Friday, May 31, 2019

Was Officer Amber Guyger Truthful in Her 911 Call?


Did Dallas police officer Officer Amber Guyger shoot Botham Jean due to her belief that she was entering her own apartment? 

In 2018, Officer Guyger fatally shot Botham Jean (26) claiming to believe she encountered an intruder in her own apartment. 

We now turn to her own words to discover if she is truthful or deceptive. 


There is much to consider in this case, but the team of analysts was focused upon whether or not the officer was truthful about believing she was in the wrong apartment.  

These are notes from the team. 

Consider that the team raises questions that seek to be answered within the language of the subject. There is supplemental material included. 

Greater Context: off duty, coming from 14 (one report of 15) hour shift.  

Analytical Question:
1.     Is the subject reliably reporting what happened?
    (Was she truthful about being in the wrong apartment?)

C: get up, man.  

Unintended Recipient – 
get up, man”--- 
?
Why the command to “get up”? 
Was the victim capable of “getting up”?
Was the subject arresting the victim? (interview) 
Was the subject in shock, or denial of what happened?
Was anything said prior to this? 
What happened prior to making the call? 

Greater Context: the subject had come off of a 14 hour shift & was Off duty. 

D: Dallas 911. This is Carla. Whatis your emergency?

C: Hi. This is an off duty officer. . .um. . . can I get. . .I need EMS. . .um… um I’m in number. . .um

From the language, we know the victim is a male, and the victim is down. 
Shooting – victim is down. 
1.    The emergency call of a shooting, with the victim down, begins with a greeting, “Hi” as unexpected. Please note the possible ingratiation.  The subject may have a need to be seen in a positive light, with law enforcement.  Why the greeting? This is informal: could the caller (subject) expect some form of “professional courtesy” in this report? Could the caller use the greeting as routine calls to 911?  Ingratiation—‘I am one of you’ bonding when the officer should direct attention to the victim. 

Also consider officers may, by routine, call 911 which can produce the greeting...

2.    This is an off duty officer” – 

a.    The caller does not use her own name – 

b.    She does not say “this is an___ officer”  (psychological ‘distance’? inner conflict?) --title

c.    The caller produced that she was “off duty” – 

d.    Taken together, the caller does not identify herself, her dept/title  and uses a greeting. 

e.    What difference does it make to the subject’s verbalized perception of reality of being “off duty”?

f.     What difference would her time status make to the victim? 

g.    “an” – articles are instinctive (without pre thought) and guide us. It is consistent with the lack of name.  Consider – ‘crowd source’of guilt? ‘Crowd source’ of personal responsibility? 

Distancing:  you do not know my name, my dept, and I am one of many… You do not yet know what the emergency is. 

h.    Does the officer see herself as law enforcement, personally? – or is she distancing? “call”—or “call of duty”; not a “good job.” 

: Hi. This is an off duty officer. . .um. . . can I get. . .I need EMS..um… um I’m in number. . 
.um

Please not the “pause” (sensitive) above, four times.  The subject is slowing down the pace to give time to consider what to say. 

What causes this need?  Deception? Fatigue? Trauma? unknown? We look for the subject's own words to guide us. 

Note that not giving her name, yet giving her time status (off duty) is a form of self censoring information. This should be considered in the following broken sentence:

um,can I get…”

The subject is a trained law enforcement professional who has discharged her weapon and we know, (from her words) that the victim is a male and he is down. 
We do not expect a question, yet some in LE will use “Can I get…?”as routine. 

Pause 1 produced “I” and a question/request (unexpected) – she asks for something for herself; not the victim. 
Question: Is this habit/training/norm (Greater Context) for a law enforcement official?

In the lesser context, we consider that she did not identify her name, rank nor dept. 

This is appropriateifshe is administering first aid and seeking guidance. 

We must consider that the request for assistance began with a pause.  Is this expected? Is the subject experiencing trauma? 


.um. . . can I get. . .I need EMS

Note the change of language. 

For the subject, has something changed?

Might  this had been something the officer rolled up on (on duty, officially sent)  if the language would have been different-maybe it would have been I need vs can I get. Since she was involved I could  that have changed her language?

b. Has the victim’s status (time?) changed? Is more urgency needed? Is he beyond help? 

c. Note the subject has asserted that she has a need; not the victim. This could be because she is facilitating help for the victim, or it could be a signal of personal guilt, as we find in domestic homicide calls. 

c. um… um I’m in number. . .um

Might this affirm, deny or not speak to, her assertion of accidental entrance? 

+ + 0 + + 0   0 0 + 

The pause here is about location. – the language is address of the apartment. This affirms the assertion about belief in wrong apartment.  During this critical (hormonal consequence) communication (including shots fired indoors/sensory/sound), the "excited utterance" is in support of the assertion.  We continue to analyze...

 Please note that as a trained officer, she did not give location first. 

The question is “what” is your emergency:


: Hi. This is an officer. . .um. . . can I get. . .I need EMS..um… umI’m in number. . 
.um

1.    Greeting
2.    Personal Identification is incomplete 
3.    Request for assistance for self
4.    Location of apartment –
Contextual: an officer may: 
1. give their call sign 
2. give their location 
3. give the crime code 
4. what they need


We do not know why EMS is needed. We do not know who needs it (other than the subject) – to this point, there has not been a shooting. 


What does trauma in language look like?

Even with the possibility of trauma in her language, we note that she has the presence of mind greet, place herself in a group…

Passivity that is inappropriate – (mirrors deception) but sometimes with a dissociative factor as if the subject is watching and commenting on what happened, sometimes using present tense (or incomplete past tense) language. 

Thus far, trauma?  Not evident yet. 

Processing of information is in question 


____________________________________________________________________




D: What’s your address?
C: um

D: Do you need police as well or just EMS
C: Yes. Ineed both.

D: Okay, what’s the address?

C: Fuck. I’m at apartment number 1478. I’m in 1478

She does not give the address.
a.    Is her priority the apt number because she went to the wrong apt?
b.    Might she instinctively be thinking enhanced 911 knows the address? 
C. "at" to "in" may be realization (processing)

Does this point support (+) or negate (-) or not speak to (0) the possible wrong apt assertion?

(++++) supporting the premise of wrong apartment. 


?: +  - 0 her assertion of wrong apartment accident: 

+ + + supportive of being in the wrong apt. 

“at” could be location, while “in” could be the situation inside the apartment. 

Pause re location?  (+++) supportive of wrong apartment assertion. 

Emotion, “F”--- realization?  Some personal responsibility? "in" places her as a participant; "at" could be an outside observer

Note: this could explain why she gave the address first, the shock of seeing it right there, and it's the wrong apartment (?) 



External Info -- 

Affidavit:    The affidavit says the apartment was dark and Guyger turned on the lights while on the phone with 911 after the shooting.

Guyger would later tell police she found the door slightly ajar and that it opened when she put her key fob in the door, the arrest warrant says. She told investigators she saw a "large silhouette" across the room and began giving commands, which Jean "ignored,” the arrest warrant says.



D: And what’s the address there?
C: Um.. .it’s 1210 South Lamar. . . 1478. . .yes

D: What’s going on?

Present tense – what is now happening at the location? The expectation is that the subject now identify the victim’s needs and/or what she is doing to help him. 

C: I’m an off duty officer

I thought I was in my apartment and I shot a guy thinking that he was. . . thinking it was my apartment.

a.    Self identity continues to avoid using her name, title or name of her dept. 
b.    Repeat of earlier work status (“off duty”) 
c.     Note “I” and “officer” are far apart. 
d. Note reliability of form "I thought I was in my apartment" 
and "I shot a guy..." 

