Jusme wrote: ↑
Sat Sep 15, 2018 8:26 am
I wouldn't be so hasty, to denigrate the investigation. Most of what is being reported, is opinions from the victim's friends and family, and I'm sure behind the scenes activists are involved. None of the reports are from the Texas Rangers, and they have a pretty decent track record, of investigating. You won't see leaks, coming from the Rangers, and they won't report anything until the investigation is complete. I know we all want quick answers, but, even cases, that seem cut and dried, take time. There are ballistics reports, witnesses, to interview, etc. People, want to assume conspiracy, if they don't get instant information. I would not trust anything, as being official, that is being reported in the media right now. JMHO
I agree with this observation. So far, the news has reported a lot of claims from the victim's family, and darn little facts from anything else. This is because the city cannot tell them anything, having done the smart thing by turning it over to the Rangers for investigation and the Rangers, as a general rule, do not talk to the media about on-going investigations. The closest that they have come to saying anything about the investigation is by filing an affidavit to get the arrest warrant. Those are public and the media did report on that.
As for the searches in question, I would think the Rangers got a search warrant for the victim's apartment to cover it for evidence in the investigation. It is private property and the evidence would not be admissible if questioned without a warrant. This would be especially important if the evidence indicated anything like the rumored "affair" because it could give the officer standing to object to the search. The only thing better than a search warrant is if you get consent for the search. The warrant could still be argued in court but consent (if true consent and freely given) can not be. They would have needed much more evidence than just rumor to search her apartment for evidence of any prior relationship or knowledge of the victim, so her giving consent was the best way for them to search it. Her giving consent, BTW, does help make it look better for her, IMO.
I fully believe her story is possible and plausible. There are rumors of her having prior knowledge of the victim, both good and bad (an affair or complaints about his behavior). I have one serious question though, and it is possibly explainable too. It has been reported that witnesses heard someone shouting to open the door and that it was the police. This has been argued to be the female officer when she arrived. That doesn't match her story. But witnesses are not very reliable on time lines and this could have been the police after she called for help. For the obligatory cultural reference showing this problem, think about the "magic" grits which cooked in less time than anyone else's grits in "My Cousin Vinny". Honest mistakes on timelines can happen.
I am not yet convinced the officer's story is the straight up truth but I have not heard of enough evidence to say it isn't either. This makes her guilty of manslaughter at worst.
I am convinced that many people, especially the victim's family, are adding in race where it really had no bearing on this at all, though I could be wrong on this too.