This had nothing to do with how hard it is to be a cop. Just how hard it is to be a good neighbor.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Thanks so much for explaining the legalities of this case (and so many others). I probably make you crazy with some/much of what I spout off, but I really do appreciate it -- and you.

I'm surprised the prosecutor asked for higher charges than the Rangers. Not sure what to make of it, but I'm not ready to believe the worst either.

We'll see what plays out, eh?

This cant happen the way the cop says it did.

No way in hell she didnt know she wasnt in her apartment. There was even a very distinct matt at the door that she would have known wasnt hers.

This is pre meditated murder . But I bet she walks. Because they gave her a chance to destroy all the evidence in her apartment

a reply to: notsure1

I agree completely.

The way I view it...if she was a citizen, not an officer, would they have searched her apartment? Yes? Then it's pretty screwed up that they didn't search her apartment, and it's pretty obvious that it was because she's an officer.

Now, if they wouldn't have searched a regular citizen's apartment either, then I'm ok with it.

I'm pretty sure the first scenario is how it'd play out if she were just a citizen, but I'm not entirely sure.

It can be first degree without any evidence supporting it in her apartment.

This has to be one of the saddest, yet at the same time most insane cases I have ever read, and I've been on ATS a while.

A trained LEO walks into the wrong apartment, possibly missing obvious visual clues that it is not her apartment and someone else opened the door or whatever she then said... Then she shot the person, exited the room, backup was alerted and she walked to the balcony to cry as other officers arrived?

It sounds like a very strange and very sad story. I wish Columbo was still around. My condolences to his family.

a reply to: notsure1

If you want to ask the same questions that have been asked in the other thread, you're welcome to re-read the answers in the other thread.

Reposting them here won't get new answers.

they didnt even effing fire or charge her.

Aside from that tiny little detail where they did fire her. And that other little detail about them not arresting her because, despite DPD stating they were in the process of getting an arrest warrant, the Rangers told Dallas PD not to since the Rangers had taken over the investigation. Y'know, those Rangers you say are the ones that had to do it? Yea, those guys are the ones that said not to arrest her yet.

If you're going to try and post diatribes about things, you could at least attempt to have some semblance of a clue as to what's happened.

So far, I agree with this decision. You don't go into the wrong apartment "accidentally" and shoot an innocent man. Especially not as a police officer.

Most cops in this country are great but there is a percentage, somewhere between 5 and 10 percent, depending on location who are criminal at worst.

I think all that we're asking for, is that those bad cops are not above the law. We just want to know that cops can't get away with murder, and abuse and criminal activity of any kind. Bad cops are nothing new, Serpico from the 70s comes to mind.

a reply to: Illumimasontruth

Since the murder charge still has the lesser included offense, I think they made the right call. What evidence we do know of supports a manslaughter charge better than a murder charge, but to me this says that the investigation has turned up better evidence and prosecutors felt a murder charge was within reach.

Should they fail to make that case, I think a manslaughter case is very winnable.

a reply to: Boadicea

It will be interesting to see what evidence has come out of all the devices they seized during the investigation. My bet is that investigators found something there, or on video, or both, that they felt supported the upgraded charge.

So far looks like the system is working correctly in this case, next it will be up to the people on the jury to do their job and if the evidence supports it return a guilty verdict.

a reply to: Shamrock6

So they didnt arrest her that night because the rangers told them not to? BULL CACA

They should have arrested her and searched her apartment that night.

Why do you have such a hard time admitting she was given VIP treatment because she was a cop

a reply to: notsure1

So you are in favor of arrest before an investigation and securing evidence of potential guilt?

Innocent till proven guilty right?

originally posted by: amazing
So far, I agree with this decision. You don't go into the wrong apartment "accidentally" and shoot an innocent man. Especially not as a police officer.

Most cops in this country are great but there is a percentage, somewhere between 5 and 10 percent, depending on location who are criminal at worst.

I think all that we're asking for, is that those bad cops are not above the law. We just want to know that cops can't get away with murder, and abuse and criminal activity of any kind. Bad cops are nothing new, Serpico from the 70s comes to mind.

Sadly it's way higher than 5 and 10 percent. It's realistically around 60-75%. Corruption is odd that way, and anyone who has any experience with corporate business knows how corrupt everyone is. Police are easier to corrupt because it's inherently more difficult to be caught or punished. You basically have to murder your neighbor in his apartment and claim you thought it was your own to get caught.

And every cop who knows a corrupt cop is also corrupt himself because he allows his fellow officer to be corrupt, because "blue blood."