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

[Toni]

I think it was an accident, however, the police force should not ignore that they made the mistake that caused the death of a member of the community they are there to protect. The right thing to do is give condolences to the family, don't stand in the way of them seeking a reasonable remedy. Preemptively recognize the issue by making a change in training and naming it after the victim (with the family's permission). But instead what we'll get is a police department covering their ass, treating the deceased as just a criminal we're better off without, and a bewildered face when the community says fuck off.

Edit: by preemptively I mean get in front of the issue. Don't wait for your community to show up with no justice no peace signs.

I can find absolutely nothing wrong with this, either in content nor completeness.

I'm certain some members here don't agree. They'll just see this as me supporting a criminal.

I agree almost entirely. Where I disagree is that I believe that police officers, whose job requires that they be armed in order to protect the citizenry, have an additional burden of using such weapons with a higher degree of precision and responsibility than your average criminal on the street. Potter is more culpable because she was a police officer.

As for why Wright's parenthood was brought up at all: to humanize him and to counter the attempts to label him as a dangerous criminal who was surely about to murder police officers. We demonize criminals all the time--it makes it so much easier to dismiss the need for compassion or mercy or in this case, basic competence and care with deadly weapons. If Wright were only a criminal, little more than an animal, then Potter's crime would be negligible at worst, and to some, almost laudable.

Only insofar as one understands how the society and culture addresses this need, namely through training.

Officers have little decision n of how they are trained, or even what they do to train others. It comes down to institutional policy and in this kind of incident, the reflex derived is directly attributable beyond all other effects of reasonable impact to the training model.

As the person repeating that training model, they are likewise the one likely hardest hit by the failures caused by it.

Here the cop is a victim of bad training. Certainly not as much as Duante, but still a victim.

More pertinent is whether someone damaged this way is also a victim of "an event that renders clarity over the fact that they are not and have not been, and may never again be capable of being a competent police officer."

Here, the cop was a trainer, so her culpability is increased, not decreased. Yes, there were probably shortcomings in her training but as someone who has been trained in processes and on instruments that seriously affected life/death decisions, I can attest that not only was I responsible for knowing my instruments/processes and their proper use, any possible malfunctions, troubleshooting, maintenance, etc. but I was also responsible for informing the appropriate people if my training was insufficient or had gaps in it.

Do I think that she intended to kill Wright? No, I don't. But I think she had an absolute responsibility to know what she was touching/using and what its capabilities were. I've mentioned before that I grew up in a household with hunters, from a long line of hunters (and marksmen). Gun safety was drilled into us from a very young age. It is incomprehensible to me that a trained police officer could make such an error. This was at best, gross negligence. She had a responsibility to know what she was doing and she did not. Yes, responsibility resides with the police department but it also resides with her.

 

[Derec]

Wait, I'm sorry, I haven't been following this trial, the defense brought up the fact that Wright had unprotected sex? Why?

Not the defense, the prosecution. As in, making a big deal out of him having a child, as if that was relevant. On the whole, the prosecution was all about irrelevant appeals to emotion, while the defense was unable to bring up details of Daunte's robbery and shootings that would counter the one-sided "Prince of Brooklyn Park" narrative the prosecution is peddling.

 

[Derec]

Preemptively recognize the issue by making a change in training and naming it after the victim (with the family's permission).

That would be a slap in the face of all the people he has victimized.
Kim Potter made a serious mistake and there needs to be some penalty for it, although the racist AG of Minnesota overcharged her.
However, that does not mean we need to glorify the shootee, because he was still a bad guy.

But instead what we'll get is a police department covering their ass, treating the deceased as just a criminal we're better off without, and a bewildered face when the community says fuck off.

The dead guy was a criminal and we are better off without him.
Kim Potter trial: Daunte Wright's victims remember slain Minneapolis 20-year-old, 'Karma's a b----'

Edit: by preemptively I mean get in front of the issue. Don't wait for your community to show up with no justice no peace signs.

Stupid slogan. "Justice" does not necessarily mean the protesters and rioters should get their way.

