Police officer walked into a man's home — mistaking it for her own — and kills him

[SummerMadness]

Police officer walked into a man's home — mistaking it for her own — and kills him

A police officer in Dallas shot and killed a man she thought was in her apartment — only, it wasn't actually her apartment, authorities said. After her shift ended Thursday night, the officer mistakenly entered the wrong apartment, Dallas Police Chief Renee Hall told reporters on Friday afternoon. The man who lived there — identified as 26-year-old Botham Shem Jean — was home when the officer entered; while it's unclear exactly what happened between Jean and the officer, Hall said, the officer fired her weapon.

Dallas police officer charged with manslaughter after shooting man in apartment she thought was hers

A Dallas police officer who shot and killed her neighbor and later explained that she had mistaken his apartment for her own will be charged with manslaughter, the police chief said Friday.

It's not clear what the officer may have said to 26-year-old Botham Jean between entering his home and shooting him late Thursday, police Chief U. Renee Hall said during a news conference. But given what investigators currently know about the case, they decided to pursue a manslaughter charge, she said.

Bizarre.

 

[Sabertooth]

How would a police officer "get confused" about which apartment was hers?

Why didn't she question the differences in decor...?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Police officer walked into a man's home — mistaking it for her own — and kills him


Dallas police officer charged with manslaughter after shooting man in apartment she thought was hers


Bizarre.

Was the officer was sober or drunk?

 

[PreviouslySeeking...]

I wonder if they drew blood for a tox screen on the officer. I don't understand how a sober person could do this.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

That is why you lock your door while at home.

 

[Not David]

Police officer walked into a man's home — mistaking it for her own — and kills him


Dallas police officer charged with manslaughter after shooting man in apartment she thought was hers


Bizarre.

Hope that he can fully pay for the killing of the innocent. Also, I hope he feels guilty for his actions.

 

[Sabertooth]

Hope that he can fully pay for the killing of the innocent. Also, I hope he feels guilty for his actions.

("He" is a she...)

 

[Hank77]

That is why you lock your door while at home.

Why would she walk into an unlocked apartment without checking that it was hers. Surely she doesn't leave hers unlocked when she isn't home.

 

[Not David]

("He" is a she...)

Ooops!

 

[Sabertooth]

Surely she doesn't leave hers unlocked when she isn't home.

That is probably why her gun was drawn.

 

[Hank77]

That is probably why her gun was drawn.

Probably but I think I'd stop a second to make sure of where I was.

 

[TerranceL]

I mean she had to be under the influence of something right?

I can't imagine what sort of defense her lawyer is going to come up with.

I feel bad for the dude and his family.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Police officer walked into a man's home — mistaking it for her own — and kills him


Dallas police officer charged with manslaughter after shooting man in apartment she thought was hers


Bizarre.

That is bizarre...hopefully she was immediately tested for drugs and alcohol. I could understand alcohol impairing one's ability to correctly identify their apartment, especially if she had recently moved in. If that's the case though, she shouldn't have had a gun and should be convicted accordingly.

I have a feeling there might have been something up between these two that she hasn't admitted to yet.

It's hard to imagine a plausible scenario where she was sober, walked into this guy's apartment, he tells her she's in the wrong apartment....and instead of checking to make sure, she shoots him.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

This is the police mindset at its worst.

 

[Tanj]

Also, it's her neighbour. I mean, you don't have to be best buddies, but you should at least recognise them.

 

[High Fidelity]

That is probably why her gun was drawn.

Her key wouldn't work in the lock so she started banging in the door yelling to open up, it's the police. The homeowner did what, as far as I know, he was legally required to do, and was shot moments after.

This was a home invasion and the homeowner was murdered. I hope this cop gets the book thrown at her like anyone else would.

 

[Sabertooth]

Her key wouldn't work in the lock...

Has that been determined, yet? I worked in a place that had five different combinations for all of their lockers. Every fifth one had the same combination.

They said that she was at the right door, but wrong floor. They could both be on the same key...

 

[grasping the after wind]

This is the police mindset at its worst.

No such thing as "the police mindset" enters into this. This is one person doing something uniquely her own.

 

[dgiharris]

It's hard to imagine a plausible scenario where she was sober, walked into this guy's apartment, he tells her she's in the wrong apartment....and instead of checking to make sure, she shoots him.

The plausible scenario which I argue all the time relates to the MINDSET of police officers in regards to the Constitution and the Citizenry.