I thought I was in my apartment

a.    Form: Reliable on its form.  
“I shot guy” 

Form: reliable – we should believe her. The article suggests not knowing him previously. 

Affidavit:  Jean, 26, lived on the fourth floor of the Southside Flats apartments in Dallas, according to an arrest warrant filed in September. Guyger, who lived directly below Jean on the third floor, said she parked on the fourth floor and walked down the hallway to what she "thought was her apartment," the warrant stated.


What is her level of care (LD) towards the victim, up to this point?  -- thus far, we do not know where he was shot, how many times he was shot, or his present condition? There is no empathy expressed for the victim. 

and I shot a guy thinking that he was. . . thinking it was my apartment.

She is explaining why without being asked. 

Appropriate in context. 


D: You shot someone?

C: Yes, I thought it was my apartmentI’m fucked. Oh my godI’m sorry.


Guilt: “I’m sorry”—would be appropriate for accident and intentional, though mostly for different reasons.  The latter is often associated with regret of being caught. 

Note the lack of empathy towards the status of the victim. ***Key in domestic shootings where the subjects know each. 

a.    We do not know the status of the victim 
b.    We do not have concern for the victim
c.     We have Ingratiation, distancing language, signals of guilt (deity, sorry) 
d.    To whom is she “sorry”?  To the Recipient (911 operator) or to an unintended recipient (victim or police in general? 
e.    From the subject to the police (911), he is “a guy” but we do not know his current status. 

We know her condition (she’s “fucked”) but we do not know the condition of the victim. 

*If the victim is beyond help (in her understanding) the LD shifts. 


D: Okay and where are you at right now?

C: I’m in uh. . .What do you mean? I’m inside the apartment with him. Hey, come on, man.


D: What’s your name?

C: I’m Amber Guyger. I need . . get me. . .I’m . . I’m in



Startled: wrong apartment, intruder, shooting, sound, 

Note asking for assistance for self is found in law enforcement language (as well as medical professionals, or anyone who is seeking to facilitate assistance) 


D: Okay we have help on the way.


C: I know,butI’m. .I’m gonna lose my job.I thought it was my apartment. Hey, man. Fuck


She knows help is on the way for the victim, yet expresses her need without addressing the victim’s need. 

It may be she's angry for the victim putting her in this position. In this sense, she is the “victim”, which is why she expresses empathy for herself. 

Subject may be low in human empathy, but did she believe she was in her apartment, and there was an intruder? 

She may be shifting blame to the victim:  He didn't respond to her commands. This is his fault, although it's his apartment and her mistake.

We continue to wait to hear her tell us what she did to try to save him. 


D: Okay stay with me, okay?

C: I am. I am. I needI know I need a supervisor. Hey, bud. Hey, bud. Come on. Fuck. I thought it was my apartment.



D: I understand. We have help on the way, okay?

C: I thought it was my apartment. Hurry, please.

D: They are on their way.

C: I need. . .I. . .I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment. I could have sworn I parked on the third floor.

Lack of commitment - Appropriate use or Inappropriate use?

-- she is in doubt about the parking---this make speak to confusion.  This would make it an “appropriately” weak assertion. 
Confused in parking should warrant exploration of lengthy hours, sleep deprivation. 

D: Okay I understand.

C: No. I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment.


This is to shut down the info and any possibility to the contrary.  This is self focus only. 


D: What’s the gate code there?
C: I don’t know. I don’t know.
D: You don’t know? Okay
C: [Unintelligible.] I thought it was my apartment.

D: They’re trying to get in there. We have an officer there. You don’t know the gate code?

C: No. I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment.

D: Okay and what floor are you in right now?
C: On the fourth floor. Fourth.Hey, bud. Hey, bud. They’re coming. They’re coming. I’m sorry man.

Empathy towards victim noted.  In subsequent questioning, the victim's condition at this point is of importance in understanding the language. 


D: Okay, where was he shot?
C: He’s on the top, top left.

Long pause

D: Okay you’re with Dallas PD, right?
C: Yes. . . . Oh, my god. I’m done. I didn’t mean to. . I didn’t mean to. . I didn’t mean to. . I’m so sorry. Hey, bud.

D: They’re trying to get to you, okay.

C: I know. Stay with me bud.. . Oh, my god.

D: Okay they’re almost there. They’re already there, they tried to get to you.

C: I thought it was my apartment. I thought it was my apartment. Holy fuck. I thought it was my apartment. Oh my god. I thought it was my apartment. I’m so sorry. I’m so sorry. [unintelligible] Oh my god.

D: Okay, they’re trying to get there to you. Do you hear them? Do you see them? 

C: No. . .no. . I . . I. . how the fuck did I put the. . how did I . . I’m so tired. Hurry. Hey! Over here, over here.
D: Go ahead and talk to them.
C: No, it’s me. I’m off duty. I’m off duty. I fucked. I thought they were in my apartment. I thought this was my floor. 


External Info: 
As a result, “Guyger fired her handgun two times striking the Complainant one time in the torso,” according to the affidavit, which says that Guyger entered the apartment, calling 911 and requesting police and EMS and provided first aid to Jean. She turned on the interior lights while on the phone with 911. Upon being asked where she was located by emergency dispatchers, she returned to the front door to observe the address and discovered she was at the wrong apartment,” the document alleges.

The Jean family attorney has also revealed that there were noise complaints made by downstairs neighbors about Botham Jean’s apartment. Guyger lived below Jean.

 Supplemental Info: 

Note:  DOJ 2000 study Evaluating the Effects of Fatigue on Police Patrol Officers


This project’s findings have great relevance since increased fatigue worsens mood and adds to the likelihood of poor judgment and the misuse of force (see Vila 1996).

How lack of sleep may cause deadly police errors
A recent study examined fatigue’s effects on 53 officers’ decision-making and reaction times when the officers were faced with deadly-force situations
Aug 9, 2014

Officers frequently suffer from high levels of fatigue due to lack of sleep, unusual shift schedules, and long hours awake. Fatigue impairs a person’s mental functioning, especially in areas such as decision-making, reaction time, and memory. 
Dr. Bill Lewinski and the researchers at Force Science Institute have done excellent work regarding exhaustion due to physical exertion, and Dr. Bryan Vila has conducted extensive research on the negative effects fatigue has on officer safety
new study conducted by David Blake (MSc.) and Edward Cumella (PhD) has addressed the impact of fatigue on officers’ performance in deadly-force situations. Blake and Cumella’s research examined fatigue’s effects on 53 officers’ decision-making and reaction times when the officers were faced with deadly-force situations

