Poll of the Day > Amber Guyger has immediately APPEALED her 10 year MURDER CONVICTION ALREADY!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

Amber Heifer Guyger wasted no time in filing her APPEAL to her 10 year murder sentence against Botham Jean as her lawyers have now gotten the go ahead from the ex cop to file an appeal effective immediately, just weeks when she was sentenced!!

It's the firststep for her plan to appeal the sentence but doesn't specify on what grounds as it has to be filed within 30 days under Texas law

Ed Klein, a legal analyst said it was likely just a procedural matter that will extend the appeal cut off for up to 90 days and give their team more time to decide whether to file or not

The jury found her guilty of murder earlier this month for entering her neighbor's apt by accident and shooting him dead thinking he was an "intruder"

She made a "tearful" plea for forgiveness as the Jean family said they forgave her as even the BROTHER said he DIDN'T want to see her go to prison and the Jury was very much divided and sympathetic to her situation and even considered acquitting her as well as Judge Kemp going over to HUG HER..but it wasn't meant to be and she was still sentenced on a controversial decision of 10 years.

The SOLE witness, Joshua Brown who was killed in a "drug deal" in the SAME WEEK of her 10 year conviction, was the only one who said Guyger should receive a prison sentence for her actions

They are asking the judge to recuse herself as DA John Creuzot is facing contempt for having an interview to share about the trial detials when Judge Kemp put a gag order

If the appeal is approved, Guyger could further cut her sentence even shorter and may be out earlier given the amount of "forgiveness" she had going into the trial from the jury, judge and jean family.

The appeal is also no surprise given her defense claimed it was very reasonable for an overworked woman to confuse the apartment and it has "haunted" her forever over her mistake. But the trial also did not look good for guyger where social media paints her as a RACIST against african americans and her biased opinions.

Do you think Amber deserves to be set free EARLIER?






---

10 years was already a joke of a sentence. If she wants it shorter than that, then she should work to get out early for good behaviour, not go crying to a different judge.
---

She should be happy she only got 10 years for breaking into someone's house and murdering them.

BlackScythe0 posted...

She should be happy she only got 10 years for breaking into someone's house and murdering them.

She's gonna be out in 5-8 rather than 10, too.

Bitch should be thankful, she deserved like 30 years.

Sometimes, I wish I could see what a person was thinking...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Sometimes, I wish I could see what a person was thinking...

I assume she's thinking she doesn't want to be in jail
---

LinkPizza posted...

Sometimes, I wish I could see what a person was thinking...

You know what shes thinking. She wants a more racist judge who wont care about the backlash theyll get for letting her go after committing a racist crime

---

adjl posted...

10 years was already a joke of a sentence. If she wants it shorter than that, then she should work to get out early for good behaviour, not go crying to a different judge.

Pretty much.

Would be nice if in appeals court they could actually extend the original sentence. Like a game show.

Do you stay on 10 years? Or do you go for whats behind the curtain?

The curtain, Judge!

Oooo. Were sorry! You get 25 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Jz1TjCphXE" data-time="
---

HornedLion posted...

Would be nice if in appeals court they could actually extend the original sentence.

Yeah, we definitely should encourage the system to punish people for trying to make sure their case was tried properly and they were sentenced fairly.
---

Youre right, she wasnt tried properly or sentenced fairly.

she needed more time, but cops are a socially accepted gang, so we need to think about her little feefees

---

mrduckbear posted...

Do you think Amber deserves to be set free EARLIER?

idk. As long as she's getting a few years of prison, I guess the mission is being accomplished.

BlackScythe0 posted...

She should be happy she only got 10 years for breaking into someone's house and murdering them.

Accidentally entering somebody's home isn't the same shit as a break-in and it's absurdly disingenuous to pretend that it is. There was no intent to trespass and, as far as I'm aware, NOBODY has suggested a plausible motive for her even wanting to trespass in a random apartment.

streamofthesky posted...

BlackScythe0 posted...

She should be happy she only got 10 years for breaking into someone's house and murdering them.

