• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Price Waterhouse analyst murdered in his home by police

People inherited his property not the police.
And "people" will get the property once the investigation is over. But what does eventual inheritance have to do with the privacy protections of the deceased occupant?

It is their property and therefore their privacy. The weed would not be legal in most instances, though. The police have no authority to list their private items, but the pot, they have no responsibility to publicly list it.
 
I agree. But it seems that the DPD is doing anything they can to help her. Like releasing this information to possibly taint a future jury pool when the info has no relevance at all.
Same can be said for the actions of the lawyers hired by the family. They are also muddying the waters with claims of noise complaints, yelling "let me in", and so on.
Muddying the waters? The guy was shot dead in his own home. Pretty simple.

For the life of me, I can’t think of any motive for you to disparage the victim other than their race.
 
I agree. But it seems that the DPD is doing anything they can to help her. Like releasing this information to possibly taint a future jury pool when the info has no relevance at all.
Same can be said for the actions of the lawyers hired by the family. They are also muddying the waters with claims of noise complaints, yelling "let me in", and so on.
Muddying the waters? The guy was shot dead in his own home. Pretty simple.

For the life of me, I can’t think of any motive for you to disparage the victim other than their race.

The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

But of course we’re leftists so we don’t give a crap about civil rights and everything is racism so let’s just assume there could be no other possible reason, right?
 
Muddying the waters? The guy was shot dead in his own home. Pretty simple.

For the life of me, I can’t think of any motive for you to disparage the victim other than their race.

The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

But of course we’re leftists so we don’t give a crap about civil rights and everything is racism so let’s just assume there could be no other possible reason, right?

Don't be so hard on yourself, dismal. We know in your heart you mean well.
 
The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

If the pot is not relevant, then you simply cannot make this argument. You might as well be saying his sex toys might be relevant.
 
Muddying the waters? The guy was shot dead in his own home. Pretty simple.

For the life of me, I can’t think of any motive for you to disparage the victim other than their race.

The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

But of course we’re leftists so we don’t give a crap about civil rights and everything is racism so let’s just assume there could be no other possible reason, right?

The way investigations are supposed to work is that you don't release any information to the public until after the investigation is concluded. Or, at least that's what they say. So, how did the information about Botham's apartment search get released since that would obviously be a part of the investigation. The result of Guyger's apartment search was never released, or even if they did a search. And the findings of the search just happened to shed him in a supposed negative light. Hmm, curious minds would like to know.
 
But of course Fox News is using it as a smear. Please don't pretend it is merely "reporting facts" when this totally irrelevant detail is included in the headline.

And that is precisely my point.

Most news sources did report it as a list.

FauxNews, otoh, put ONLY the marijuana in their headline, and reported it as being his even though that is not an established fact. (It is just as conceivable that she planted it on the kitchen counter after killing him)
 
Muddying the waters? The guy was shot dead in his own home. Pretty simple.
I think Lee Merritt is trying to argue for premeditation with his claim that there was a preexisting noise complaint against Jean. Of course, Merritt is known to lie about his cases.

For the life of me, I can’t think of any motive for you to disparage the victim other than their race.
I am not even disparaging the victim. From the beginning I have said that he was innocent in the shooting and also that the weed has nothing to do with the shooting either.
 
How would you know. Were you there?
Occam's razor. Your scenario, that she planted the weed would require her to have 10g of weed and a grinder on her when coming home from the job.
Also, it's a pretty useless frame-up.
 
The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

If the pot is not relevant, then you simply cannot make this argument. You might as well be saying his sex toys might be relevant.
Yes, Civil Rights. Not certain what that has to do with releasing prejudicial information irrelevant to a crime into the public to taint a jury pool.
 
The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

If the pot is not relevant, then you simply cannot make this argument. You might as well be saying his sex toys might be relevant.
Yes, Civil Rights. Not certain what that has to do with releasing prejudicial information irrelevant to a crime into the public to taint a jury pool.

Yes. I'd guess the government not covering up stuff has more to do with the trial. Or possibly after the trial.
 
We don't actually know if the weed was hers or his. I bet it was his, but we don't know it as fact. I tend to think it was his because of the grinder which ordinarily might not be carried around. (I assume). On the other hand, if it were his and part of his property, then you'd think he also had some way to smoke it in his apartment such as paper, bong, pipe, etc. If he had a grinder, then I'd also think that he were growing it, but that is not in the police report either. I have to assume there was such or that the police report just doesn't contain that info, but I cannot be sure. I don't think this is as straightforward as some would like to think with Occam's Razor.

Another possibility here is that Guyger had all sorts of drugs paraphernalia in her apartment, but police gave her a full three days until arresting her and so she may have destroyed all that missing evidence, such as growing plants, bongs, rolling paper, a pipe that she had as opposed to Botham Jean. Since police did not immediately hold her in custody as they would a normal citizen we're not able to analytically test this alternate scenario.

Your scenario, that she planted the weed would require her to have 10g of weed and a grinder on her when coming home from the job.

I don't think it does. Any cop could have planted this at any time in order to support Guyger. Or Guyger could have stolen the weed from the office. Maybe there is a network that distributes pot to the cops within the police office since weed is fairly harmless and they possess the weed from confiscations. Or maybe she picked it up from a supplier on the way home.

Also, it's a pretty useless frame-up.

Well, suppose it were his. Then, announcing it may lead to a little extra support for Guyger which seems to be a goal of the police right now, not their normal procedure as applied to regular citizens...that's not a frame-up but it's generally what people are talking about.

Anyway, that is one case where it is not the kind of frame up you are asserting people are saying. Another is that Guyger had weed on her. Then, she realized police would be coming, so she dumped it in one of Botham's drawers. Not a pre-meditated frame-up, just incidental....though her smoking weed could be related to the shooting.

While I think the weed and grinder were likely his, I reserve the right to revise my opinion, if Guyger's toxicology report is ever released and that is not an obvious switch of results with another cop such that it shows she has smoked weed recently, in which case I would then think the weed was likely hers and played some role.
 
How would you know. Were you there?
Occam's razor. Your scenario, that she planted the weed would require her to have 10g of weed and a grinder on her when coming home from the job.
Also, it's a pretty useless frame-up.

But a very useful way to get rid of your weed when you know you will be searched.
 
The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

If the pot is not relevant, then you simply cannot make this argument. You might as well be saying his sex toys might be relevant.

It is not for the government to decide what is and isn’t relevant to a defendant in a criminal trial. It is for the government to disclose evidence and allow the defense to make its case.
 
The way civil rights work in the US is the government can’t cover up evidence that might be useful to a defendant.

If the pot is not relevant, then you simply cannot make this argument. You might as well be saying his sex toys might be relevant.

It is not for the government to decide what is and isn’t relevant to a defendant in a criminal trial. It is for the government to disclose evidence and allow the defense to make its case.

You are the asserting it might be evidence relevant to the case and thus not a smear. So tell us, how might pot be relevant if Botham's.
 
There is a difference between the gov't reporting the results of a search and Fox News using that to smear a victim.

And if someone is claiming that the release of the discovery of illegal substances helps the defense, then that person ought to make explain why that makes sense.
 
So neighbors and warrant say she yelled and got him to open the door, while she claimes the door was open and she only saw him once inside. Where was his body found? And where the shells?
 
Geeze. We have at least two grinders in our house right now and nobody smokes or uses pot or any other drug, period.

They are frequently used to grind coffee and/or herbs (which is a good reason to have more than one).
 
Back
Top Bottom