Impaired Decision-Making and Slowed Reaction Times
For one week, officers completed online tasks both before and after each of their shifts. Records included a history of their sleep patterns, total hours slept, total hours awake, shifts worked, and sleep quality. Officers  then engaged in a series of simulated shoot/don’t shoot scenarios using pictures of potential targets that use of force experts had previously classified as warranting either a 'shoot or don’t shoot' response or as ambiguous.  
Blake — a PoliceOne Contributor and retired police officer — and Cumella — a professor of psychology at Kaplan University — found that many fatigue measures correlated strongly with officers’ impaired decision-making and slowed reaction times within the deadly force situations. In particular, poor sleep quality, greater total time awake, more days worked, and working night or swing shifts all decreased the accuracy of officers’ decisions to 'shoot or don’t shoot' and also slowed their reaction times. 
“These impacts occurred most frequently when officers were faced with the more difficult decisions within the ‘don’t shoot’ and ambiguous scenarios,” Blake explained.
In other words, compared to well-rested officers, fatigued officers chose to shoot more often when they should not have done so, and they took longer to decide on the appropriate action when faced with ambiguous situations. The study also indicated that the negative effects of fatigue increased throughout each work day, with officers’ reaction times growing consistently longer from pre-shift to post-shift. 
Blake added, “A surprising and concerning finding was that the officers had experienced only moderate levels of sleep deprivation and fatigue, yet even these moderate levels appeared to cause impairments in decision-making and reaction time. For example, the average total time awake per officer per day was 16 hours.”
Blake continued, “A mountain of empirical evidence demonstrates that 17 hours of total wake time is equivalent to a .05 percent blood alcohol level (BAC); in the present study, officers’ performance was shown to decrease with 16 hours of wake time.”
Officers in the study averaged 6.4 hours of sleep per night, and slept only 20 minutes less per night on work days vs. days off. Although this may not seem like a large amount of sleep deprivation, research has shown that even small decreases in sleep below an average of eight hours per night create a cumulative sleep debt, the negative effect of which is added to the total hours awake. 
Consequently, with the 6.4 hours of sleep per night reported by the officers in the study, participants’ performance levels were impaired nearly to the same extent as someone with a .08 percent BAC. 
Studying Fatigue in Policing: Should We Know More?
In a second phase of the study, 277 officers shared their opinions about the role of fatigue in law enforcement. The results were astonishing; with 69 percent of officers admitting that lack of sleep had caused a mistake or error in their police work. 92 percent believed that the law enforcement field does not adequately concern itself with safety issues arising from officer fatigue, and 95 percent felt the law enforcement field needs to formally explore the impact of sleep deprivation on officers’ performance. 
The results of the study parallel other scientific research about the effects of fatigue on human cognitive performance. Fatigue has been linked to industrial and motor vehicle accidents, causing human errors that have resulted in loss of life and property damage, usually because of impaired decision-making, attention problems, and slowed reaction times. 
“These are clearly not factors which the public would want police officers to face, especially when those officers are making the most critical decision about whether or not to use force in a police encounter,” Blake said. “The decision to take a life in the line of duty and the ability to make that decision quickly enough to save one’s own life is an extremely important public and officer safety concern that cannot be underemphasized.”
Blake contends that police executives, police unions, officers themselves, and other responsible persons should be concerned about the results of this study “because many have noted that the law enforcement industry often entails extremely fatiguing environmental conditions due to shift work, overtime, and long hours.”
Because this study involved a relatively small sample of officers and used a computer simulation that has not yet been fully validated, a next step should include a follow-up study with a greater number of officers from a nationally representative sample of police departments. If the results of follow-up investigations reveal the same findings, proactive steps would appear to be warranted to ensure that officers are not sleep deprived or awake for too many hours while on duty. 
For example, fatigue-mitigating measures can be enacted using simple adjustments, such as on duty nap periods for fatigued officers, circumscribed overtime rules and total work hours, and less frequent shift rotations. 
“Continued research can more precisely determine at what point total hours awake and nightly sleep quantity begin to unacceptably impair officers’ performance,” Blake concluded.
This study indicates that performance deficits arise from even low levels of fatigue. If these findings are borne out, decisive and timely follow-up may be required to ensure that those who are sworn to protect and serve are able to do so at an optimal human performance level for the benefit and safety of themselves and the public. 



Analysis Conclusion

Analytical Questions:
1.     Is the subject reliably reporting what happened?    Yes
2.     Did the subject intentionally shoot the victim?     Yes
3.     Did the subject believe she was shooting an intruder?  Yes  
4.     Did the subject reliably report the mistaken location? Yes 


The subject  tells the truth about going to the wrong apartment, and tracing her thoughts to parking on the wrong floor. 

The subject did not intent to shoot the victim, nor acted with malice nor racist animus towards him. 

The subject may very well be sleep deprived (note in context about being “tired”) as well as impacted by the prior shooting (2017) with her judgement impacted/impaired. 

Self absorption: subject had more empathy for self than victim.  

The subject may be narcissistic (personality driven, immature) and/or have narcissistic like traits due to self preservation from prior traumatic incident. 

Much discussion as to the original psych evaluation and hiring criteria indicated.

The subject does not indicate racial animus in the language. 

The processing sensitivity (pauses) are contextually connected to the wrong location (parking level) and may, very well be, the result of sleep deprivation/fatigue.  

62 comments:

Mike Dammann said...

This analysis surprises me.

Annette said...

I wasn't sure. I could see lack of concern for the victim, but that alone wpuldnt be enough to show deception, I don't think.

Sharon said...

This brings to my mind that women officers are expected to physically perform the same as men. There is no consideration of the fact that monthly hormonal cycles cause women at certain times to be more prone to fatigue and more emotionally driven. I do not know if that was a factor in this case, but it could be. I know that at those times I am simply not productive at work, and I come back later and discover everything I did had mistakes. It would be far better to just take a couple days off, but how do you explain that to your boss? Additionally, if you don't get the rest you need during that time, the fatigue lingers and is difficult to recover from.

Marianne said...

As much as I loathe the black lives matter organisation, I find it strange that suddenly a greeting, consern for self, saying sorry, and God now are fine in a 911 call.
On top of that, she is not worried about him, only that she will lose her job.

Well, maybe Amanda Knox was tired too, when she showed more consern for herself than for Meredith. (Who was already dead, so nothing could bring her back to life)

General P. Malaise said...

it is important to understand and see bias in oneself. people tend to see bias in others and do not consider that their bias has influenced how they see bias in others. it is hard to put aside. it is hard to accept that we are biased ourselves.

the subject is not sympathetic and that seems to influence people negatively towards her.

the subject has many sensitivity indicators. which on their own do not constitute deception.
there are many questions generated by the subjects language. while information is not flowing she is not deceptive in what she does say.

thanks for posting Peter.

General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous said...
@Sharon Ugh, speak for yourself! As a woman I find it crazy that you believe you are so much at the mercy of your hormones. Ideology like that is one of the reasons we have yet to have a female POTUS.


not everyone has the same issue with hormones. to deny @Sharon her experiences is a narrow minded view. it isn't "ideology". people are not equal. man and women are not equal. CLUE: different words are used to designate, like him or her. like man and woman.

equal before the law is not the same as equal. the education system in the west has be co-opted by dishonest brokers.

Olivia said...

Yes! Peter & I agree on this case! I knew I was one of his best students!!!

Olivia said...

Peter has gotten even better at analysis, viewing things more contextually. So difficult to do, and he seems to excel at it. Hopefully other cases can be solved now.

Lisa21222 said...

On the flip side...

She was tired. It had been a LONG shift, and she wanted to sleep. She had previously made noise complaints against Mr. Jean. Is it possible that she was so tired that all she wanted to do was sleep, but the noise from his apartment was sufficient to keep her awake?

WAS her car parked on the wrong level?

According to the statement, she turned on the light and tried to help the victim, but it was not until she went to check the number on the door that she realized she was in the wrong unit.

How did she not notice the difference in furnishings and decor as soon as she turned on the light?

New England Water Blog said...