There is a breed of police who simply feel they are above the Constitution and that the Constitution does NOT apply and that you do whatever they say and let the courts sort it out later.

Similarly, it seems many police feel that the Citizenry are subjects to be ruled over. They also seem prone to have a hair trigger in regards to using violence against the citizenry.

Last but not least, whenever an incident with a citizen happens, said officer can cite the flimsiest and most ridiculous of reasons for the incident and "the system" accepts those reasons.

Now, am I claiming the above is why this incident happened?

No.

What I am claiming is that the above increases the probability of violent conflicts between the police and the citizenry that would never happen between a citizen and another citizen.

No such thing as "the police mindset" enters into this. This is one person doing something uniquely her own.

completely disagree. "mindset" plays into every interaction we have with our fellow man.

If you have a negative mindset, then the probability of you having negative interactions will be higher than someone with a positive mindset.

In regards to police, a "mindset" that allows you to do basically whatever the hell you want any time you want is a mindset that will lead to more negative conflicts and interactions.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The plausible scenario which I argue all the time relates to the MINDSET of police officers in regards to the Constitution and the Citizenry.

There is a breed of police who simply feel they are above the Constitution and that the Constitution does NOT apply and that you do whatever they say and let the courts sort it out later.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here...but how does the Constitution relate to this incident at all? It doesn't seem relevant to me...but maybe you mean something I'm not thinking of, so I'll let you explain before I reply about this incident specifically.

What I will discuss is the concept of a "mindset" that you're talking about. I've worked with a lot of police, and I can say in total honesty and without hesitation, that I've never encountered any that believed themselves "above the Constitution". Not a single one. In fact, I think it's fair to say that Constitutional rights are rarely thought of and only briefly when they are during confrontations with citizens, and that's entirely reasonable. A cop has potentially a large group of serious concerns when arriving on a scene that are dynamic and changing. Things like identifying threats to the cop, identifying threats to the subject, identifying threats to the public, rendering medical assistance, collecting and/or preserving evidence, determining whether anyone has broken the law (which itself has multiple aspects of concern), determining if anyone has broken any laws unrelated to the call...and many more. The idea that you expect police to constantly assess their own actions in relation to the Constitution is ridiculous. They're taught and trained on when they can and cannot search someone or their vehicle...and when they need consent to search. I'm not saying that they don't make mistakes from time to time...they are human after all...but the idea that this should ever be their first concern or that it should constantly occupy their minds seems pretty out there.

Similarly, it seems many police feel that the Citizenry are subjects to be ruled over. They also seem prone to have a hair trigger in regards to using violence against the citizenry.

You do realize that you're expected to comply with any reasonable request from a police officer...right? Most, if not all, states have some version of the "failure to obey a lawful order" law.

https://www.thelawplace.com/criminal-attorneys/failure-obey-lawful-order-police-officer/

This is because they need this legal authority to tell you what to do to be able to do their job. It would be a nearly impossible job without that authority. So if it seems like cops have this "attitude" that they expect you to do what they tell you to do because they're cops....that's because society expects you to do what they tell you to do because they're cops.

Now, that said, again...there are times when they're wrong...they are human after all. The thing is, it's not usually the case when a citizen challenges them. Typically, it's the citizen who has a poor understanding of their rights, or a poor understanding of the law, and for whatever reason they are just going to disobey the police because they believe they legally can. In those citizens minds' they believe they're sticking up for their rights against crooked, racist, bully cops....but in reality, they're just idiots who unnecessarily make a difficult job all that much more difficult. Here's a good example although you can find tons of these online....

Watch "Did LAPD Officers Overreact To Woman Putting Feet On Subway Seat?" on YouTube

Now, there's a longer full version of the incident which you can see from beginning to end. The girl thrown off the subway did have her feet up on the seat in front of her. The subway does post signs stating that passengers cannot put their feet up on the seats (amongst other things) and that you can be thrown off the subway for doing so. The cop asks her multiple times to comply, and even warns her that he will remove her from the subway physically if she doesn't. The girl continues to disobey, and she gets removed. From that point on, you have at least two other people on the scene who apparently think the cop is wrong and either verbally harass him...or physically try to insert themselves into the situation. These people are also wrong.

I'm not saying that people should obey obviously unlawful orders (no one should consent to a full cavity search over a parking ticket for example)...but since they generally have a difficult job that requires compliance from the public, you should give them the benefit of the doubt the vast majority of the time. Yes, that includes citations and crimes that you may consider "no big deal".