• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Daunte Wright shot with Taser. And by "taser," I mean, "Gun."

Right. My point is twofold: Wright was not driving his own car so police would have no idea that there was a warrant for his arrest from running the plates.
Good thing then they stopped him and ran his license. Or do you not want gun criminals taken off the street?

DMVs had shortened hours or no hours for a while and everyone was having trouble getting their tags renewed.
People still go to renew their tags in person? I have been doing it online for years. Even emissions are uploaded to DMV electronically.
Officer testimony is that she would not have pulled over the vehicle for expired tags because people were having trouble renewing their tags during that period of time.....And that the air freshener was a minor infraction. I do know that police will pull people over for air fresheners hanging as a pretext for looking for drugs, warrants, etc. Because I've been told by people who work with law enforcement that they do.
 
Right. My point is twofold: Wright was not driving his own car so police would have no idea that there was a warrant for his arrest from running the plates.
Good thing then they stopped him and ran his license. Or do you not want gun criminals taken off the street?

DMVs had shortened hours or no hours for a while and everyone was having trouble getting their tags renewed.
People still go to renew their tags in person? I have been doing it online for years. Even emissions are uploaded to DMV electronically.
Derec, how quickly you forget. Its different for white people. Black people don't know how to use the internet, much less afford it. You need to get with the program.

Potter testified that she wouldn't have pulled over someone for expired tags because of difficulty going to DMV at the time. (Edited to say, I see Toni already said this, but I'll leave it in.)

Whenever I've gone to the DMV I haven't see any disproportion in the demographics there.
 
It appears that you are arguing the prosecutor's arguments are irrelevant, so the defense should be able to bring up irrelevancies. Describing the death is common in trials, so that is not irrelevant. I agree that the unprotected sex appears irrelevant.

How the death is described is very much important. I think the way the prosecution has done it is a blatant appeal to emotion.
And if prosecution is allowed to talk about who Daunte was as a man, the defense should be allowed to rebut that characterization by bringing up his ample history of crime and even to bring his victims to testify.
As it stands, prosecution is allowed to spin hagiographies about St. Daunte of Brooklyn Park and the defense is not allowed to contradict it with facts and evidence.
Your characterization is bullshit.
Mr. Wright's past actions are irrelevant to this particular tragedy.
Far more relevant than his reproductive status.
And again, if prosecution is allowed to spin a narrative about Daunte's life, the defense should be able to contradict that characterization.

Ms. Potter killed Mr. Wright. Given the long and documented history of inaction on the part of the police in the area to adequately investigate these types of actions, there is little or no community trust in their determinations. These trials are the result of a history of leniency towards the police that have lead to this distrust.
There is no leniency. Unless you are Somali Muslim who deliberately shot an innocent woman for no reason. Then you get out after mere five years. If you are a white cop who accidentally shot a violent thug, you can expect no leniency whatsoever in Minnesota. :rolleyesa:
What on earth are you on about now?
 
NO, he didn't. He picked getting tased. Because that's what Officer Potter yelled over and over.
The thing is that if you make stupid choices, you might get more than you bargained for. Potter made a mistake, but she would not have even tried to pull her taser had he allowed himself to be taken into custody.
And Ms Potter would not have accidently killed Mr. Wright if her parents had had effective protected sex at the time she was conceived.

Ms. Potter and Mr. Wright both made mistakes. The difference is that Ms. Potter is alive to deal with hers.
 
Heard the testimony on the radio this morning. Not really buying it, personally, especially since the witness is sobbing that she knows she's guilty essentially, but her lawyers are insisting that she can't be faulted for the mistake at all, that it would have been perfectly fine to shoot the man. If that's so, why does she feel so bad? A clear contradiction. No one would likely come to my defense if I made a mistake on the job that resulted in shooting one of my charges in the chest, no matter how much I sobbed on the witness stand. And I'm glad of that. People in positions of public service should hold themselves to high standards. People who handle firearms as part of their role, triply and quadruply so.

