Cop Enters Wrong Apartment, kills Neighbor - No Charges


#428

You can overlook a lot when you’re not expecting anything. I got into and tried to start the wrong car once. The interior tipped me off that it wasn’t mine. But I’ll ask you what you thought happened? Do you not believe she thought she was at her apartment? If not, what’s the alternative? She is at fault for a lot here without having to pick at this issue.


#429

Having pot in the house is not germane to the case either.


#430

It’s relevant because it’s unlawful, to not conduct a thorough search of the apartment would be an act of gross negligence on the part of the PD since it’s where the shooting occurred.


#431

What probable cause was there to search the victim’s home for any evidence except as it related to the shooting? Now maybe the pot was sitting on a table in the room where he was shot and in full view. Still not relevant to what happened.

There as NO reason to announce it.


#432

Don’t cops often search homes of people accused of crimes, even if the crime didn’t happen in their own residence?


#433

A warrant was issued on probable cause to search the entire apartment. There was every reason to report anything illegal turned up in the search to maintain the credibility of the investigation and to prevent giving the defense any cause to claim reasonable doubt because evidence was hidden.


#434

If thee is probable cause to do so such as a search for additional illegal weapons when someone is caught with same, or for drugs when caught with same.

In order to obtain such a warrant you must provide an affidavit of probable cause to a judge.


#435

Any illegal contraband found is germane to the case. Hiding what was found would be improper.


#436

It’s really simple. If they don’t report it the prosecution of the suspect could be in jeopardy. You can think something isn’t relevant, but better to be safe than sorry.


#437

Not when it belonged to the victim. It has nothing to do with what happened.


#438

You keep repeating this with no basis in fact.

You also continue ignoring the fact that it’s presence in no way helps Guyger’s case, but failing to do so does.

The presence of the MJ in no way justifies her actions. Hiding it could jeopardize her prosecution.

Only one person in this case had a justifiable claim of self defense, and he’s dead.’

The objective now is to build the strongest case possible for prosecuting the shooter.


#439

What possible reason do we need to know they found pot in his house? Who cares? It’s got nothing to do with the shooting. Nothing.

It’s no more relevant than if they reported alcohol was found, although alcohol is a legal substance and (I think) marijuana isn’t in Texas. But so what?


#440

Even if he was drunk or stoned at the time of the shooting, how does that help her case?

I see this as smearing the victim.


#441

It has everything to do with protecting the prosecution’s case and the public’s right to know. We have a right to know what was found on the search and any attempt to hide it aids the prosecution as we’ve repeatedly stated.


#442

I’m no lawyer, but fail to see how saying marijuana was found in his apartment aids the prosecution. That’s the dumbest argument I’ve heard yet.


#443

Neither helps her case, she had no lawful use of deadly force period, no lawful claim of self defense at all period.

This isn’t about helping her it’s about presenting the strongest possible case against her.

She entered the apartment unlawfully, everything she did following was unlawful as well.


#444

Failing to disclose it would aid her case by creating doubt about all of the evidence obtained by the police.


#445

Yes, I’m sure saying pot was found in his home will result in a conviction.

And no, we don’t have a right to know. Not everything. Police are often tight lipped while conducting an investigation. Many police and prosecutors withhold information from the public, as they have every right to do, to protect the integrity of the investigation and to be able to find an unbiased jury, should it result in going to trial.

We do NOT need to know these things.


#446

I wish @DLaw was here.


#447

The reports of the search are a matter of public record therefore we have a right to know.

Legally they can only withhold privileged information and then only until discovery.