She's gonna be out in 5-8 rather than 10, too.

Bitch should be thankful, she deserved like 30 years.

lolwut? Your attitude is what's wrong with our criminal justice system and another reason why American jails are jam-packed past capacity. In places with progressive justice systems like Sweden where everything isn't strictly punitive, she'd only be looking at like 2-4 years. A deliberate, premeditated murder should be like 20, so 30 is fucking crazy.

Smarkil posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Sometimes, I wish I could see what a person was thinking...

I assume she's thinking she doesn't want to be in jail

Well, gang, that's another mystery solved!
---

PK_Spam posted...

so we need to think about her little feefees

Nah, you just need to think about not saying dumb shit regarding revamping the justice system to satiate your bloodlust.
---

Strong, independent wahmyn not held accountable for her action. Nobody is shocked. More at 11.
---

Rasmoh posted...

Nah, you just need to think about not saying dumb shit regarding revamping the justice system to satiate your bloodlust.

She broke into a mans home, walked through it, and then shot him to death because she thought that was her house.

She got off lightly after ending a mans life for her own stupidity and racism, and yes, it makes me really fucking angry.

---

Like, I don't believe she did it accidentally. But Idk. But I wish I could see if she's actually replaying it and it's a nightmare for her. Or if she's just thinking, I "I thought I'd get away with it. Maybe I can get this appeal. Time to start crying again." Or something...
---

PK_Spam posted...

She got off lightly after ending a mans life for her own stupidity and racism, and yes, it makes me really fucking angry.

Ten years is a little light, I would agree, but overall it's a reasonable sentence when you consider all factors that go into it.

Your appeal idea was still stupid though.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Like, I don't believe she did it accidentally. But Idk. But I wish I could see if she's actually replaying it and it's a nightmare for her. Or if she's just thinking, I "I thought I'd get away with it. Maybe I can get this appeal. Time to start crying again." Or something...

Appealing a criminal case is extremely standard, there's likely not some sinister ulterior motive. She's probably just hoping for a chance that there's something that could reduce her sentence or get her a new trial.

People definitively more guilty than her appeal cases all the time. Hell, even people who actually plea to their cases appeal them.
---

How can you be more guilty than her? Someone who absolutely did it.

---

PK_Spam posted...

How can you be more guilty than her? Someone who absolutely did it.

Perhaps the wording was poor. Maybe "people with much more damning evidence against them" would be a more accurate phrase.
---

Rasmoh posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Like, I don't believe she did it accidentally. But Idk. But I wish I could see if she's actually replaying it and it's a nightmare for her. Or if she's just thinking, I "I thought I'd get away with it. Maybe I can get this appeal. Time to start crying again." Or something...

Appealing a criminal case is extremely standard, there's likely not some sinister ulterior motive. She's probably just hoping for a chance that there's something that could reduce her sentence or get her a new trial.

People definitively more guilty than her appeal cases all the time. Hell, even people who actually plea to their cases appeal them.

I know appeals are common. I'm just saying, I wish I could see what's going on in her head is all...
---

LinkPizza posted...

I wish I could see what's going on in her head

"I don't want to be in prison."
---

Rasmoh posted...

HornedLion posted...

Would be nice if in appeals court they could actually extend the original sentence.

Yeah, we definitely should encourage the system to punish people for trying to make sure their case was tried properly and they were sentenced fairly.

Lol. Homeboy, thats how it works. You accept you did wrong, and it doesnt even have to go to trial and waste the time and money of dozens of tax payers... well, then you get the safest sentence.

You think youre innocent... make them bring in 12 super bright individuals that couldnt get out of jury duty... make the DA work 10x harder... and THEN lose. Well then you typically get worse than if you just went along with what was offered to you at the start.

An appeal here is silly as there is no new evidence. This case was tried fairly, and the people have spoken... and even then 10 years is a fucking joke for killing someone who was legally eating ice cream in their own home.
---

Rasmoh posted...

HornedLion posted...

Would be nice if in appeals court they could actually extend the original sentence.

