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

[TomC]

Tom doesn’t venture a guess as to WHY his dreaded “YBM” are so much more dangerous than “YWM”.
I think I know why not.

You'd be wrong, again.

On one of these threads about police killings, awhile back, [MENTION=346]Gospel[/MENTION]; made a post musing on this subject a bit. Or maybe it was tulip thread, I don't remember and can't find it now. I'd like to discuss that.
I thought it should be a different thread, it was a derail. But I forgot and never got back to him.

Maybe he'll read this and start something.
Tom

I really want to help you out here, but I have no idea what you're talking about.

It was vaguely related and some time ago.
Oh well.

Thanks anyway.
Tom

 

[Derec]

No, the pictures do not show him committing any crime at all.

He was barred from possessing a gun due to his armed robbery charge.

Daunte Wright was facing attempted robbery case when killed by cop

Wright was later arrested in the case and released on $100,000 bail. But he violated his bail conditions in July when he failed to stay in touch with his court monitor, the papers said.
According to the Daily Mail, he also was in possession of a gun at some point after his arrest for the robbery, which was also in violation of the condition of his bail release.

So him posing with a gun would be a crime if it was taken after the robbery.

Why is it so important to you that he was a criminal?

Because some people - including you - pretend that he was an innocent child who was killed because of an air-freshner[sic].

 

[Toni]

He was barred from possessing a gun due to his armed robbery charge.

Daunte Wright was facing attempted robbery case when killed by cop



So him posing with a gun would be a crime if it was taken after the robbery.

Why is it so important to you that he was a criminal?

Because some people - including you - pretend that he was an innocent child who was killed because of an air-freshner[sic].

Nobody is pretending any such thing. At 20, he's not fully adult under the law, although the law would allow him to be tried as an adult. There's a long list of things that he could not legally do because of his age but we've gone over that list in other threats countless times. He was a kid. Legally adult for some purposes and not quite an adult for others.

Initially and for some days, the story was that he was pulled over for an air freshner hanging on his rearview mirror. Actually, in Minnesota, that will get you pulled over if the police or bored or want some pretext to pull you over. I find that plausible and that while they had him pulled over, they noticed an expired registration, ran the plates, discovered a warrant (which may have been because of a misdelivered notice to appear--reports vary). But in any case, he was not pulled over because he was driving dangerously, had just committed a robbery or any such thing.

We can play this game forever but the truth is that you are pretty insistent that 17 year old girls should be fair game for prostitution and that adolescents are adults whenever that narrative suits you.

Heaven knows that almost all of us have done stupid stuff at 13 or 15 or 17 or 20 but most of us grow up. Because we're allowed to grow up. Of course, a few of us do refuse to grow up and think that their own sins are negligible.

 

[Derec]

Nobody is pretending any such thing.

You are.

At 20, he's not fully adult under the law, although the law would allow him to be tried as an adult.

Age of majority in the US is 18, even if there are some restrictions placed on young adults. Minors above a certain age can be tried as adults, but adults like Dante cannot be tried as minors. That's the difference.

There's a long list of things that he could not legally do because of his age but we've gone over that list in other threats countless times.

Yes, we have, and you are still wrong about a 20 year old not being an adult.

He was a kid.

He wasn't. He had a kid though.

Legally adult for some purposes and not quite an adult for others.

He was legally adult, period. That there are some age restrictions placed on legal adults does not change that.

Initially and for some days, the story was that he was pulled over for an air freshner hanging on his rearview mirror.

That was the story pushed by Dante's family, and it smelled like bullshit from the beginning.
You can't trust these early accounts. Like what happened today in Columbus, OH where a girl (15 or 16, accounts vary) was shot by police as she was about to stab another girl.
The family claimed that she dropped the gun before getting shot, but body camera that was released recently shows that that was a lie.

And for the love of FSM, Toni, it's spelled "freshener"!

Actually, in Minnesota, that will get you pulled over if the police or bored or want some pretext to pull you over. I find that plausible and that while they had him pulled over, they noticed an expired registration, ran the plates,

It's easier to spot an expired sticker than an air freshener, so I think that would have been the primary reason. And they run the license for warrants as such every time they pull somebody over.

discovered a warrant (which may have been because of a misdelivered notice to appear--reports vary).

The only person claiming that was some rando on TikTok.
It appears not to be the case.

But in any case, he was not pulled over because he was driving dangerously, had just committed a robbery or any such thing.