 

[Derec]

As for why Wright's parenthood was brought up at all: to humanize him

It does not take much to make a baby - sex without a condom will do it. It's not any sort of meritorious action or a moral virtue. It is completely irrelevant to his shooting, and should not be allowed at the trial, as it is entirely prejudicial and not at all probative.

and to counter the attempts to label him as a dangerous criminal

He WAS a dangerous criminal. It's funny how you on the left pretend to want to go after gun crime, but to you it means banning AR-15s because they have the "shoulder thing that goes up" or suing gunmakers (see Newsom, Gavin C.) but you are much less gung-ho about going after the real problem, which is people like St . Daunte who use illegal guns to rob and shoot people.

who was surely about to murder police officers.

Had he had a gun on him, I think it is very likely he would have tried to use it against the arresting officers, yes.

We demonize criminals all the time--it makes it so much easier to dismiss the need for compassion or mercy or in this case, basic competence and care with deadly weapons. If Wright were only a criminal, little more than an animal, then Potter's crime would be negligible at worst, and to some, almost laudable.

First of all, the defense is not even allowed to paint an accurate picture of what a piece of shit Daunte really was. Instead the jury is getting a one-sided narrative from the prosecution and Daunte's girlfriend and mother. How about letting Daunte's victims testify?

And yes, Kim Potter was negligent - she did not intent to shoot him, however. In any case, Daunte's death is not a great loss to humanity. It's probably even a net gain.

 

[Derec]

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.

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.

 

[Toni]

As for why Wright's parenthood was brought up at all: to humanize him

It does not take much to make a baby - sex without a condom will do it. It's not any sort of meritorious action or a moral virtue. It is completely irrelevant to his shooting, and should not be allowed at the trial, as it is entirely prejudicial and not at all probative.

and to counter the attempts to label him as a dangerous criminal

He WAS a dangerous criminal. It's funny how you on the left pretend to want to go after gun crime, but to you it means banning AR-15s because they have the "shoulder thing that goes up" or suing gunmakers (see Newsom, Gavin C.) but you are much less gung-ho about going after the real problem, which is people like St . Daunte who use illegal guns to rob and shoot people.

who was surely about to murder police officers.

Had he had a gun on him, I think it is very likely he would have tried to use it against the arresting officers, yes.

We demonize criminals all the time--it makes it so much easier to dismiss the need for compassion or mercy or in this case, basic competence and care with deadly weapons. If Wright were only a criminal, little more than an animal, then Potter's crime would be negligible at worst, and to some, almost laudable.

First of all, the defense is not even allowed to paint an accurate picture of what a piece of shit Daunte really was. Instead the jury is getting a one-sided narrative from the prosecution and Daunte's girlfriend and mother. How about letting Daunte's victims testify?

And yes, Kim Potter was negligent - she did not intent to shoot him, however. In any case, Daunte's death is not a great loss to humanity. It's probably even a net gain.

Hate to break it to you but we agree that Potter was negligent. I don’t know the law in MN, but my layperson’s opinion is that her culpability was greater because she was an on duty police officer acting in her official capacity—and that error was compounded by the fact that she was supposedly a trainer.

If you want to make the point that Wright’s life was no more worthwhile because he fathered a child, I will agree: a person’s worth as a human being does not depend on whether or not they have reproduced. The prosecution is doing what all police training should do: paint a picture of Wright as an actual human being whose life had meaning and value. One does not need to have lived a blameless life to be worthy of life.

No one deserves to die the way that he died—by a stupid mistake on the part of a police officer who acted with negligence, especially since the traffic stop was unnecessary anyway. He was not driving dangerously nor was he suspected of fleeing the scene of a crime, much less a violent one,

Police officers are often too quick to reach for a weapon —and that includes tasers, which can also be deadly.

Serious police reform is urgently needed.

 

[Jarhyn]

I think it was an accident, however, the police force should not ignore that they made the mistake that caused the death of a member of the community they are there to protect. The right thing to do is give condolences to the family, don't stand in the way of them seeking a reasonable remedy. Preemptively recognize the issue by making a change in training and naming it after the victim (with the family's permission). But instead what we'll get is a police department covering their ass, treating the deceased as just a criminal we're better off without, and a bewildered face when the community says fuck off.