In every case of real police footage I've ever seen they all immediately go to the radio with the words "shots fired". If she were on duty that is likely the first thing she'd say to irrespective of who fired them.
She takes quite a long time to get to the fact that any shots were fired, it seems to go significantly against her training which makes me think she was instead construing her story.

New England Water Blog said...

OT
"“There were not any drugs taken at all,” she said. “I was not under the influence of anything.”

More from the Maui Yoga Teacher

https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/05/31/breaking-news/video-maui-hiker-amanda-eller-apologizes-for-being-irresponsible-putting-anybody-in-harms-way/

Erin said...

I am confused about two statements and I need clarification of common practice for police officers in a burglary scenario.

1. "Okay, where was he shot?
C: He’s on the top, top left."

He was shot in the torso... how does "He’s on the top, top left" explain the shot into his torso to the operator?

In the last statement that she made while the operator was still on the line recording... she said to the police when they arrived.

"No, it’s me. I’m off duty. I’m off duty. I fucked. I thought they were in my apartment. I thought this was my floor. "

Who is "they"... ??

3. If she thought that her apartment was being burglarized... is it common practice for a trained officer to enter without lights on and not clear the rooms for further threats? Or at least clearing the rooms and then turning the lights on?

Her statement explained that she rendered aid to the guy and when she was asked her address she responded and at that time turned the lights on. If that was me... I would want to clear the remainder of the rooms for threats at minimal or I would back out of the room and call 911 for backup/EMT.

I am new to this and still learning. These questions above are not addressed in Peter's SA. Can anyone help clarify please?

Erin said...

Per above. .

External Info --

Affidavit: The affidavit says the apartment was dark and Guyger turned on the lights while on the phone with 911 after the shooting.

Erin said...

One more note...

he changes from "man" to "guy" to "bud."

"Man" was before the wrong apartment was identified. After the wrong apartment was identified he is then "guy" and after "bud."

Thoughts?

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Not a statement analysis expert or anything, but to me it seemed like the "Get up, man." might be out of desperation because she needed him to get up and be "fine" because she knew she was in seriously big trouble...and she knew he was seriously wounded and unable to get up. It felt to me like all the "Hey Bud(s)", the "come on(s)/come on, man", and the "I'm Sorry(s)" were really more for the unintended recipients (the 911 Operator, the Police Administrators who would eventually hear the call, the public, the Judge/Jurors, etc.) because the majority of the call was spent establishing that she was in the wrong apartment. If she'd cared that she'd actually accidentally shot another human being, that would have been her focus and priority in the call (and subsequently, in her language). Even if she were tired as she twice asserts, I would expect the fight or flight adrenaline of confronting an intruder (or at least what she asserts that she believed to be an intruder), to make her hyper aware of both her surroundings and his condition. But then again, I've never been an officer on a 12-15 hour shift, where you're already hyper aware the whole shift, so maybe she was fatigued. As for Jean, if someone burst into my apartment in the dark, shouting commands (and identifying themselves as an officer-or not), I likely wouldn't obey commands either. I *think* if I were the officer and it were an honest mistake, my priority would be the victim because he could bleed to death and I'd expect my training to automatically kick in (especially if this wasn't my first shooting). I'd expect to hear more comforting of the victim (words of encouragement, "Hang in there, buddy. Help is on the way. Stay with me." kinfd of statements). I found it unbelievable (literally) that she couldn't better identify where he was shot. Officers spend a considerable amount of time at the shooting range, hitting targets. They also make a number of 911 EMS calls and spend quite a bit of time in CPR/First Aid/First Responder training. Her vagueness, coupled with how late in the call she even introduced that he was shot and that she failed to address the severity altogether, I think she already knew he was beyond help when she called...which leads me back to her prioritizing establishing motive over empathy and seeking help for the victim and comforting the victim. Just my opinion.

Maddie said...

Derion Vence and his murdered four year old step daughter. Isn’t three the number of liars?

Maddie said...

I’ll tell you one thing. I know when I’m in my own house.

Maddie said...

Me as well. Whether or not she thought it was her apartment she could have immediately LEFT when she noticed an “intruder”. Nothing was preventing her. She should have never passed the psychological assessment and shot blindly first. Just leave and call it in! Poor guy. This is manslaughter.

Maddie said...

The “I’m going to get fired” was bone chilling. Zero regard for the innocent victim.

Lilstr said...

I may be stepping back from SA for a moment here, but as I've read Peter write: what would you have said, or what would you have done, here's my two cents.
I can imagine being over-tired and missing my way home. But there's no way I can imagine leaving my front door unlocked, in an apartment complex and even less so, leaving for work on a long shift. How I could not fish for my keys, try the lock, but just turn the knob and walk in ? If that were the case, or if I saw the door ajar, that would be the first thing I would mention to the 911 operator, and I would probably say it over and over: my front door was unlocked, my door was open, I thought someone was in my apartment..
Nowhere did she say: I thought he was in my apartment. Her words are: I thought it was my apartment.
So until someone explains to me how she, a police officer goes to work leaving the door unlocked, or fails to mention this most important detail (I found my door unlocked coming home) to the operator, whether she put the lights on or not, whether she didn't recognize her furniture or not, what she says or doesn't say in the call, is most unusual.

Anonymous said...

Is there a reason why my comments were deleted? I don't think there was anything disrespectful about them.

Autumn

Mod said...

Autumn---not intentionally. I will check and restore if they got caught up in Spam folder with a different "Anonymous" who had many deletions.

Anonymous said...

Okay, that's fine. Thanks for letting me know.

Autumn

General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous said...
Hurry, hurry before the scientist deletes it:

It takes quite an efford to go thus far in presupposing what is to be proven. For instance, why is the study about tired cops relevant -



lol your language acknowledges that you consider your post worthy to be deleted.

how is the study relevant? tired people do things that aren't the same as people who aren't fatigued. it isn't to excuse the actions the subject took. it is another facet of the event.

are your arguments personal? the analysis doesn't excuse the actions of the subject, you appear to argue from that presupposition.

Westry said...

The “General” is correct in this instance. In SA, we must put aside our personal emotions (bias) and let her words guide us here. Although her words speak to us in more of a negative context, it doesn’t mean she isn’t telling the truth about being confused about where she was when it occurred. A couple more things stand out:

D: Okay, they’re trying to get there to you. Do you hear them? Do you see them?

C: No...no..I..I..how the fuck did I put the..how did I..I’m so tired. Hurry. Hey! Over here, over here.

“I..I..”.. Is this possible confusion?
“how the fuck did I put I put the..how did I..” - Is she referring to a possible card key or key into the door to open the apartment that wasn’t hers? Is she questioning herself on how she could have mistaken this apartment for hers?”

This is followed by...”I’m so tired.” - Frustration with herself? A personal reason why she might be confused?

Next, we see her reaction to responding officers. (Officers she works with)
C: No, it’s me. I’m off duty. I’m off duty. I fucked..I thought they were in my apartment. I thought this was my floor.

We continue to see her express her “off-duty” status. This is the first thing she says to the responding officers after she identifies herself as “familiar”. She’s in uniform. Is it important to her to to convey to them she’s not one of the responding officers; but the one actually involved? Does it show empathy towards the victim. No. We don’t always see what is ideal in SA. We search for the truth.

Anonymous said...

Erin said

He was shot in the torso... how does "He’s on the top, top left" explain the shot into his torso to the operator?

I think Guyger probably thought the operator was asking in what part of the building Jean was shot and meant to say that it was on the top floor on the left. The fourth floor is the top floor of that apartment building.