No, he committed a robbery on an earlier occasion. And he had a warrant for a gun. I thought you progressives were all about strict gun enforcement. I guess not.

We can play this game forever but the truth is that you are pretty insistent that 17 year old girls should be fair game for prostitution

Now you are just lying! I stated repeatedly that I think 18 should be the minimum age for sex workers. But if a guy sleeps consensually with a 17 year old, I do not think it's "rape" as you insist it is.

Heaven knows that almost all of us have done stupid stuff at 13 or 15 or 17 or 20 but most of us grow up.

Had Daunte not tried to get out of being arrested, he'd be alive. It was his rotten luck that Potter made the tragic mix-up with the taser. but it was his action that made this whole thing go south.

 

[none]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/12/us/brooklyn-center-minnesota-police-shooting/index.html

(CNN)A 20-year-old man was fatally shot during a traffic stop after a Minnesota police officer shouted "Taser!" but fired a handgun instead, Brooklyn Center Police Chief Tim Gannon said.

Daunte Wright was driving with his girlfriend Sunday afternoon when he was pulled over in the Minneapolis suburb.
Earlier, police said they tried to take the driver into custody after learning during a traffic stop that he had an outstanding warrant. The man got back into his vehicle, and an officer shot him, police said. They said the man drove several blocks before striking another vehicle.
Bodycam video released by the police chief Monday provided more details about what happened.
Wright got out of his car, but then got back in. It's not clear why, but the police chief told reporters it appeared from the video that Wright was trying to leave.

An officer is then heard shouting, "Taser! Taser! Taser!" but then fires a gun -- not a Taser -- at Wright.
"Holy sh*t!" the officer screams. "I shot him."
The police chief said the shooting appeared to be "an accidental discharge that resulted in the tragic death of Mr. Wright."
Gannon offered his "deepest sympathies" to Wright's family and vowed continued transparency.

It's easy to get all those doo-dads mixed up, I guess. Guns, tasers, flashlights, handcuffs. It's a wonder more cops don't draw down on a guy and then realize, "Oh, what the--this is Chapstick, not my service revolver."

Time to start blaming the victim in 3, 2, 1...

some stupid fuck will come along...

 

[Derec]

So CNN (and I am sure others) carried Daunte Wright's funeral, complete with black supremacist Al Sharpton calling him a prince.

Sure, Daunte did no deserve to die, but neither is he deserving of all the adulation and pomp and circumstance mainstream media are giving him. He is still a guy who resisted arrest for a hun warrant while prohibited from possessing firearms due to an open armed robbery charge. He is no "prince"!

 

[blastula]

The trial of Kim Potter started yesterday.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sounds like there is post-shooting video indicating she was in shock, implying an accident.

 

[blastula]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit. For 2nd degree, it seems that it would need to be considered negligence for any copy to carry both a gun and a taser.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit.

Accidents happen and they are tragic. This woman going to prison isn't going to improve society. She needs to pay a cost, but time in prison doesn't seem appropriate. Our judicial system is wholly incapable of measuring out justice appropriately in so many cases.

 

[blastula]

Maybe it's about whether she should have even tased him at all.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe it's about whether she should have even tased him at all.

The point I raised early in the thread. Once you draw your weapon, you have ceded a lot of hope in the situation.

However, that isn't manslaughter either. We need a real judicial system in place to handle police violence independently and with an appropriate measuring stick that their profession needs.

 

[blastula]

Looking at the complaint, looks like it will be about ignoring all her training.

SSA McGinnis later collected and reviewed the layout of Defendant’s duty belt. SSA McGinnis observed that Defendant’s handgun was holstered on the right side of the belt, set in a straight-draw position, requiring Defendant to use her right hand to draw the handgun. Defendant’s Taser was holstered on the left side of the belt, also set in a straight-draw position, requiring Defendant to use her left hand to draw her Taser. The Taser is yellow with a black grip, while the handgun is entirely black. Additionally, the texture of Defendant’s handgun has a distinct grip from that on her Taser. Defendant’s Taser is also equipped with a manual safety switch which the operator must physically disengage before the Taser can be discharged and with a laser-sighting feature, which causes a laser indicator to appear on target when the Taser is being aimed after the safety is disengaged. Defendant’s Glock handgun is not equipped with such features.

During her 26 years as a police officer, Defendant received a substantial amount of training, including training related to use of force and, specifically, to the use of Tasers and firearms. Defendant completed annual recertification training courses on each of these weapons. These courses included training on how to draw, aim, and use each weapon correctly. The training material for these courses also included notices alerting Defendant to the possibility and risks of drawing a handgun instead of a Taser.