Edit: by preemptively I mean get in front of the issue. Don't wait for your community to show up with no justice no peace signs.

I can find absolutely nothing wrong with this, either in content nor completeness.

I'm certain some members here don't agree. They'll just see this as me supporting a criminal.

I agree almost entirely. Where I disagree is that I believe that police officers, whose job requires that they be armed in order to protect the citizenry, have an additional burden of using such weapons with a higher degree of precision and responsibility than your average criminal on the street. Potter is more culpable because she was a police officer.

As for why Wright's parenthood was brought up at all: to humanize him and to counter the attempts to label him as a dangerous criminal who was surely about to murder police officers. We demonize criminals all the time--it makes it so much easier to dismiss the need for compassion or mercy or in this case, basic competence and care with deadly weapons. If Wright were only a criminal, little more than an animal, then Potter's crime would be negligible at worst, and to some, almost laudable.

Only insofar as one understands how the society and culture addresses this need, namely through training.

Officers have little decision n of how they are trained, or even what they do to train others. It comes down to institutional policy and in this kind of incident, the reflex derived is directly attributable beyond all other effects of reasonable impact to the training model.

As the person repeating that training model, they are likewise the one likely hardest hit by the failures caused by it.

Here the cop is a victim of bad training. Certainly not as much as Duante, but still a victim.

More pertinent is whether someone damaged this way is also a victim of "an event that renders clarity over the fact that they are not and have not been, and may never again be capable of being a competent police officer."

Here, the cop was a trainer, so her culpability is increased, not decreased. Yes, there were probably shortcomings in her training but as someone who has been trained in processes and on instruments that seriously affected life/death decisions, I can attest that not only was I responsible for knowing my instruments/processes and their proper use, any possible malfunctions, troubleshooting, maintenance, etc. but I was also responsible for informing the appropriate people if my training was insufficient or had gaps in it.

Do I think that she intended to kill Wright? No, I don't. But I think she had an absolute responsibility to know what she was touching/using and what its capabilities were. I've mentioned before that I grew up in a household with hunters, from a long line of hunters (and marksmen). Gun safety was drilled into us from a very young age. It is incomprehensible to me that a trained police officer could make such an error. This was at best, gross negligence. She had a responsibility to know what she was doing and she did not. Yes, responsibility resides with the police department but it also resides with her.

If she could not set the tone, or worse received good faith instruction in the training's sufficiency, she is more a victim still.

She was subjected even more to lopsided training and this breaks her more than most with overburned muscle memory without drilling on intent

 

[barbos]

I knew a guy who would often confuse left and right. I mean I would say turn left and he would start looking to the right. Like there is no connection between a word and a hand. I would often use a hand to point where to turn.
She could be one of these people. No amount of training can fix it.
Plus under stress people would rather use their main hand.

 

[Jarhyn]

I knew a guy who would often confuse left and right. I mean I would say turn left and he would start looking to the right. Like there is no connection between a word and a hand. I would often use a hand to point where to turn.
She could be one of these people. No amount of training can fix it.
Plus under stress people would rather use their main hand.

I would say if someone is so predisposed to failure of prompting, they had no business ever being an officer, and they would need to be fired for gross incompetence.

This I find doubtful.

I find her training countless officers on drawing and firing, and getting their reaction times and accuracy up and spending maybe a day a year on taser drills a much more likely source of such failure.

 

[Derec]

Hate to break it to you but we agree that Potter was negligent. I don’t know the law in MN, but my layperson’s opinion is that her culpability was greater because she was an on duty police officer acting in her official capacity—and that error was compounded by the fact that she was supposedly a trainer.

I do not think her culpability was greater because she was an on duty police officer in that a civilian would have no business trying to arrest a bail absconder or use a taser. Police officer put themselves, by virtue of their jobs, in highly volatile and rapidly evolving situations. Mistakes do get made when you have to react quickly, and that has to be taken into consideration. Not that she should not be held responsible, but I do not think a lengthy prison sentence would be in the interest of justice.

