Sgt Potter on trial for accidental 'shoot instead of tase'

@dood111 said
I never said that, quite the opposite, it's obvious she meant to taser him, not shoot him.
The way you people make assumptions is ridiculous.

Then why are trying to justify his death by lying about his wrap sheet?
It doesn’t matter what you think of the victim, he was killed unlawfully by an officer of the law.
Again:-“ Without all your twisted BS my gut tells me she’s guilty of no more than manslaughter due to negligence, probably another case of low standards regarding recruitment and training in US law enforcement.”

@kevcvs57 said
Combative in the sitting position in a car 🤔 don’t you care how effing stoopid you look!

He was OUT of the car being handcuffed when he started fighting with the male officer and jumped back in to take off. Something that he had done before and almost ran over two cops in the process.
I bet you haven't even watched the whole video, have you?

@dood111 said
He was OUT of the car being handcuffed when he started fighting with the male officer and jumped back in to take off. Something that he had done before and almost ran over two cops in the process.
I bet you haven't even watched the whole video, have you?

at the point he got in the car, the car became a deadly weapon

@no1marauder said
The penalty for "resisting arrest" isn't death.

There is no question that Officer Potter would not have been justified in using deadly force though the usual racists seem to think it is OK to kill any black person who doesn't immediately comply with police orders.

The question for the jury is whether she acted with "culpable negligence".

wright was using a deadly weapon

@no1marauder said
The Criminal Complaint is here: https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-21-7460/AmendedComplaint09022021.pdf

In the Statement of Probable Cause there are these statements:

"SSA McGinnis later collected and reviewed the layout of Defendant’s duty belt. SSA [b]McGinnis observed that Defendant’s handgun was holstered on the right side of the ...[text shortened]... used Wright's death which is the required elements of Manslaughter II Minnesota Statute: 609.205(1).

She is being charged with First and Second Degree manslaughter. I cannot even begin to comprehend how any of the 5 clauses pertaining to First Degree manslaughter could possibly apply. One has to consider the implied political context that seemingly has created a scenario where the prosecution is over-charging so clearly.

But second degree is at least arguable, although I still see it as quite a stretch. It is not just the two words "culpable negligence" that get to stand alone in making the charge, it also requires that they "consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm..."

I fail to see the "conscious" part. At what point are we speculating that Potter said to herself, "hmm. Let me take out this 9mm firearm and point it at this unarmed man so I can taze him." It was a high stress situation that could easily turn life-threatening any second. If what Potter did meets this definition, why wouldn't the law have just said "any accidental death of any kind that a person causes should be considered second degree manslaughter"? If there are any kinds of accidental deaths that do not result in criminal charges, I am at a loss as to what would a situation that results in death where there is LESS reason to press charges than this one.

And look at the other clauses for second degree manslaughter. "Setting a spring gun" for example. When one sets a spring gun, one has time to carefully consider the outcome. It is obvious it can cause death and the person setting it would almost never deploy any such thing in the heat of a stressful encounter.

It has been brought up that Potter has had gobs of training and should easily distinguish between the gun and taser. It's as if they're asking "how could anyone with that much training make this mistake?" This seems like a good question, except that we already know she did make that mistake. So it has been demonstrated that someone with all the training the police department gives over a long career CAN still make this mistake when under the stress of a combative arrestee. Obviously it is rare, otherwise we'd be hearing a lot more about it. The fact that it is rare does not demonstrate that it's not a mistake. Unless the prosecution is going to follow up this question with "therefore it is not a mistake", which I don't think they are (and it would be ridiculous without a lot of new surprise evidence), then I see nothing changed by arguing about how much training Potter has had.

I have to think about what the police department can do to improve things. Instead of giving gun training once a year, how about every 6 months, or every 3 months, or every month even? And instead of having officers sign a form saying they understand the difference between a taser and a gun once a year, why not every week, or every day? Why not just have them radio in every hour and get a reminder that a taser and a gun are not the same thing?

Other than a nice, feel-good platitude of "more training" or "better screening", the police have a really tough job in making sure 100% of police officers never use even slightly too much force while they themselves can be shot at.

But, I also think of Daunte Wright. What could he have done to ensure this situation went better than it did? Hmm. I can't think of a single thing.

@suzianne said
I wish to subscribe to your newsletter and your podcast.

😎

@techsouth said
She is being charged with First and Second Degree manslaughter. I cannot even begin to comprehend how any of the 5 clauses pertaining to First Degree manslaughter could possibly apply. One has to consider the implied political context that seemingly has created a scenario where the prosecution is over-charging so clearly.

But second degree is at least arguable, althoug ...[text shortened]... have done to ensure this situation went better than it did? Hmm. I can't think of a single thing.

"I made a mistake" is not the 100% foolproof defense to manslaughter you think it is. "Culpable negligence" is failure to use due care, in this case in the handling of a deadly weapon. How could anyone in Potter's position using due care not know she had a gun not a taser in her hand with the obvious differences between them? At the least, it is clearly a jury question to evaluate.

Step on the gas when you intend to step on the brake and cause a fatal accident and you're likely to be charged with some type of vehicular homicide. That situation seems analogous to Potter's.

@mott-the-hoople said
wright was using a deadly weapon

Is that what you think the law is? That you're allowed to use lethal force against any black male in a car because they possess a "deadly weapon?"

@dood111 said
Garner died of a heart attack. Morbidly obese, enlarged heart, diabetes, high blood pressure, and emphysema. Any exertion could have killed him. He had no business struggling with the cop and resisting arrest.
"Choke holds" do not choke, they restrict the blood flow, not the windpipe.

Is this covered in The Big Book of Republican Fairy Tales?

@dood111 said
Inglewood, my hometown, left in '77 when it really started turning to crap. You should have seen it in the 50's-60's, it was a beautiful, clean, safe, wholesome place for a kid to grow up in.
How's that working out for you? Do you like what the diverse crowd has done to it?

"Diverse crowd"? Or white oppression? Blacks have been in Inglewood for a long time. Mistreat them + bitch when they protest + blame them for protesting = the white agenda. BLM is no different.

How's that working out for you?

@dood111 said
All of the BLM martyrs would be, Garner, Floyd, the list is endless. Don't resist arrest and fight with cops, you'll be fine.

A white boy is a white apologist. Go figure.

@averagejoe1 said
That’s tellin’ em. The Forum should start taking overflow cases.
Wonder what code of law would be applied. Equality, Equity, what…..

How about just treating them like human beings?

Is that too hard for you white boys?

@contenchess said
...said the traitor.

Non-sequitur. By setting races against each other, one could say that you are the traitor, against the human race.