Autumn

Jane said...

Anonymous This blog has been hi jacked

Crikey! I hope not.

I do agree that the SA is different to previous posts. Perhaps Peter wants to share an example of his students work.

I agree that the subject ‘thought it was her apartment’ and it is possible that the mistake of parking on the wrong floor and thereafter going to the wrong door could be down to extreme tiredness.
However, she refrains from saying what happened thereafter.

It would be useful to see a copy of her statement to police so that we can SA her exact words.

There is info in the affidavit that worries me.

She says that the door was ajar but a witness and resident says that the doors are fire doors and close automatically. If this is correct how could the door be ajar, was it broken, had the closing mechanism been disabled. Hopefully the police have investigated this.
If the door was not ajar it is possible that the noise of her trying to get in alerted the victim and he opened the door. She was extremely tired but I question whether at this point her brain would have instantly known that something was not right. An intruder does not open the door to a resident, I also read that the victim was wearing only his underpants. (?) Hopefully the evidence will help with this, ie location of body, forensics etc

She says she commanded the person. Presumably she identified herself as police and said she had a firearm. There was light coming from the landing and he would have seen her in uniform. Why would he continue to move and risk being shot.

She says that she didn’t realise that she was in the wrong apartment until she was speaking to 911 and they asked her the address. Surely if she still believed she was in her apartment she would have given them her apartment number. Instead she goes to look on the door for the apartment number, she must have realised by that point that she was in someone else’s apartment. So, if the affidavit it’s correct she lied to police.

Lots of questions to be answered

Interesting to note original manslaughter charge has now changed to murder. What has investigation revealed?


Oscar Pistorious keeps coming to mind whilst I look at this case. (In my opinion a clear case of premeditated murder)

I wonder if this police officer is ‘trigger happy’, mix that with extreme tiredness and confusion and we have the resulting tragedy.

Olivia said...

This is not different than Peter’s other work. Peter is an artist who can incorporate the rules while using his own brain.
Hopefully Peter can solve some other cases botched by the media/legal system that he has previously dismissed as a joke or delusion.

Erin said...

Thank you Autumn

John said...

D: Okay you’re with Dallas PD, right?
C: Yes. . . . Oh, my god. I’m done. I didn’t mean to. . I didn’t mean to. . I didn’t mean to. . I’m so sorry. Hey, bud.

What "didn't she mean to.."

If it is to shoot him, why can't she say it?

This is a point i would be ramming home along with the mistake of being in the "wrong apartment" Yet she doesn't. Why?

Habundia said...

Although I agree she's telling the truth, does that make right what she did wrong? To me it doesn't. I agree lack of sleep and long shifts can cause people to make error.
Yet i do have questions about the situation.
Yes she thought to entered her own home and then find someone in it. Was the 'intruder' armed? Did he carry a gun that she saw? What made her feel so treatend she felt the need to shoot? (twice). How long after she entered did she shoot? And what about that 'Code?' Did she need a code to enter the house? (of which the door was slightly open)

So why didn't the hall way at enterance not cause her to see it wasn't her home? No hallway is identical.

It's awfull to think about officers on the road, fatigue, judgmenting (possible) crimes.......how many innocent vicims have been killed or injured because of this?

I think it's a crime to send officers to the street who aren't well slept and clear minded, at the least it's negligence for the safety of the public, their partners/collegues and themselves.

Hey Jude said...

Affidavit:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4853150-Amber-Guyger-arrest-affidavit.html?sidebar=false

Anonymous said...

Article + video of interview with neighbor who filmed aftermath of shooting:

https://www.theroot.com/woman-who-filmed-aftermath-of-botham-jean-shooting-says-1832270038

The neighbor says her video started about 60 seconds after the shots were fired. In the video we see Guyger on her phone pacing down the hallway. According to the neighbor, it didn't sound like a police call, it sounded like a personal call. There was a lot of crying, a lot of hysterics. The call and the pacing back and forth went on for at least 7 minutes.

In other words, Guyger may have made a personal call of around 7 minutes before she called the police. If so, Jean laid there dying without help/reanimation for at least seven minutes before she called police/EMS. This doesn't match Guyger's story as laid down in the affidavit.

Plenty of other interesting info in the neighbor's statement.

Autumn

John said...

Here we go again. There is hardly any coverage of this in the news.

OT:

Native American Activist Claims Racially-Motivated Brutality in Arrest | Footage Shows Otherwise

Monet, who claims she was racially oppressed by a liquor store that wouldn’t sell to her when she was conspicuously drunk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXqiobavEY

FB Post.

Jenni Monet
20 April ·
Family, Friends, Supporters and Members of Indian Country and the greater Journalism Community:

Please accept my sincere apology for any embarrassment or disappointment I may have caused you regarding news circulating from my wrongful arrest and detainment, Friday, April 5, 2019, in Santa Fe County, New Mexico.
It is not lost on me the irony of how I am often writing and discussing the crisis for Native Americans overcoming chronic negativity in the news media--and yet, here, I am central to it.
To every parent or grandparent raising Indigenous girls and boys, I wish I could wish that night away. And as I stand in my truth, I look forward to seeing those of you on the other side of this storm who are brave and courageous enough to understand that what happened on 4/5 is a story not about belligerent drinking but rather legitimate outrage in how quickly and persistently brown women like me are disbelieved, gaslighted and presented with microaggressions at seemingly every turn.
The mental coping of many months and weeks and now days has been incredibly taxing. I am seeking proper attention and care to manage during these difficult times. And I am grateful for those of you who have reached out to express your support. It means the world. Thank you.

https://www.facebook.com/jenni.monet.journalist

Henrietta said...

A lesbian married couple in their thirties, have received a nasty letter, and now their house has been broken into, and someone have written "cunt" on their piano. And, their wedding photo was teared up.
The reason, was that they put up a LGBT flag on national day.

Here is the letter: (the spelling mistakes are not mine, nor are the lack of punctuation)

Fucking lespian whores think you can defile Norway's national day with your filthy flag.
We are proud people rich nation you defile our national inheritance bloody homobitsjes. Women shall know their place you
need a real man.


(Every word were written in capital letters, btw)
Now, sympathy, and more important, money, are pouring in. And I remain sceptical.
The pair, however, look normal (no blue hair, piercings or hideous tattoos, which are often the case in fake hate)

John said...

Hi, Henrietta

is there a link?

Henrietta said...

John, yes, but it is in Norwegian.
https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/4qr7yR/innbrudd-og-haerverk-paa-familiebolig-i-sandnes

John said...

Thanks, Henrietta

Burglary and vandalism on family home in Sandnes
A lesbian couple experienced that their home was tagged night by Sunday.

In addition, they must have been stripped of objects.

A family home at Vatne in Sandnes was tagged at night and stripped of objects of great value. In addition, the burglars had committed vandalism.

The lesbian couple who lived there were shocked when they came home on Saturday night, writes Stavanger Aftenblad, who interviewed the couple.

Among other things, their wedding image had been torn in pieces.

The women also said that they had previously experienced getting a threatening, anonymous letter sent by mail after they flagged with a rainbow flag, in addition to a Norwegian flag on May 17.

In the case lies a picture of the letter. VG reproduces the text as it stood on the sheet:

"Fucking lespeople think you can dirty Norway's national day with their dirty flag. We are a proud people a rich nation you defile our national heritage of homosexuals. Women should know their place you need a real man ”.

This is fairly strong language somewhat consistent with hate crimes. I would however, like to hear them speak up before making a conclusion.



