The “wrong apartment” murder trial will shortly be heading to the jury. This is the case in which then-LEO Amber Guyger entered what she claims she believed was her own apartment, encountered Botham Jean who actually was in his own apartment, and shot and killed him in claimed self-defense against a perceived intruder.
Today I note that what should be the most important and decisive evidence—indeed, the only evidence that really matters—in the case was actually provided last Wednesday, and it appears to have been wildly under-reported by a news media that as usual is ignorant of the subject they’re covering.
There are really only two relevant questions in this case of Amber Guyger shooting and killing Botham Jean.
First, if she had been entering her own apartment and found Jean unlawfully present, would her shooting of him have been lawful?
If not, she ought to be criminally liable for killing Jean.
If so, the second question is, was her mistake in entering the wrong apartment, believing it to be her own, a reasonable mistake?
If not, she again ought to be criminally liable for killing Jean.
If the answer to both questions is in the affirmative, however, what we have here is a tragic “awful but lawful” shooting in self-defense. Defenders are not required to make perfect decisions in self-defense, they are merely required to make reasonable decisions, and the reasonably mistaken killing of an innocent person is simply not a crime. (It may, of course, still carry civil liability, but that’s a separate matter.)
For purposes of discussion, let’s assume that if Jean had, as perceived, been an unlawful intruder into Guyger’s own apartment, she would have been legally justified in using deadly defensive force under the circumstances.
That leaves the question of whether her entering Jean’s apartment by mistake, believing it to be her own residence, was a reasonable mistake. In other words, might a reasonable and prudent person in Guyger’s circumstances have made the same mistake of entering the wrong apartment.
Decisive evidence favorable to acquittal on this issue was presented in court last Wednesday by Texas Rangers investigator David Armstrong.
I note, only because of the nature of the race-mad world in which we currently live in, that Trooper Armstrong is black (he is this post’s featured image). Guyger, of course, is white, and Botham Jean was black.
I also note that Trooper Armstrong’s law enforcement agency, the Texas Rangers, is independent of the Dallas Police Department for which Guyger worked at the time she shot and killed Jean.
Finally, I note that Armstrong a witness for the state, and not for the defense.
Trooper Armstrong’s testimony in front of the jury is shared here as it was reported by Dallas CBS news:
The lead investigator of the case for the Texas Rangers took the stand Wednesday during the murder trial of Amber Guyger and described how the layout of her apartment complex could be seen as confusing.
Although Armstrong is technically a prosecution witness, he supported defense claims that the former Dallas officer could have easily been confused about the layout of the South Side Flats, where the shooting took place.
Trooper Armstrong also showed initiative not common in my experience among police investigators:
Armstrong testified that he did a survey of tenants at the apartment complex where Guyger and Jean lived and found that 23% of those tenants had accidentally walked into the wrong apartment because of the layout. He confirmed the hallways of the complex are similar, as well as the parking garage.
So, we have credible evidence that the apartment complex in which Guyger and Jean resided was sufficiently confusing in layout that it was fairly common for people to innocently and with the best of intentions walk into the wrong apartment.
But how would Guyger have managed to even enter Jean’s apartment if his door was closed? Well, that begs the question: Was Jean’s door closed? Trooper Armstrong further testified:
Armstrong also told the jury that Jean’s door was poorly installed and often would not close all the way. The jury was shown videos that supported his claim.
“On multiple occasions, the door would close all the way and the door would also not completely close depending on the distance. And we were just letting go of the door not using any force and sometimes it would close all the way sometimes it wouldn’t, depending on the distance,” Armstrong said.
Further, Trooper Armstrong was not the only credible witness to testify as to the confusing layout of the apartment complex, leading people to walk into the wrong apartment:
A neighbor at the Southside Flats apartments, Whitney Hughes, testified, like Guyger, she two [sic] had walked to an apartment on the wrong floor before, confusing it for her own.
In a criminal trial in which of Amber Guyger’s must be proven guilty of unlawful conduct beyond all reasonable doubt, such evidence should be sufficient to justify an acquittal in this case, absent explicit evidence of bad will on the part of Guyger (and I’ve heard no substantiated examples of such evidence).
That said, juries are unpredictable, so we shall see what we shall see.
NEXT “Calling the Shots”: Wednesday October 2
Hey folks, the next episode of “Calling the Shots,” our online show in which we do legal analysis of use-of-force events caught on video, will air on Wednesday, October 2, 3 PM Pacific. You can watch the show live on the Facebook page of our show partner, Alien Gear Holsters:
If the live show doesn’t work for you because of timing or lack of a Facebook account, you can find the replay of the show on the Law of Self Defense Blog beginning the following day (Thursday):
SEND US VIDEOS! If you are aware of use-of-force videos that you’d like me to consider for analysis during an episode of “Calling the Shots,” please email a link to the video to firstname.lastname@example.org. Be sure to put “CTS” or “Calling the Shots” in the subject line of the email to ensure it’s expedited to my attention.
Also, every live episode of “Calling the Shots” we will raffle off a full-access pass to our full-day equivalent Law of Self Defense LEVEL 1 Class, a $200 value. To be entered into this raffle, simply sign up at:
If you enter the raffle YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE PRESENT during the show to win, we’ll notify each winner by email directly.
FLASH SALE: Law of Self Defense GOLD MEMBERSHIP!
We’re running a special FLASH SALE for our Law of Self Defense GOLD Memberships. Sign up for a GOLD Membership, and you’ll be sent a complimentary copy of our Law of Self Defense QUARTERLY 3-DVD/CD set for the third quarter of 2019. This includes all of our video and audio/podcast blog content for the months of July, August, and September 2019, yours to keep.
Each Law of Self Defense QUARTERLY is normally a $49.95 product, but it’s yours for free (we’ll even cover the S&H!) if you become a GOLD Member of Law of Self Defense before the FLASH SALE ends at the close of this week.
Even better, as a GOLD Member you’ll also receive every future Law of Self Defense QUARTERLY, as well, automatically!
That’s right folks, GOLD Membership costs about $19 per month, or $57 per quarter, but as a GOLD Member you automatically receive $50 of content immediately—meaning the net cost of your GOLD Membership is really only about $2 a month!
GOLD Members also receive direct access to me, Attorney Andrew F. Branca, for your use-of-force law questions through our premium Q&A system, exclusively for GOLD+ members, as well as ongoing, daily access to our secure Law of Self Defense podcast.
And by the way, folks, this is a risk-free offer. It’s been our experience that our Members almost never leave, but if within 30 days you decide that Law of Self Defense Membership is not for you, simply contact us and we’ll cancel your membership and not charge you so much as a penny. AND you can keep the 3Q2019 DVD/CD set as our gift to you.
This FLASH SALE runs only through this week, however, so if you’re interested you need to head over NOW to:
You carry a gun so you’re hard to kill.
Know the law so you’re hard to convict.
Attorney Andrew F. Branca
Law of Self Defense LLC
Law of Self Defense CONSULT Program