Don't forget also that Potter is not the only one who made a mistake. Wright made a mistake skipping the court date. Then he made a mistake resisting arrest and trying to flee. True, those mistakes should only have resulted in a shock, arrest and some new charges added. But when you do stupid shit like this you introduce possibility of things going very bad. Had he not fled, Potter would not have had the opportunity to make her mistake. In a way, his decision destroyed two lives - his and Potter's.

By the way, we have been discussing how dumb vs. smart fleeing from police is since #BLM insurrections started in 2014. It was either you or RavenSky who insisted it was smart because the criminals often get away, referring to a book (which I have later read myself) written by some chick who embedded herself in a bad neighborhood in Baltimore (?) and befriended a group of local thugs (and probably fucked one of them, although I forgot whether it was the guy who later got wasted or somebody else).

If you want to make the point that Wright’s life was no more worthwhile because he fathered a child, I will agree: a person’s worth as a human being does not depend on whether or not they have reproduced.

We agree again.
But why then are both the prosecution and mainstream media so obsessed with his reproductive status?
The articles about the case like this one tend to use St. Daunte's photo with his kid, while using Kim Potter's mugshot, rather than showing her family photo or her in uniform. That shows clear media bias.

The prosecution is doing what all police training should do: paint a picture of Wright as an actual human being whose life had meaning and value. One does not need to have lived a blameless life to be worthy of life.

Prosecution should be focusing on the facts. If a story of the dead guy's life is offered, then it should be a full picture, not a one-sided version.

No one deserves to die the way that he died—by a stupid mistake on the part of a police officer who acted with negligence, especially since the traffic stop was unnecessary anyway.

First few stupid mistakes were made by St. Daunte. And why do you think the traffic stop was unnecessary? He drove with expired tags. He had an open warrant for a gun crime, and it is a good idea to take people like that off the streets. Again, why is the left so quick to condemn lawful AR-15 owners or gun manufacturers, but is far more reluctant to go after people like Wright.

Now, of course, the mayor of Brooklyn (aka wish.com Tiger Woods) has prohibited cops in the city from stopping people for such traffic violations, but I do not think this will make the people there

He was not driving dangerously nor was he suspected of fleeing the scene of a crime, much less a violent one,

He was fleeing an attempt to arrest him on a warrant, however.

Police officers are often too quick to reach for a weapon —and that includes tasers, which can also be deadly.

Potter reaching for a taser was perfectly legitimate and appropriate reaction to resisting arrest and fleeing.

Serious police reform is urgently needed.

Probably, but it should not use prohibiting police from using tasers on fleeing suspects.
Also, when a police department (due to political meddling) removes tasers from the police arsenal, and somebody (like Mario Woods) gets shot instead of tased, the outcry is about why the cop did not use a taser. You can't please people!

 

[Toni]

Hate to break it to you but we agree that Potter was negligent. I don’t know the law in MN, but my layperson’s opinion is that her culpability was greater because she was an on duty police officer acting in her official capacity—and that error was compounded by the fact that she was supposedly a trainer.

I do not think her culpability was greater because she was an on duty police officer in that a civilian would have no business trying to arrest a bail absconder or use a taser. Police officer put themselves, by virtue of their jobs, in highly volatile and rapidly evolving situations. Mistakes do get made when you have to react quickly, and that has to be taken into consideration. Not that she should not be held responsible, but I do not think a lengthy prison sentence would be in the interest of justice.

Don't forget also that Potter is not the only one who made a mistake. Wright made a mistake skipping the court date. Then he made a mistake resisting arrest and trying to flee. True, those mistakes should only have resulted in a shock, arrest and some new charges added. But when you do stupid shit like this you introduce possibility of things going very bad. Had he not fled, Potter would not have had the opportunity to make her mistake. In a way, his decision destroyed two lives - his and Potter's.

By the way, we have been discussing how dumb vs. smart fleeing from police is since #BLM insurrections started in 2014. It was either you or RavenSky who insisted it was smart because the criminals often get away, referring to a book (which I have later read myself) written by some chick who embedded herself in a bad neighborhood in Baltimore (?) and befriended a group of local thugs (and probably fucked one of them, although I forgot whether it was the guy who later got wasted or somebody else).