Yeah, we definitely should encourage the system to punish people for trying to make sure their case was tried properly and they were sentenced fairly.

It wouldnt be all bad. I mean, it helps to save time. I mean, she was just sentenced and is appealing. Like HornedLion said, theres no new evidence of anything. It really does feel like a waste in this situation. And having the option doesnt mean they will always get a longer sentence. Its just an option. Instead of wasting everyones time, you have to think if an appeal right now would be a good idea. And it wouldnt even have to be something they used often. Maybe in cases where the prisoner has been in for while, they dont use it. Or its only for prisoners who have been in under a certain amount of time...
---

HornedLion posted...

Homeboy, thats how it works.

The rest of your post can be safely ignored because appeals are also "how it works", but here goes.

You also don't need new evidence to appeal. Also, going to trial, getting found guilty, and getting sentenced doesn't mean that it all took place fairly and appropriately. Appeals exist for that very reason.
---

shes about to walk away free.

LinkPizza posted...

It really does feel like a waste in this situation.

99% of the justice system involves huge amounts of waste. 99% of appeals are a waste.
---

Rasmoh posted...

LinkPizza posted...

It really does feel like a waste in this situation.

99% of the justice system involves huge amounts of waste. 99% of appeals are a waste.

Yeah. So maybe there should be something in place to limit that waste of time...

Again, it doesnt have to be all, or even a lot, of them. But limiting them would be nice. And less costly...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Yeah. So maybe there should be something in place to limit that waste of time...

Again, it doesnt have to be all, or even a lot, of them. But limiting them would be nice. And less costly...

So are you saying we should take measures to reduce the rights of convicted criminals?
---

Rasmoh posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Yeah. So maybe there should be something in place to limit that waste of time...

Again, it doesnt have to be all, or even a lot, of them. But limiting them would be nice. And less costly...

So are you saying we should take measures to reduce the rights of convicted criminals?

No. Like I said, just add that there can be penalties for going for appeals. And again, it doesnt have to be for all. Or make it so they have to actually serve a little time. Or something. It definitely just seems like a waste for her to go to prison, only to immediately turn around for an appeal with no new evidence, or any evidence to suggest the trial was unfair (especially since she got a pretty light sentence of 10 years for what she did), and waste time after she just finished.
---

LinkPizza posted...

No. Like I said, just add that there can be penalties for going for appeals.

Seems like saying "we should punish people for exercising their rights or at least make them jump through a bunch of hoops to exercise them" is advocating for reducing their rights to me.

And don't get me wrong, I'm all for restricting the rights of criminals, it just seems like you are too while pretending not to be.
---

Rasmoh posted...

LinkPizza posted...

No. Like I said, just add that there can be penalties for going for appeals.

Seems like saying "we should punish people for exercising their rights or at least make them jump through a bunch of hoops to exercise them" is advocating for reducing their rights to me.

And don't get me wrong, I'm all for restricting the rights of criminals, it just seems like you are too while pretending not to be.

Adding that there can be a consequence in certain cases isnt taking away all rights. So no. You can think what you want, though...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Adding that there can be a consequence in certain cases isnt taking away all rights.

"If you exercise your rights but the reason is good enough, you should be punished."? Is that somehow not a method to reduce one's rights? Do you not see how this could discourage potentially innocent people from filing appeals?
---

Rasmoh posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Adding that there can be a consequence in certain cases isnt taking away all rights.

"If you exercise your rights but the reason is good enough, you should be punished."? Is that somehow not a method to reduce one's rights? Do you not see how this could discourage potentially innocent people from filing appeals?