- Has provoked some very powerful
The couple tell Stavanger Aftenblad that they see the letter and the burglary in context.

Elisabeth Vorland, Section Manager for Investigation in Sandnes, however, told VG that they cannot even answer whether the letter can be seen in connection with the burglary.

- May 17 is not only the Norwegian national day, but also the World Day against discrimination against gays. As a gay couple, we wanted to mark it. This has provoked some very powerful, says the woman to Stavanger Aftenblad.

Vorland cannot comment on which objects are stolen in the home. But she mentions the burglary as "special".

- Struggling for those involved in the case
- Basically, the case has been investigated as burglary and damage. It is a bit special that so much damage has been done as in this case, it is both broken and tagged on walls in the apartment, says Vorland.

Several walls must be tagged and damage has been done in the house. In the picture of a piano it is tagged "fitter".
“Today, I am raising the rainbow flag in support of the couple in Sandnes, who in the weekend were severely hit by hate crime. Everyone should feel safe in their own home and free to be who they are without getting their house end facing and tagged down. Completely unacceptable! June is PRIDE month and this is a strong wake-up call that there is still a way to go, also in Norway. Therefore, we must hoist the rainbow flag to the top and continue walking as far as is necessary for love. Everyone feels free to be exactly what they want ”.

Pride in 2018: This means Pride to us

Head in free, Ingvild Endestad writes this in a status on Facebook:

"It's heartbreaking and frightening that a couple's home is being vandalized because they are of the same sex. One woman tells the newspaper that what triggered the anonymous letter was probably that the family flagged with rainbow flags in addition to the Norwegian flag on May 17. Dear all skeptical friends and family: top with the flag, take care of each other and give an extra hug to a leaning friend. June is the prime month and I hope I don't have to answer why we still need Pride. 50 years with Pride, 50 years of struggle, 50 years of love! ”

A collection has also been established in support of the couple in Sandnes. At the time of writing, they have collected NOK 54 100.

In 2018, Muslim Thee Yesen Al Obaide showed his face for the first time in the Pride parade.

John said...


- Will the case be considered hate crime?

- There are things written in the apartment that can go under the criminal code section - but it becomes a legal assessment, says Vorland.

She tells VG that forensic technology is now present in the home.

She says that questioning and questioning have also been carried out on the spot. She also asks for tips from others who know something about the matter.

The police do not know if there is one or more perpetrators.

- In most of the burglaries we have, so much damage is not caused as in this case. It will be particularly stressful for those involved in the case, she says.

The case has created involvement
Trine Skei Grande has also commented on Facebook about the case:

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/4qr7yR/innbrudd-og-haerverk-paa-familiebolig-i-sandnes

Henrietta said...

As of now, over 100.000 nkr has been raised for the couple. (About 12.000 dollar) However, more is to come.

This case comes three months after the wife of Norways minister of justice (Tor Mikkel Wara is his name) was arrested and charged with fake hate toward herself, her home and her husband.(the minister of justice)
For weeks, they, and their two children had experienced getting their house and car painted with racial slogan (accusing Mr Wara of being a racist). Letters had been sent to them, their car was set on fire, liquid which is used to make a bomb was placed under their car and in the mailbox, etcetera.

After the arrest, Wara was in shock, he had not known that it was his wife who had made his life a living nightmare the last weeks, and he resigned from his post.
He had been especially terrified for his children, two teenage girls, and what could happen to them. Knowing their own mother was behind it, must have been heartbreaking.

This is why I am skeptical. But, I seem to be the only one, since the lesbian couple are now receiving lots of support.


General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous said...
Why was this "team of analysts" granted permission to post analysis that strays so far from Peter's usual instruction?


you are missing the part called context. your view is why computer programs are not great at statement analysis.

statement analysis is applied in context, sensitivity and language must be measured against the whole. the subject does not use qualifying language nor tangents she does not diminish the victim, her justification, is appropriate in context. NO ONE IS EXCUSING THE SUBJECT.

your line about "trudging home to the right apartment" is case in point. SHE didn't know she was in the wrong apartment.

rotinhelljohnson said...

Can SA be applied to interviews of some of the “Central Park 5”?

John said...

OT:

EXCLUSIVE: Casey Anthony - The Movie! Notorious mom reveals plans for racy film detailing her wild partying, murder trial acquittal and claims she was told to cover up her daughter Caylee's 'drowning' death.

Casey Anthony, 33, will have a movie called 'As I Was Told' made about her life which will be shot in Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina
It comes eight years after she was acquitted in 2011 for the murder of her two-year-old daughter Caylee Anthony
In the days following Caylee's death, she admits: 'Yes I drank and carried on like nothing happened'
'The movie is called 'As I Was Told' because I'd done what I was told to do. I had to put on a fake persona throughout those 31 days'

Caylee's body was found in December 2008 in a trash bag in woodland behind the Orlando, Florida home of her grandparents George and Cindy Anthony
Casey told DailyMail.com she does not want to make money from the movie: 'I just feel my truth needs to be out of me. I need to close the book'

The low-budget biopic will feature amateur actors, and the unnamed filmmakers, who normally run a theater group, admitted to her they have never made a movie before.

Snipped:

"It will make it clear that i had no part in Caylee's death as far as how she died. It will show the fact that i did not report it right away.

It will show the tears and the turmoil that i truly went through and the anxiety and hardship after i was released when i actually had time to mourn.

Through it all, i never once thought of suicide! I am stronger than that.. that is a cowards way out, and it is a sighn of guilt to me.

regardless of what the media think of me, i am not a monster..I just don't show my sadness. A thing that i was taught to me as a you girl.

I suffer on the inside... I learn to make peace and put a smile and put of a smile to cover the sadness,"

'It will make it clear that I had no part in Caylee's death as far as how she died.'


More, including a short interview.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7083055/Casey-Anthony-reveals-plans-racy-film-detailing-wild-partying-cover.html

Anonymous said...

She also calls it "A real movie based on my version of true events". Even a pathological liar can't lie twice.

Henrietta said...

Re, the lesbian couple. A pic now show the obligatory dyed pink hair.

Angie said...

It does contain all 3 of those criteria whether you want to say it was written by one of the women or an outside perp.

It also contains elements of sexual confusion.

As well as a focus on the “dirtiness” of lesbian behavior and an emphasis that a “real man” is what is needed.

The is language which also reflects that one of the partners is from a heavily religious background and either feels shame about her behavior or a projected fear that the partner could be unfulfilled by lesbian sex.

Willow said...

OT.
Statement Analysis by Peter.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=267&part=1&gen=99

By Richard D. Hall:
"On 16th June 2016, a British MP, Jo Cox, was murdered in broad daylight outside a library in Birstall, Yorkshire. The murder was witnessed by several people. The perpetrator allegedly shot Jo Cox three times and stabbed her several times. He wore a baseball cap, and none of the witnesses recognised him.
The attacker was not named by anyone at the scene of the crime. There is a long list of anomalies in this case which point to a probable serious miscarriage of justice. The alleged attacker, 52 year old Thomas Mair was arrested over a mile away from the murder scene and I suspect at the time of his arrest he had no knowledge about the murder, there is doubt about whether the police arrested and charged the correct man.
There is also doubt about whether the man who was interviewed by the police and stood trial WAS Thomas Mair.
There are four witnesses I have interviewed independently of each other, all who knew Thomas Mair, and all state that the man being interviewed shown on video by police is not Thomas Mair.
I suspect the two officers being interviewed for a TV documentary were involved in framing an innocent man for a murder he did not commit. Does the language of the two detectives show guilty knowledge that Thomas Mair is innocent and played no part in the murder of Jo Cox? Please note that in the CCTV evidence mentioned by the detectives, the suspect is wearing a baseball cap which is obscuring his face, therefore in no CCTV sequence can Thomas Mair be identified."