If you want to make the point that Wright’s life was no more worthwhile because he fathered a child, I will agree: a person’s worth as a human being does not depend on whether or not they have reproduced.

We agree again.
But why then are both the prosecution and mainstream media so obsessed with his reproductive status?
The articles about the case like this one tend to use St. Daunte's photo with his kid, while using Kim Potter's mugshot, rather than showing her family photo or her in uniform. That shows clear media bias.

The prosecution is doing what all police training should do: paint a picture of Wright as an actual human being whose life had meaning and value. One does not need to have lived a blameless life to be worthy of life.

Prosecution should be focusing on the facts. If a story of the dead guy's life is offered, then it should be a full picture, not a one-sided version.

No one deserves to die the way that he died—by a stupid mistake on the part of a police officer who acted with negligence, especially since the traffic stop was unnecessary anyway.

First few stupid mistakes were made by St. Daunte. And why do you think the traffic stop was unnecessary? He drove with expired tags. He had an open warrant for a gun crime, and it is a good idea to take people like that off the streets. Again, why is the left so quick to condemn lawful AR-15 owners or gun manufacturers, but is far more reluctant to go after people like Wright.

Now, of course, the mayor of Brooklyn (aka wish.com Tiger Woods) has prohibited cops in the city from stopping people for such traffic violations, but I do not think this will make the people there

He was not driving dangerously nor was he suspected of fleeing the scene of a crime, much less a violent one,

He was fleeing an attempt to arrest him on a warrant, however.

Police officers are often too quick to reach for a weapon —and that includes tasers, which can also be deadly.

Potter reaching for a taser was perfectly legitimate and appropriate reaction to resisting arrest and fleeing.

Serious police reform is urgently needed.

Probably, but it should not use prohibiting police from using tasers on fleeing suspects.
Also, when a police department (due to political meddling) removes tasers from the police arsenal, and somebody (like Mario Woods) gets shot instead of tased, the outcry is about why the cop did not use a taser. You can't please people!

It wasn't me re: book.

It wasn't Brooklyn. It was Brooklyn Center, MN.

It is highly doubtful that Wright was pulled over for an outstanding warrant. The police were probably just on a fishing expedition or bored and used the expired tags as a pretext to pull over someone. They run your plates and license AFTER they pull you over. When they pulled that vehicle over, for all they knew, it was not Wright driving it. So please don't give me his outstanding warrant as justification for pulling him over. They didn't know. They weren't looking for him. He had not just committed a crime.

EDIT: Wright was driving his brother's car. The police officer who pulled him over was a trainee and Potter was also in the car. He was pulled over for expired tags on his brother's car and also because the trainee noticed an air freshener strip hanging (a MN violation).

I've explained: Wright's parenthood is brought up to humanize him because too many people, such as you and likely at least some of the jury, find it easier to think of Wright as a dangerous criminal and not a human being.

I recognize that police are often in uncertain or known dangerous situations by virtue of their jobs. However, they are supposed to be professionals and they are armed with multiple loaded weapons (a taser is a weapon) and have an absolute duty to be not just competent but proficient with their weapons and to use them with the greatest care. Any police officer who is on duty has a higher degree of responsibility compared with any non-officer. For example: If you had been present and had jumped in to help and accidentally discharged Potter's gun rather than her taser, you would have had less culpability because you are not a trained police officer. I would argue that Potter's culpability was greater because she was a trainer. In reality, she probably saw less time on patrol. Nonetheless, police officers have a greater burden of care while on duty or acting in an official capacity.

It's similar to a professional boxer having greater responsibility/culpability in a bar fight: he knows how to use his fists as weapons with a much higher degree of effectiveness than the average bar goer. He has an additional burden of care in that fight. But here, we're talking police officers, on duty, acting in their official capacity, on our (the public's) behalf.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

who was surely about to murder police officers.

Had he had a gun on him, I think it is very likely he would have tried to use it against the arresting officers, yes.