Why is it that when people want to be "tough on crime", they insist that no criminals will obey the law unless there are severe and consistent consequences for breaking it, but when it's the police, we say there should be no real penalty for accidental murder on the job as long as they feel sad about it afterward. You know who else feels sad? The victims of incompetent people wielding guns in an unsafe fashion. Plenty of accused criminals cry on the witness stand. It's an everyday occurence in any court. Should they all go free, having paid the ultimate price of crying publically over the mistake they made? Or are we more sympathetic to some people's tears than others?
 
Given everything, she could be an extremely valuable asset to the police department.
Frankly, as a weapons trainer. Who better to teach a lesson on careful usage of the tools available than someone who messed up and caused a huge disaster? She is, and always will be, an object lesson in why decisions about use of weapons, sometimes made in a second or less, are a big effing deal.
I agree that this would be an excellent use for her. After she has served her time. Or even while she's serving her time; modern technology makes many things possible, and service of that kind speaks well to you when you're up for parole consideration. Either way, she will be better able to speak on the lived consequences of fatal mistakes once she has experienced some of those consequences.
 
Suppose Jan6 insurrectionist was carrying anti bear spray and a pistol. He is confronted by Capitol Policeman. He intends to spray the officer, but in the stress of the moment, many years of militia training takes over and he shoots the officer.

Can he claim it was an accident, as his intention was to use a chemical weapon, not a deadly weapon?
 
I renew my tags in person all the time. I live in a small town which is also the county seat. There is virtually never a line.
I really wonder where you live. Your town must be a geographical oddity. DMVs with no lines. White people selling drugs in the streets but never getting arrested. Quite a strange place.

Aside from that, in my state, ALL the DMVs were short staffed, had short hours and online registrations were taking FOREVER because of the pandemic.
I had no trouble, neither in 2020 nor 2021.

THAT is why my state and some others (including Minnesota) were telling police not to pull people over for expired tags. It put the officers and the drivers at greater risk for COVID exposure AND it was likely that the person was not able to renew their tags in person OR on line.
But it does allow you to check for warrants and thus allows you to catch gun criminals. Again, I thought your lot was in favor of arresting gun criminals.
 
White people in your area get busted for dealing drugs on the street? Where I live, not so much and it's a very, very white place.
Of course white people get busted when they deal drugs in the street. Where do you live anyway? Pleasantville?
 
Your characterization is bullshit.
Hardly. I leave that to you.

What on earth are you on about now?
Mohammed Noor, the Somali Muslim who deliberately murdered innocent woman Justine Dammond had his murder conviction overturned and will be released in less than five years.
Ex-Minneapolis police officer sentenced to 57 months in the killing of a 911 caller

How is what he did any less severe than what say Derek Chauvin did? If anything, Chauvin is less guilty because the killing was accidental and Floyd's poor health and fentanyl overdose contributed to his death. And yet Chauvin will be in prison five times longer. Black Muslim privilege. Especially when AG is a black Muslim with Nation of Islam ties. I smell a coverup!
 
And Ms Potter would not have accidently killed Mr. Wright if her parents had had effective protected sex at the time she was conceived.
Or if St. Daunte's parents did.

Ms. Potter and Mr. Wright both made mistakes. The difference is that Ms. Potter is alive to deal with hers.
True. But Potter made one mistake. St. Daunte made many - from robbing that woman to fleeing from police. His decisions eventually caught up to him. I have far more sympathy with somebody who made a mistake making a split-second decision than somebody who kept making stupid choices pretty much all their adult life.
 
Suppose Jan6 insurrectionist
Or a #BLM insurrectionist ...

was carrying anti bear spray and a pistol. He is confronted by Capitol Policeman. He intends to spray the officer, but in the stress of the moment, many years of militia training takes over and he shoots the officer.
The big difference is that a police officer has a right to use force against a fleeing suspect. An insurrectionist, regardless of political flavor, does not have a right to use force against a police officer. Using bear spray on a police officer is already aggravated assault in most places, i.e. a felony. Killing somebody during the commission of a felony is felony murder.
 
Last edited:
Your characterization is bullshit.
Hardly. I leave that to you.