No. Because I also said in certain cases. For example, maybe it gets people to wait instead of constantly appealing. Like maybe waiting a couple months in prison instead of immediately being able to appeal. They can still appeal without consequence. They just have to wait. Or they can try earlier and risk some form of penalty. They still have a right to appeal without penalty. They just have to wait. They still have all their rights... as long as theyre patient. And as I said, its not for all cases. Like people who have been in for a certain amount of time probably wouldnt be affected by this. But again, you can think whatever you want. It doesnt really matter to me. I was just saying that I think it would be a good idea. And would save time and money.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Like, I don't believe she did it accidentally. But Idk. But I wish I could see if she's actually replaying it and it's a nightmare for her. Or if she's just thinking, I "I thought I'd get away with it. Maybe I can get this appeal. Time to start crying again." Or something...

wtf are you on about? The perp had no known relationship with the victim nor reason to visit that apartment. The investigators and the defense also proposed no alternative reason for her to be there. But go ahead, tell us why you don't believe she did it accidentally. I'll get some popcorn.

HornedLion posted...

Rasmoh posted...

HornedLion posted...

Would be nice if in appeals court they could actually extend the original sentence.

Yeah, we definitely should encourage the system to punish people for trying to make sure their case was tried properly and they were sentenced fairly.

Lol. Homeboy, thats how it works. You accept you did wrong, and it doesnt even have to go to trial and waste the time and money of dozens of tax payers... well, then you get the safest sentence.

You think youre innocent... make them bring in 12 super bright individuals that couldnt get out of jury duty... make the DA work 10x harder... and THEN lose. Well then you typically get worse than if you just went along with what was offered to you at the start.

An appeal here is silly as there is no new evidence. This case was tried fairly, and the people have spoken... and even then 10 years is a fucking joke for killing someone who was legally eating ice cream in their own home.

New evidence generally isn't enough for an appeal. Appeals are generally procedural. I think you're objecting to the appeal system because you don't understand what the fuck it is.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Like maybe waiting a couple months in prison instead of immediately being able to appeal.

So then you are restricting their rights. "You have to wait x amount of time to exercise your rights" is restrictive, by definition.

LinkPizza posted...

And as I said, its not for all cases.

By justice system standards, it kind of has to be. Otherwise, you're restricting their rights.

LinkPizza posted...

And would save time and money.

I'm all for saving time and money, but you're going to have to restrict rights to do so in the justice system.
---

How do you accidentally go into someone else's home? If she did get off with the crime would it set a precedent for people to straight up murder complete strangers then claim it was an accident and they thought that it was their home.
Like, was she high? Does she live next door or one floor up or down or something?

Aaantlion posted...

wtf are you on about? The perp had no known relationship with the victim nor reason to visit that apartment. The investigators and the defense also proposed no alternative reason for her to be there. But go ahead, tell us why you don't believe she did it accidentally. I'll get some popcorn.

I literally said I dont know. I just dont really believe it was. And while she says they didnt have any known relationship, we dont really know if they didnt, so...

Rasmoh posted...

So then you are restricting their rights. "You have to wait x amount of time to exercise your rights" is restrictive, by definition.

So, youre not reading what I said? I said they could at any time. But doing sombefore a certain time can carry certain risk. Most things have a risk/reward system. This will just be me of them. I said they had to wait a certain amount of time before its penalty free. It they they could do it at anytime.

Rasmoh posted...

By justice system standards, it kind of has to be. Otherwise, you're restricting their rights.

Nope. Lots of things are a case by case basis. It depends on all the circumstances surrounding the case. It doesnt have to be for all of them...

Rasmoh posted...

I'm all for saving time and money, but you're going to have to restrict rights to do so in the justice system.

And again, not restricting rights...
---

Aaantlion posted...

The perp had no known relationship with the victim nor reason to visit that apartment.

I was under the impression they were neighbours?
---

LinkPizza posted...

So, youre not reading what I said?

I am, you're just being disingenuous as you sit here and pretend you're not looking to discourage people from exercising their rights via veiled threats.

LinkPizza posted...

And again, not restricting rights...

Please explain to me how making people wait to exercise their rights under threat of penalty isn't restrictive.
---

Rasmoh posted...

I am, you're just being disingenuous as you sit here and pretend you're not looking to discourage people from exercising their rights via veiled threats.

Im not being disingenuous. It would be so they have more to think about than constantly wasting time. They can still appeal every damn day if they want. But they now can incur penalties in certain cases.