How is that even relevant? The officer didn't intend to shot the person. You seem to be painting a picture of an officer using lethal force that was justified by the threat... but the officer herself didn't intend to kill the person. So it is beyond my understanding why you are using this as a defense?

 

[Jarhyn]

who was surely about to murder police officers.

Had he had a gun on him, I think it is very likely he would have tried to use it against the arresting officers, yes.

How is that even relevant? The officer didn't intend to shot the person. You seem to be painting a picture of an officer using lethal force that was justified by the threat... but the officer herself didn't intend to kill the person. So it is beyond my understanding why you are using this as a defense?

Because when you can gish gallop on the back of a red herring, and when you have no problem with using tactics of bad faith, why wouldn't you?

 

[TomC]

It is highly doubtful that Wright was pulled over for an outstanding warrant. The police were probably just on a fishing expedition or bored and used the expired tags as a pretext to pull over someone. They run your plates and license AFTER they pull you over.

That's not how it works around here.
Expired plates get attention. The first thing the cops do is run the plates. If they're registered to someone with an outstanding warrant, the car gets pulled over.
Expired plates is not a pretext. They're an infraction. Suggesting other infractions, from no insurance to an unlicensed driver. In this case, they were registered to criminal with a history of violence and illegal gun ownership and an outstanding warrant for failure to appear. The cops knew all this before they started to pull the car over.

Potter knew Wright's history. Wright probably knew that too. Then he lunged for his car. Potter shot Wright. She didn't want to find out that Wright still had an illegal weapon by being shot in the face.

Wright made choices for years that lead to that moment. Then he made the fatal choice of trying to get back to his car. Potter had a split second to react. Everyone agrees that the tazer was the correct choice. But Wright is who forced that choice to be made in a second, under stress, by someone who knows he's violent. Sorry she grabbed the wrong weapon, but Wright chose everything else about this situation.
Wright's death is on him.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

That would be a slap in the face of all the people he has victimized.
Kim Potter made a serious mistake and there needs to be some penalty for it, although the racist AG of Minnesota overcharged her.
However, that does not mean we need to glorify the shootee, because he was still a bad guy.

Sure, I concede naming an adjustment to current training efforts in response to the incident after Wright would be a bad idea. Are you willing to concede that addressing the issue in training is a good one? I suppose I can make the argument that it doesn't happen often so, "whatevs". However, with relations being in such a weary state between the police and their local citizenry I'd think they'd use every opportunity to improve relations (especially in polorized cases). But that's just me special pleading in your eyes ain't it, Derec.

The dead guy was a criminal and we are better off without him.
Kim Potter trial: Daunte Wright's victims remember slain Minneapolis 20-year-old, 'Karma's a b----'

Thanks for proving my point. It's not about the dead guy's criminal past, it's about the expectation the community has in their local police that a taser being mistaken for a gun is unacceptable to them & they will take responsibility for the screw-up as reasonably as they can. Unless of course, you don't think the community is worth convincing, Derec.

Stupid slogan. "Justice" does not necessarily mean the protesters and rioters should get their way.

I agree, I never liked the slogan. I prefer civil & collective disobedience over words.

 

[TomC]

Are you willing to concede that addressing the issue in training is a good one?

I would.
Are you willing to concede that the important issues are the one's that lead to Wright's life and history? Issues much broader than police training? The issues that resulted in his fatal choice?

Would you be willing to start by conceding that some problems for YBM aren't the results of white privilege or racist cops? And sometimes, those aren't the preponderance of relevant issues?

Concede that better training of cops might have very little impact on the total number of violent deaths of YBM?
Tom

 

[Gospel]

I would.
Are you willing to concede that the important issues are the one's that lead to Wright's life and history? Issues much broader than police training? The issues that resulted in his fatal choice?

Always have, always will.

Would you be willing to start by conceding that some problems for YBM aren't the results of white privilege or racist cops? And sometimes, those aren't the preponderance of relevant issues?

Again always have always will.

Concede that better training of cops might have very little impact on the total number of violent deaths of YBM?
Tom

Once more, always have and always will.



With all that said, mind sharing some examples of these cases?


Edit: Doesn't have to be here if it's difficult to stay on topic.

