Simple question about Potter
-
@george-k said in Simple question about Potter:
COUNT I – Charge: First-Degree Manslaughter Predicated on Reckless Use/Handling of a Firearm - Guilty
COUNT II – Charge: Second-Degree Manslaughter - Guilty
The bad part? If she had intentionally discharged her pistol and just stated that he was a threat and the car was a deadly weapon then she walks. She's not going to jail because the dude's dead. She's going to jail because she was not well enough equipped to make that call in that position.
-
From the RWEC:
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Earlier today, to my disappointment, a Hennepin County jury convicted former police officer Kim Potter of both first degree and second degree manslaughter in the shooting death of hard-core criminal Daunte Wright. The facts of the case were never in dispute: police officers tried to arrest Wright on an outstanding warrant for a weapons charge, and he attempted to flee in his vehicle. As Wright was starting to get away, Potter meant to tase him, but under the pressure of the moment she drew her gun instead of her taser and fired once, killing Wright. Videos at the scene show that she was horrified and distraught at her mistake. The evidence at trial added little or nothing to what has always been clear.
In my opinion, the verdicts are wrong and should be reversed on appeal. The first degree manslaughter count requires that Potter caused another’s death “in committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offense with such force and violence that death of or great bodily harm to any person was reasonably foreseeable…” But Potter was not committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor, she was executing a lawful arrest of a criminal. There was a similar issue in the Derek Chauvin case.
Further, she did not act with “such force or violence” that death or great bodily harm was foreseeable. On the contrary, what was foreseeable to her when she tried to pull her taser was minor injury at worst.
The second degree manslaughter charge requires that death be caused “by the person’s culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.” There was no evidence that Potter “consciously” took the chance of “causing death” to Daunte Wright. Consciously, she was trying to use her taser, which would not have killed or seriously injured Wright.
In my opinion, Attorney General Keith Ellison should not have brought these charges against Potter, and Judge Regina Chu should not have submitted them to the jury. Will Potter’s conviction be reversed on appeal? It should be, but I don’t think anyone holds out much hope that Minnesota’s appellate courts have that kind of courage. The lynch mob atmosphere that prevailed in the Chauvin trial was more muted here, but I assume there would be riots if an appellate court did the right thing.
In recent times, two criminal defendants have had the book thrown at them in Minnesota: Derek Chauvin and Kim Potter. In general, Minnesota is a lenient state–one could almost say, a pro-criminal state. But Chauvin and Potter not only were overcharged (in Chauvin’s case, I don’t think his actions had anything to do with George Floyd’s death from a fentanyl overdose), the prosecution also was taken over by the Attorney General’s office, and the full resources of the state were brought to bear to ensure that convictions would be obtained in an atmosphere of threatened mob violence.
Here in Minnesota, we will be living with the consequences of these actions for a long time. At a minimum, it is hard to see who will want to be a police officer here. Not surprisingly, recruitment has dropped off precipitously. And the perceived alliance between Minnesota’s Attorney General’s office and the world of criminal gangs and drug addicts does not engender faith in law enforcement, to put it mildly.
-
Would any of us now strap on a badge and gun in Wisconsin? Or encourage one of our children to do so?
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
Would any of us now strap on a badge and gun in Wisconsin? Or encourage one of our children to do so?
-
Would any of us now strap on a badge and gun in Wisconsin? Or encourage one of our children to do so?
@jolly said in Simple question about Potter:
Would any of us now strap on a badge and gun in Wisconsin? Or encourage one of our children to do so?
I believe I've mentioned before, someone very close to me is in law enforcement in WI. Has been for 20 years. They are getting out of it as we speak, tired of what they see and hear all the time on the job.
-
That’s a shame. It’s going to be increasingly difficult to recruit police officers of any quality.
@mik said in Simple question about Potter:
That’s a shame. It’s going to be increasingly difficult to recruit police officers of any quality.
Totally.
Also, the way the jury asked about hung jury rules... then a day or two later have a guilty verdict implies they just wanted to get home for Christmas (since they were sequestered).
-
I’m sorry, but if there were ever a textbook definition of criminal incompetence, then this is it. She might have been a stellar officer in other respects, but this was really frigging bad. I think the charges were too high, but if we all agree that the truck driver in Colorado deserves to do a little time, how can she not? I’m not saying the charges are appropriate, but go to jail? Yes.
-
I’m sorry, but if there were ever a textbook definition of criminal incompetence, then this is it. She might have been a stellar officer in other respects, but this was really frigging bad. I think the charges were too high, but if we all agree that the truck driver in Colorado deserves to do a little time, how can she not? I’m not saying the charges are appropriate, but go to jail? Yes.
@lufins-dad I said earlier I thought this was textbook involuntary manslaughter (at the worst) or at best a reason she should lose her job. But 1st/2nd degree manslaughter was an over-prosecution, IMO.
-
Elephant in the room: Don't shape the Tazer like a firearm and vice versa.
-
@jolly said in Simple question about Potter:
Elephant in the room: Don't shape the Tazer like a firearm and vice versa.
That leads to a question I’ve been poking around for a while. Do you think that this is the first time an officer shot somebody thinking they had pulled a taser? My gut says no, but they didn’t have body cam video of the officer yelling “taser” as they fired. If she hadn’t yelled that, there’s a good chance she walks.
-
I disagree that she needs to do time at all. In fact I disagree that she should have been prosecuted. All this second guessing is going to get officers killed if it hasn't already. This fuckwad criminal made his own bed and created the situation where a mistake could be made.
-
I’m actually walking my stance back a little. Legally speaking, criminal negligence requires that you show the defendant ignored an obvious risk or disregards the health and safety of those around them. You can’t show that in this case. If anything, she was trying to be attentive to the safety of those around her by intending to use the taser and by yelling taser before firing. If there is no willful disregard of safety or risk, then there is no Criminal Negligence. No negligence, no manslaughter (voluntary or involuntary).
It’s a fine distinction, but it is a real one…