What on earth are you on about now?
Mohammed Noor, the Somali Muslim who deliberately murdered innocent woman Justine Dammond had his murder conviction overturned and will be released in less than five years.
Ex-Minneapolis police officer sentenced to 57 months in the killing of a 911 caller

How is what he did any less severe than what say Derek Chauvin did? If anything, Chauvin is less guilty because the killing was accidental and Floyd's poor health and fentanyl overdose contributed to his death. And yet Chauvin will be in prison five times longer. Black Muslim privilege. Especially when AG is a black Muslim with Nation of Islam ties. I smell a coverup!
There was nothing accidental about Chauvin's actions or his indifference to Floyd's deteriorating condition. We all saw the video.

Noor did kill Dammond and was convicted in regards to her death but his actions were of panic not premeditation or consideration. She's just as dead as George Floyd, yes. It is just as wrongful a death: yes. Noor's actions took place in a second when he panicked and fired his weapon without seeing what happened. Chauvin knelt on George Floyd's neck for over 9 minutes, with not only Floyd begging because he couldn't breathe but also the crowd that surrounded the police officers begging for Floyd's life.

Noor's actions were more akin to what Potter did than what Chauvin did, except he intentionally fired his gun and she mistook her gun for a taser. Noor's conviction and sentencing for manslaughter stand. https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...erturn-mohamed-noors-3rd-degree-murder-charge
 
Suppose Jan6 insurrectionist
Or a #BLM insurrectionist ...

was carrying anti bear spray and a pistol. He is confronted by Capitol Policeman. He intends to spray the officer, but in the stress of the moment, many years of militia training takes over and he shoots the officer.
The big difference is that a police officer has a right to use force against a fleeing suspect. An insurrectionist, regardless of political flavor, does not have a right to use force against a police officer. Using bear spray on a police officer is already aggravated assault in most places, i.e. a felony. Killing somebody during the commission of a felony is felony murder.
That's not an answer to the question which was proposed. You are arguing against the premise of the question.

Can a person who has a choice of two different weapons use the more lethal of the two and claim it was an accident, as a defense for their crime?
 
Given everything, she could be an extremely valuable asset to the police department.
Frankly, as a weapons trainer. Who better to teach a lesson on careful usage of the tools available than someone who messed up and caused a huge disaster? She is, and always will be, an object lesson in why decisions about use of weapons, sometimes made in a second or less, are a big effing deal.
I agree that this would be an excellent use for her. After she has served her time. Or even while she's serving her time; modern technology makes many things possible, and service of that kind speaks well to you when you're up for parole consideration. Either way, she will be better able to speak on the lived consequences of fatal mistakes once she has experienced some of those consequences.
We clearly have different ideas about how much jail time is appropriate. I'd put it around a week.

This has nothing to do with the value of Wright's life. It's entirely about the relative degrees of culpability. Wright is dead, almost entirely, because he dove for the car. Given his history, the officers had every reason to assume he was going for the sort of weapon he'd used before. What else might have caused him to make that fatal choice?

I think that Potter is being scapegoated. This is nothing like the McMichaels who went out looking for trouble with no authority to do anything but call the real cops. Potter was doing exactly what she was supposed to do. Protecting the community and herself from a dangerous person doing dangerous things, under chaotic circumstances. Wright picked this, near entirely. I see Potter as a victim, mostly.
Tom
 
That's not an answer to the question which was proposed. You are arguing against the premise of the question.

Can a person who has a choice of two different weapons use the more lethal of the two and claim it was an accident, as a defense for their crime?
I suspect a lot of the same people who were swayed by the officer's testimony, would likewise be swayed by that of a sobbing insurrectionist and beg for clemency from the government. And once Trump office, a full pardon would be certain. Provided he was a conservative white man of course. Not if it was socialist Black trans kid or some such.
 
That's not an answer to the question which was proposed. You are arguing against the premise of the question.