 

[TomC]

Edit: Doesn't have to be here if it's difficult to stay on topic.

Done right, it would be a huge derail of this thread, which is about one particular incident.

But staying on topic here, I see Wright as choosing his own violent death by jumping towards his car. Not Potter who had a second to decide whether Wright was going for another illegal gun planning to shoot her in the face. She clearly should have pulled the tazer. But Wright chose being shot.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Done right, it would be a huge derail of this thread, which is about one particular incident.

But staying on topic here, I see Wright as choosing his own violent death by jumping towards his car. Not Potter who had a second to decide whether Wright was going for another illegal gun planning to shoot her in the face. She clearly should have pulled the tazer. But Wright chose being shot.
Tom

I agree, attempting to flee the police earned him the police's attempt to prevent it. Never disputed that (have I?). If they would have succeeded in arresting him I'd have no complaints what's so ever. Regrettably, that's not all that happened. An officer made an error resulting in Wright's death. That error is the issue, regardless of want Wright did because Wright didn't pull out a taser instead of a gun, the officer did.

It is very important to the Minnesota police force to handle this error correctly as they have that duty to the public. And doing as you and Derec do by essentially saying Mr. Wright caused his own death, would not only be dishonest, it would not build the trust they not only desperately need but is also essential to improving the community together.

 

[Toni]

It is highly doubtful that Wright was pulled over for an outstanding warrant. The police were probably just on a fishing expedition or bored and used the expired tags as a pretext to pull over someone. They run your plates and license AFTER they pull you over.

That's not how it works around here.
Expired plates get attention. The first thing the cops do is run the plates. If they're registered to someone with an outstanding warrant, the car gets pulled over.
Expired plates is not a pretext. They're an infraction. Suggesting other infractions, from no insurance to an unlicensed driver. In this case, they were registered to criminal with a history of violence and illegal gun ownership and an outstanding warrant for failure to appear. The cops knew all this before they started to pull the car over.

Potter knew Wright's history. Wright probably knew that too. Then he lunged for his car. Potter shot Wright. She didn't want to find out that Wright still had an illegal weapon by being shot in the face.

Wright made choices for years that lead to that moment. Then he made the fatal choice of trying to get back to his car. Potter had a split second to react. Everyone agrees that the tazer was the correct choice. But Wright is who forced that choice to be made in a second, under stress, by someone who knows he's violent. Sorry she grabbed the wrong weapon, but Wright chose everything else about this situation.
Wright's death is on him.
Tom

I've been pulled over a number of times for violating the speed limit. I know that they ran my plates and my license after I handed my license over to them.

I was also once pulled over in what I am certain was a case of mistaken identity because, while driving during daylight hours on a 2 lane highway on my way home, carefully within the speed limit and in fact, slowing down as I was approaching a small town with a lower speed limit, not one but two state police cars put on their lights and pulled me over, motioning for me to pull off the highway onto a small side street. They first tried to assert that I was exceeding the speed limit but I definitely was not ( I was extra careful as I drove that route twice a day and I knew that it was heavily patrolled plus, more importantly, there were sometimes pedestrians walking along side the road.) and frankly, they looked confused when they saw me. They ran my license and plates and let me go. I am certain that they were looking for someone with a car similar to mine.

Driving with expired plates is an infraction here, as well. It just doesn't usually get you pulled over unless it's a slow day and not much else is going on, or it's a trainee (as in Wright's case) but it seems to be a bigger issue if you are not white.

Wright was 20 years old when he died. He was still an adolescent, although legally an adult. I know I did a lot of stupid stuff before I was 20 and some stupid stuff after. I was fortunate that it was not actually criminal, that I am small and look very innocuous at least partially because I am white and female and partially because I grew up in an area where pretty much everyone knew everyone else and I had a 'reputation' as a 'good girl' from a 'good family.'

Wright was pulled over by a trainee, with two police officers along, Potter was a trainer for the exercise. From what I saw on various tapes, she sounded panicked right away, not calm and assertive.

We don't know why Wright tried to get back in the car. We'll never know. Because he was shot dead during a traffic stop for a minor infraction.