TexasCHLforum.com

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Fri Jan 13, 2023 10:40 am
<SNIP>

Like you, I won't pretend to have the answers but here we are. Now what is coming next? It is not likely to get better.

I believe another wrote that Dean violated all sorts of policies and made several tactical mistakes. I'd agree 100% on the latter. As to the former not one supervisor, training officer or street officer could be found to assert Dean made ANY mistakes. The only one to assert that was the Colorado import that had previously defended the officer in a case with worse facts than Dean (that was an entertaining cross and about the only thing Dean's team did right).

The policy I would like to see addressed is treating an open structure as a burglary in progress. That sets up a tension that doesn't necessarily need to be there. The neighbor was concerned because it was so uncharacteristic and he was afraid to investigate any further. The cops see a messy house and presume it's been ransacked... with all of the lights on? God help me if they show up at my house and see inside I wouldn't drop my guard but I'd be a lot less wound up if a house is standing open with all of it's lights on as opposed to a door ajar and a dark house. Most burglars I don't think turn on any lights when they're in a home.

I have "investigated" neighbors' houses that were left unsecured unusually. There are ways to do that without exposing oneself.

I think where we talk past each other is labeling her "carrying" her handgun with the laser on netting her the death penalty. That ignores that she pointed the weapon at dean, albeit justifiably. Her nephew even said he saw a badge when she pointed the gun. Had she won that gunfight and FWPD didn't go all Las Vegas on her, she would have been completely justified. But the policies, tactical errors and lack of experience... even twitchiness shouldn't matter in the criminal case. Civil is another matter.

What matters is:

• Was it lawful for him to be there? He was on duty and dispatched on an open structure that policy dictated be treated as a burglary in progress.
• Was proceeding through an unlocked gate lawful? He was investigating the property to see if anyone was there. A locked gate may have altered that analysis.
• Was he in REASONABLE fear of imminent death or great bodily harm? He saw a "silhouette" pointing a gun at him with the laser sight hitting the glass. A fact verified by the nephew in the contemporaneous forensic interview.

Where a lot of our heartburn lives, in my opinion, was there was an innocent who lost her life and the police took it. We can argue how suited he was for the job, the hiring crisis that put two very inexperienced officers in that situation and we can Monday morning quarterback his "errors" until we're blue in the face. But if we get to a state where we are judged by our non-criminal errors leading up to the imminent threat, we're doomed.

I don't have any love for Dean, don't know the man. And it's not a factor of supporting cops, etc. It's that an aberrant ADA and feckless defense buried this guy with little, if any, hope for his appeal to be taken up. That we're at a place that a lawyer can literally sleep through a lot of the case and not be appealable for ineffective counsel scares the water out of me. That such a gross malpractice by a prosecutor can be allowed to stand and there's no recourse because your representation didn't object on time, every time diminishes the presumption of innocence. Yes, I realize that an appeal starts from the assumption of guilt but maybe a little more balance should be sought.

For me, it's not whether he was a scared and sloppy cop operating under problematic response policies and models. Or whether he woulda, shoulda, coulda in 20/20 hindsight. It's whether he was supposed to be there and was the self defense justified. If you take out the fact that an innocent was killed and hypothesize the same fact pattern with a bad guy, would he have been justified? I think we'd mostly say yes.

Eddited multiple times for fat fingers.

chasfm11 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:25 pm

Dragonfighter wrote: ↑Sat Dec 17, 2022 10:00 am

What's the mixed feeling? Both were testified to and both were supported by the fact pattern. The problem a lot of people have is she wasn't a bad guy. There weren't any "bad guys" in this instant. Sadly, that happens regularly. The facts, including Dean's testimony would back up her justified use of force if she was the one left standing.

My problem was the ungodly malpractice by the prosecutors and a feckless defense. Watching this and a few other trials gavel to gavel scared the daylights out of me. I dropped the trigger on some insurance.

The mixed feeling is that she, like Jerry Waller, were in their homes doing nothing wrong and both ended up dead at the hands of a police officer. To believe that is OK is to believe that there is not a reason for someone to have a self-defense handgun on the outside chance that a police officer will show up at their house and kill them because of it.
1. The police have operate on the premise that the home owner might be legally armed if there is not a direct reason to KNOW otherwise. The suspicion of a POSSIBLE burglary is not sufficient Was the chance of catching a burglar in the act worth an innocent person's life? That as exactly the same premise as Waller.
2. The police testimony in the Waller case was as iron clad as it was in this one. Unfortunately, there is no badge came (at least that I've seen or heard about) to corroborate those statements. I'm sorry but to believe that she was well versed in the use of a laser and he didn't enve know how to turn that laser off is a stretch of imagination for me.

Like others on this forum, I'm a strong supporter of the police. That does not mean that I agree with every thing that they do. I imagine myself in this same situation as this woman that that scares me.

Oh please don't misunderstand me. There's a lot wrong here; not the least of which is an innocent homeowner is dead at the hands of the government. And had she won the gunfight, I'd expect her to be found justified.

There's probably a long and bumpy road and growing pangs that FWPD will have to undergo to review and/or change their policies. But the call was legitimate and the entrance to the yard was legitimate, by law at any rate, and the reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm.

Regardless of how bad any <insert Dean shortcoming(s) here>, was he reasonable in his belief and was he within the law? IMHO, he was. But so was she. The failings and shortcomings that created the perfect storm need to be curry combed and probably changed. The most obvious one is the pairing of rookies on a response but that is largely a by-product of senior personnel exodus across the country.

He might also be a jerk, I don't know but indulge me, but that doesn't mean he should necessarily spend the next 12 years in prison. It certainly doesn't mean a DA should be allowed to misstate the law and the burden of proof and thanks to an inadequate defense have no appeal.

I don't have mixed emotions. It sickens me that a young woman is dead for no other reason than attempting to defend her home and nephew. It scares me that a man can be railroaded despite a pretty obvious self defense fact pattern. Texas has great laws, but if prosecutors are allowed to act that way and judges don't do anything about it, there's no hope for the innocent unless they have excellent and probably expensive attorneys.

At least, with competent counsel, there'd be issues preserved for appeal. I have no faith that, with this ADA and judge, anyone could reasonably hope for an acquittal.

[/rant]

chasfm11 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:11 pm Officer found guilty of manslaughter

https://news.yahoo.com/jury-finds-fort- ... 15602.html

I still have a lot of mixed feelings on this case. I personally listened to a radio broadcast of the officer testifying live. He said that she pointed a laser on her gun at him. He testified that he had trouble turning the laser off after he got her gun. Some of reports said that he saw her silhouette with a gun in her hand.

What's the mixed feeling? Both were testified to and both were supported by the fact pattern. The problem a lot of people have is she wasn't a bad guy. There weren't any "bad guys" in this instant. Sadly, that happens regularly. The facts, including Dean's testimony would back up her justified use of force if she was the one left standing.

My problem was the ungodly malpractice by the prosecutors and a feckless defense. Watching this and a few other trials gavel to gavel scared the daylights out of me. I dropped the trigger on some insurance.