Can a person who has a choice of two different weapons use the more lethal of the two and claim it was an accident, as a defense for their crime?
I suspect a lot of the same people who were swayed by the officer's testimony, would likewise be swayed by that of a sobbing insurrectionist and beg for clemency from the government. And once Trump office, a full pardon would be certain. Provided he was a conservative white man of course. Not if it was socialist Black trans kid or some such.
I do think that Potter's obvious remorse is a huge factor in gaining sympathy for her. I'm sure her remorse is sincere. My compassion for her is mitigated a bit because neither she nor the other two officers offered any sort of aide to Wright after he was accidentally shot with a gun rather than a taser.

I would also like to remind people that a taser can be a lethal weapon. I think too often we think of it as just a little shock, no big deal. In fact. To date, more than 500 people have died from law enforcement use of tasers. The exact number is not known as no federal agency tracks deaths or serious injuries resulting from the use of tasers by law enforcement.

Included in recent deaths at the hands of police officers using tasers is the unborn child of a pregnant woman who was tased 3 times, including in the abdomen, because police thought she was recording them on her cell phone. So much for police being upstanding right leaning right to lifers.


People, we really need to seriously consider what we want from police and how they are trained. They are killing too many people they are sworn to serve and protect, often over minor offenses.

Here's a personal story:

I've described myself as a short, previously skinny but now carrying way too much weight older woman, now in my 60's. I've always been the kind of face that people are certain grew up down the road or a few doors down or is related to their cousin, etc. Very very innocuous/ordinary looking person. Girl/mother/grandmother next door look.

Several years ago, I was driving home one night from work. It was winter, and dark and also a pretty snowy evening, the fourth or fifth or tenth such snow of the season. I had to drive on a two lane road that wound down in a narrow valley where my cell phone transmission was non-existent. The road was steep and windy going down and coming back up. About half way down, traffic (of which there was rarely more than a couple of vehicles) was backed up--8 or 10 cars. I could see police officers blocking the road and through trees, I could see the flashing lights of patrol cars and more than one ambulance. It was obviously a bad accident and obviously, emergency people had been there for a while. So, like everyone else, I waited and waited and waited. One of the officers was chatting with a guy in the front vehicle of those who were stopped. The conversation went on for a while. I assume that they went to school together or were cousins or friends or hunting or fishing buddies or all of those, talking about ice fishing or deer hunting. But at this point, I was about 45 minutes late getting home and I was wondering if I should try turning around and taking another route home--which would have been a longer route with less likelihood that the roads had been plowed. I had been up for almost 14 hrs. at this point, and hadn't eaten since about 11 that morning. It was about 7:30 p.m. I didn't want my husband to worry and I couldn't call because no cell reception. I was wondering how long it would be--two ambulances had already left so I thought surely we were almost at the point where we could proceed but nothing was happening. I tried several times to get the attention of the officer by waving my hand but he was engrossed in conversation with his buddy. Finally, I just got out of my small sedan and quietly walked toward him, my hands clearly visible. Everybody's car lights were on so while it was a dark and snowy night, there was a lot of light bouncing off of the snow: I was clearly visible. But, inadvertently, I startled the officer about 20 feet away and when he noticed me: short, fat old lady in her winter coat and gloves, hands clearly visible in winter gloves, he reached towards his holster.

That's right: I was almost shot dead on a country road while calmly and respectfully approaching a police officer to ask him how much longer he thought we would be delayed.

I get it. I honestly do. But things have got to change.
 
Last edited:
I do think that Potter's obvious remorse is a huge factor in gaining sympathy for her.
Am I just too much of a Scorpio to understand this? Or is it that turning down sobbing people is a part of my daily job and I've just gotten brittle over the years? But the same is true of anyone who works in a courtroom, surely. I cannot imagine a professional judge changing their mind about a sentencing question because someone cried at them. People who do bad things often feel some level of remorse (or at least know that they are supposed to look like it), but if they're still trying to avoid the consequences of their actions, what good is that remorse? If you really feel bad about a choice you made, you should volunteer to pay the price for your crime and then do whatever you can to make true amends to those who you hurt, not demamd sympathy for yourself (explicitly, rather than for your victims) and beg to be let off.
 
Back
Top Bottom