GeekRad said...

Casey Anthony is getting bold. Video of her in a bar. Posted on Radar online.

Anonymous said...

OT
I've been following a story in the town I live in for 11 years. A married, 26 year old pregnant mother (Kadie Major) and her 10 month old daughter (River) were found dead by some train tracks and it was ruled a suicide before an investigation was done. It was just featured on 48 Hours recently. The 10 month old was found in a creek 50 yards away and the autopsy showed she died by drowning but had no other injuries. The girls mother said there's no way her daughter committed suicide and killed her daughter. She had just found out that she was having a boy that day and she was excited about that. She did say that the girls husband (Aaron Major) acted really suspicious afterwards and had a hand injury that he later went and had cast put on for. She just posted an old interview between him and a detective and it definitely doesn't sound right. He is talking about the night that Kadie left. Kadie's mother said they weren't getting along and she was leaving him and going to stay with her parents. Her wedding rings were in her pocket and she had taken all of the cash out of the house. Here is the link to the video and the transcription is below the link:

I'm hoping Peter will analyze it. I've tried to but I know he'll catch some things that I can't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpbRPTzRukg&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2pICEBxCGJCEbKPpNU_14TUMnbeT2oxev-IApu_L5UrmQaxCxc_BtAKJQ

Interviewer: Listen, I know you’ve had to tell this story time and time again but um, I’m gonna ask you to tell us what’s going on if you don’t mind.

Aaron: I’m talking to her in the doorway and I finally…she felt like I was trying to keep her at the house by talking to her, because I was trying to get her to sit down for a minute you know, and you know, I said, let me hear you out. So we’re in, I don’t know, we might’ve talked for an hour, that entrance to the house, and Rivers just playing on the floor and what not and, uh, so I finally got worried and she got more and more like paranoid about me and started completely not trusting me at all and that’s when I was like, because, I wasn’t planning on skipping town, or you know what I’m saying, really leaving and she felt like I was trying to keep her there, you know. So that’s when I was like, okay I’m gonna get in the shower, I’m gonna pay my employee real quick (cough cough) and then I’m gonna go with you and we can drive around all night or do whatever you wanna do cause I knew something was bad, wrong, you know, cause she’s really shaking, scared, and I didn’t know what was going on, so that’s when I finally got her to calm down so she agreed to let me get in the shower and she said she’d wait on me. So I went upstairs, um, started, you know, in our bedroom, um, you know, straight down the hall is Rivers bedroom and she was up there. I’m pretty sure she put River in the crib while she, and she said she was gonna go make a bottle to get ready to go. So, that’s the last thing she said to me. Um, and I asked her again, I said you’re gonna wait for me aren’t ya? And she said yeah. So she went downstairs and made a bottle and I got in the shower and then, about halfway the shower I heard….I don’t know…I wasn’t sure it was her truck cranking up but I heard something like that, you know, while I was in the shower. So I got out of the shower, looked out the window and her truck was gone, um….so, I got dressed, got in my truck, tried to find her.

Interviewer: Well let me ask you this, what do you think happened?

Aaron: Well that’s why I’m asking you about, I don’t know what happened. (Laugh, Laugh)

MizzMarple said...

My apologies for the O/T below:

Has anyone been following the Tammy Lawrence Daley case - she is the woman who said she was attacked in the Dominican Republic.

-----

Below are snippets from the People article:

As well as speaking to PEOPLE, Lawrence-Daley also told her story to friends in a powerful Facebook post she shared Wednesday entitled “My Story.”

“How do you explain to your kids you were almost killed by some random stranger and that ‘Mommy is coming home, but I don’t look like myself’? How do you look into your parents eyes as they gaze upon your battered face telling them, ‘I’m okay, I’ll be okay’. Seeing friends break down in tears as they look at you. Everyone asking, ‘why?’, ‘how?’ You tell them a story. You recount every detail very matter of fact so that you don’t break down, that you stay strong… so they don’t see how you are crumbling inside with fear, disappointment, and weakness.”

-----

Though most of her injuries were internal and depend on the scar tissue healing with time, Lawrence-Daley says there’s one thing she’s particularly upset about.

“I always said the one thing I loved about myself was my smile,” she shares. “I always have a smile for everybody, I love my sense of humor and that’s the one thing that guy stole from me. He stole my smile and that just kills me."

-----

This man thought he killed me, but he failed. He is still out there, a predator, waiting for his next victim,” she said in her post.

She also stresses the importance of not blaming oneself for such an awful incident, though she struggles with this at times.

“I internalize this. ‘This is my fault, I got myself into this situation,'” she tells PEOPLE. “I feel horrendous that I put my husband and my friends through this situation. Their lives are changed forever, as well as mine.”

“Because I internalize everything and blame myself for the situation, I want to make sure that others who have gone through similar situations don’t blame themselves,” Lawrence-Daley adds. “That they realize that we didn’t ask for this, we didn’t cause this. This was somebody else deciding to do this and we have to find ourselves blameless in this whole situation.”

-----

Link: https://people.com/crime/woman-speaks-out-nearly-died-attack-dominican-republic-resort/


Hmmm ...

Jane said...

Re the Norwegian anonymous letter

The context is a lesbian couple in their thirties have been burgled at their home. A lot of damage has been done and items have been ‘tagged’ on the walls. I don’t understand the word ‘tagged’ but assume some thing nasty has been left on the walls, words or objects. The police are describing it as ‘special’ so I assume it is unusual and extreme. Burglars sometimes leave their own excrement at the scene.


The word ‘cunt’ was carved into the couples piano.
This is written in the singular. It’s is extreme insult. Is the S more angry with one of the Vs. Do both Vs play the piano or just one of them. Does the S know the Vs personally.

Their wedding photo was torn up.

The couple had received an anonymous letter after displaying a gay pride flag along with the national flag of Norway on national day.

Translated anonymous letter

Fucking lespian whores think you can defile Norway's national day with your filthy flag.
We are proud people rich nation you defile our national inheritance bloody homobitsjes. Women shall know their place you
need a real man.


Fucking lesbian whores
Anger and disrespect at female homosexuals in particular
Whore - promiscuous, frequent and diverse sexual relationships with various partners
Consider, the victims (Vs) are a married couple.
The subject is demeaning the marriage and strongly disapproves of lesbian sex.
We do not know whether the anonymous note and the burglary are connected. But the Vs marriage photo was torn during the burglary

Think you can
Challenging/denying the victims right to choose. The subject wants to control the Vs or one of them. Has the S been in a previous position to control Vs or one of them.

Cont .....

Jane said...

......cont

Defile Norway’s national day
Defile - make dirty, pollute, corrupt.
National day in Norway is a big deal to them. It is nationalistic, the people come together as one.It’s is more celebrated than Christmas Day or New Year’s Eve. In particular children parade through the streets with parents and onlookers cheering them. Costumes are very expensive.

With your/their filthy flag. ( I have seen a different translation using the word ‘their’)
The S considers the flying of the gay pride flag by the Vs as them defiling national day. They are announcing to the world that they support gay pride.
Filthy flag - The Vs are announcing to the world that they are homosexual. The offender is angry about the lesbian sex.