Rasmoh posted...

Please explain to me how making people wait to exercise their rights under threat of penalty isn't restrictive.

They dont have to wait. They can do it right away and waste peoples time if they want. But in certain cases, it has a chance to incur a penalty. But the dont have to wait.
---

LinkPizza, how bout this...

You can appeal BUT... from the time the appeal is filed to when its concluded, your current sentence is frozen.

Its better than what we have and not bad enough to have folk cry about criminals rights being trampled.
---

HornedLion posted...

LinkPizza, how bout this...

You can appeal BUT... from the time the appeal is filed to when its concluded, your current sentence is frozen.

Its better than what we have and not bad enough to have folk cry about criminals rights being trampled.

That could work. That actually sounds like a great idea.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Im not being disingenuous.

You absolutely are though. You are specifically saying that people should be punished for exercising their rights if they don't wait a certain amount of time to do so. That's restrictive on both ends.

HornedLion posted...

LinkPizza, how bout this...

You can appeal BUT... from the time the appeal is filed to when its concluded, your current sentence is frozen.

Its better than what we have and not bad enough to have folk cry about criminals rights being trampled.

Considering how long appeals take, you might as well just advocate for the removal of the appeals process.

And again, I'm all for taking away the rights of criminals, I just ask that you folks join me in being honest about it.
---

Rasmoh posted...

You absolutely are though. You are specifically saying that people should be punished for exercising their rights if they don't wait a certain amount of time to do so. That's restrictive on both ends.

I still dont see how Im being disingenuous, but whatever. And they dont have to be punished. I said that in certain cases, they can carry certain penalties. It doesnt mean they have to. And even if it does carry penalties, it doesnt mean they have to act on them. But it should help to mitigate waste...
---

LinkPizza posted...

I still dont see how Im being disingenuous

You don't see how "you're not being punished, you just have to wait to exercise your rights or you'll be punished!" is disingenuous?

LinkPizza posted...

I said that in certain cases, they can carry certain penalties. It doesnt mean they have to. And even if it does carry penalties, it doesnt mean they have to act on them. But it should help to mitigate waste...

So basically your solution is to introduce a different extremely convoluted process that is going to be just as prone to waste, if not more?
---

Rasmoh posted...

You don't see how "you're not being punished, you just have to wait to exercise your rights or you'll be punished!" is disingenuous?

Again, I didnt say that. But you sure like putting words into my mouth. I said theres a possibility of a penalty. And not always. Only sometimes. And even with the possibility, it doesnt always have to happen.

Rasmoh posted...

So basically your solution is to introduce a different extremely convoluted process that is going to be just as prone to waste, if not more?

I dont see how it causes any waste...
---

Death penalty.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Again, I didnt say that. But you sure like putting words into my mouth. I said theres a possibility of a penalty. And not always. Only sometimes. And even with the possibility, it doesnt always have to happen.

I'm not putting words in your mouth, you are the one proposing that we threaten certain people with punishment for exercising their rights within a certain timeframe. What you are proposing is saying "in some cases there may or may not be a potential punishment that may or may not be enacted upon an individual who doesn't wait to exercise their rights". It's obviously threatening and needlessly convoluted. It creates waste by adding an additional lengthy legal process to precede an already lengthy legal process.
---

Rasmoh posted...

I'm not putting words in your mouth, you are the one proposing that we threaten certain people with punishment for exercising their rights within a certain timeframe. What you are proposing is saying "in some cases there may or may not be a potential punishment that may or may not be enacted upon an individual who doesn't wait to exercise their rights". It's obviously threatening and needlessly convoluted. It creates waste by adding an additional lengthy legal process to precede an already lengthy legal process.

I didnt say threaten them, either. So, it does sound like youre putting words in my mouth.
---

LinkPizza posted...

I didnt say threaten them, either. So, it does sound like youre putting words in my mouth.

"If you don't wait to exercise your rights, you might be punished."

How is that not a threat?
---