We are proud people rich nation
Who are the ‘we’, does the S feel a closeness to the Vs or one of them
This may be the work of a group
By flying the gay pride flag the Vs have hurt the S pride
Is the S reminding the victims of their heritage
Is the S wealthy, are they subconsciously reminding the victim that there is money available

You defile our national inheritance/heritage (?)
The Vs are making dirty/polluting/corrupting national day and what it stands for.

Bloody homobitsjes
Bloody - profane - blasphemous - not belonging to the sacred.
The S considers the Vs as excluded because of their homosexuality

Women shall know their place
Women plural
Shall - future time
Know - come to experience
Thier place - where they properly belong

You need a real man
The S is giving advice
Written in the singular. Is the S addressing just one of the Vs? As opposed to ‘real men’
The S wants one of them to stop being homosexual


The S strongly opposes the marriage of the couple and hates them having sex together. They want to control the Vs. The flying of the gay pride flag on National day hurt the S pride so much that they were compelled to write the anonymous letter. The S considers the Vs as excluded or outsiders because of their homosexuality. The S hopes that in the future one of the Vs stops her homosexuality and returns to where she belongs.

I think the S is possibly a family member/friend/ex-boyfriend of one of the victims. They have managed to conceal their opposition and anger about their loved one being homosexual but the flying of the gay pride flag pushed them too far. If the burglary is by the same person their anger is extreme and escalating, they want to hurt the Vs for being homosexual and want the Vs attention.
Or, could be one of the Vs is not happy in the relationship and wants out.

Lilstr said...

Here's and excerpt from the affidavit that Hey Jude found online:


"The facts of the case are as follows:
Complainant Jean is the resident tenant of apartment #1478. Guyger, who is a Dallas Police Officer, lives in the same apartment complex, directly beneath the Complainant, in apartment #1378. Apartment #1378 and apartment #1478 and their respective interior floorplan are in most ways identical or extremely similar to the exterior surroundings, structure, and description of each other. Complainant Jean was home alone when Guyger, who had just ended her shift, but was still in her Dallas Police uniform, arrived at the apartment complex and parked her vehicle on the fourth floor of the parking garage, which should correspond to the floor the resident lives on. Guyger entered the building and walked down the fourth floor hallway to what she thought was her apartment.

She inserted a unique door key, with an electronic chip, into the door key hole. The door, which was ajar prior to Guyger's arrival, fully opened under the force of the key insertion."

The door, which was ajar prior to Guyger's arrival
How can anyone know the door was ajar prior to her arriving? It seems like incongruent timeline.
Then the last part of the sentence:
the door fully opened under the force of the key insertion
This part does not seem to fit with rule of economy (the door opened vs the door fully opened). The force of the key insertion bit bothers me (the door opened as she inserted the key vs force of the key insertion). This contradicts the door being ajar, no force would be needed.

Lilstr said...

Cont'd

"Upon the door being opened, Guyger observed that the apartment interior was nearly completely dark. Additionally, the door being opened alerted Complainant Jean to Guyger's presence. Believing she had encountered a burglar, which was described as a large silhouette, across the room in her apartment; Guyger drew her firearm, gave verbal commands that were ignored by Complainant Jean."

Drawing firearm first before command is maybe instinctively the order in which those two actions are done by police.

"As a result, Guyger fired her handgun two times striking the Complainant one time in the torso. Guyger then entered the apartment, immediately called 911, requesting Police and EMS, and provided first aid to Complainant Jean. Due to the interior darkness of the apartment, Guyger turned on the interior lights while on the phone with 911."
So 1) calling 911 2) giving first aid,
3) turning the lights on

"Upon being asked where she was located by emergency dispatchers, Guyger returned to the front door to observe the address and discovered she was at the wrong apartment (#1478). Guyger called 911 from her cell phone requesting an ambulance and police to the offense location. Complainant Jean was transported to Baylor Hospital where he died as a result of his injury. Guyger remained at the scene and informed the responding officers and the 911 operator that she thought she was at her apartment when she shot the Complainant. Guyger believed she was in her apartment and confronted by a burglar when she fired her handgun, striking and killing him."

Anonymous said...

"Guyger returned to the front door to observe the address and discovered she was at the wrong apartment (#1478)"

Why would she go to the front door to check where she was, if she believed she was at home?

John said...

Guyger drew her firearm, gave verbal commands that were ignored by Complainant Jean."


"As a result, Guyger fired her handgun two times striking the Complainant one time in the torso.


A fine example of a change in language and a change in reality if this principle can be used in an affidavit.

John said...

OT Update:

911 calls from Jussie Smollett incident released

Heavily redacted and lots inaudible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AS9AntMfjY

7:44

CHICAGO —- (WGN) -- The 911 calls from the night the alleged attack on Jussie Smollett was reported were released Wednesday.

In January, the "Empire" actor reported to police that he had been attacked by two men in an apparent hate crime, saying his attackers used racial and homophobic language.

A person who was not Smollett called 911 that night to report the attack. The caller did not name Smollett but said a person was attacked.

The caller said:

“I just need police to come by…um.. I work with an artist…I don’t really want to say his name but he states that (REDACTED)… he went to Subway he was walking by some guys. I don’t know. They jumped him or something like that and I just want to report it and make sure he’s all right.

https://truecrimedaily.com/2019/06/06/911-calls-from-jussie-smollett-incident-released/?fbclid=IwAR1VhtH_lm4yh8sdljSGJ8pEX4vhA9ikuRoHKCFHnE5rGvRE2XXbrkohcXQ

Lilstr said...

Well, if she shot in the dark first, then saw something was amiss in the surroundings/ furnishings that would explain the wait a minute, where am I?
But that not what the affidavit says. It says, upon the dispatcher asking where she was, she went to the front door to check. Wait, what?? She did not notice the furnishings are not right, she needed the operator to prompt the question,where are you ? for her to check the apt number??

I really have trouble with the "gave first aid" in the dark, then turn the lights on.

If the timeline from the affidavit can be used, it would mean that:

0) open door, see shadow, draw firearm, give command, shoot twice.
1) call 911
2) give first aid,
3) turn the lights on
4) Not, oops, it's not my apartment, but "Where are you from operator?"
5) check the front door

Lilstr said...

Good read

Amanda said...

I'm also curious as to who took the photograph - looks like an editorial picture? And could her comment about needing blood be deriving from journalistic knowledge of what sells?

Anonymous said...

The analysis is contradictory in the following extract:

“Analysis Conclusion:

Analytical Questions:
1. Is the subject reliably reporting what happened? Yes
2. Did the subject intentionally shoot the victim? Yes
3. Did the subject believe she was shooting an intruder? Yes
4. Did the subject reliably report the mistaken location? Yes


The subject tells the truth about going to the wrong apartment, and tracing her thoughts to parking on the wrong floor.

The subject did not intent to shoot the victim, nor acted with malice nor racist animus towards him. ”

Question 2 conclusion is that the subject intentionally shot the victim, yet a couple of lines of text later , it states the subject did not intend to shoot the victim. Which is it ?

Anonymous said...

Great analysis Peter. I really enjoyed learning from the LE perspective as the caller, not the other way around.

You touched on it, but I would also look into her daily interactions with people. I wouldn't be surprised if she had narcissistic tendencies or some other form of emotional issues which kept her from focusing on other's needs. I wonder how she passed the psych test to become a cop.

GetThem