In the six months before this incident, Defendant completed two Taser-specific training courses. For example, on March 2, 2021, Defendant attended a four-hour training course pertaining to the Taser. This course involved a classroom component, which provided detailed and substantive information concerning the function, proper use, and safety concerns associated with using Tasers; a practical component; and a written test. After this training, Defendant was certified for use of the Taser X7. On Defendant’s certificate of completion, Defendant provided her signature, acknowledging that she had read and understood the information and warnings provided by the manufacturer regarding safe use of the Taser. One of those warnings states: “Confusing a handgun with a CEW [Taser] could result in death or serious injury. Learn the differences in the physical feel and holstering characteristics between your CEW and your handgun to help avoid confusion” and instructs officers to “always follow your agency’s guidance and training.” In other prior Taser trainings completed by Defendant, including another on November 5, 2020, Defendant likewise signed paperwork acknowledging that she received, read, and understood identical warnings.\\

And the defense will be pointing to “slip and capture errors," a kind of unconscious human error.

Judge: Behavior errors on table at ex-cop's homicide trial

A judge says attorneys for a former suburban Minneapolis police officer on trial for fatally shooting a Black motorist can call a witness at trial to testify about behavior errors.

apnews.com

Force Science explains "slips-and-capture errors"

And other psychological phenomena that drove the fateful BART shooting

www.police1.com

 

[Bronzeage]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit.

Accidents happen and they are tragic. This woman going to prison isn't going to improve society. She needs to pay a cost, but time in prison doesn't seem appropriate. Our judicial system is wholly incapable of measuring out justice appropriately in so many cases.

By this reasoning, the person who incorrectly assembles a scaffold, which later collapses and kills a construction worker, should not face a prison sentence. The modern world is filled with situations where simple decisions made by a person who is in a position of responsibility can result in a loss of life.

The definition of first degree murder depends upon a state's specific definition. In my state, Louisiana, a charge of first degree murder is very rare because any element of emotional distress in the defendant can be used by the defense and reduce the charge to second degree. However, the law also allows a sentence of life without parole for some cases of second degree murder.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit.

Accidents happen and they are tragic. This woman going to prison isn't going to improve society. She needs to pay a cost, but time in prison doesn't seem appropriate. Our judicial system is wholly incapable of measuring out justice appropriately in so many cases.

By this reasoning, the person who incorrectly assembles a scaffold, which later collapses and kills a construction worker, should not face a prison sentence. The modern world is filled with situations where simple decisions made by a person who is in a position of responsibility can result in a loss of life.

I'm saying prison time /= justice. She made a terrible mistake, but I'm objecting to prison time being what pays for it.

The definition of first degree murder depends upon a state's specific definition. In my state, Louisiana, a charge of first degree murder is very rare because any element of emotional distress in the defendant can be used by the defense and reduce the charge to second degree. However, the law also allows a sentence of life without parole for some cases of second degree murder.

Isn't this manslaughter, not murder? I'm assuming that distinction matters in this state.

 

[Bronzeage]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit.

Accidents happen and they are tragic. This woman going to prison isn't going to improve society. She needs to pay a cost, but time in prison doesn't seem appropriate. Our judicial system is wholly incapable of measuring out justice appropriately in so many cases.

By this reasoning, the person who incorrectly assembles a scaffold, which later collapses and kills a construction worker, should not face a prison sentence. The modern world is filled with situations where simple decisions made by a person who is in a position of responsibility can result in a loss of life.

I'm saying prison time /= justice. She made a terrible mistake, but I'm objecting to prison time being what pays for it.

The definition of first degree murder depends upon a state's specific definition. In my state, Louisiana, a charge of first degree murder is very rare because any element of emotional distress in the defendant can be used by the defense and reduce the charge to second degree. However, the law also allows a sentence of life without parole for some cases of second degree murder.

Isn't this manslaughter, not murder? I'm assuming that distinction matters in this state.

The term "Napoleonic Code" gets mentioned anytime Louisiana law is considered. What this means in bv reality is every degree of the a crime defined and has to meet certain criteria. Most appeals are based on an argument over degree.

In the case at hand, we need to recognize this is not a matter of an ordinarily innocuous object becoming deadly, such as knocking a flower pot off a 3rd floor window and killing a pedestrian.

This officer went into the situation knowing she had a deadly weapon. She used this weapon to kill a person. We cannot call this kind of action an "accident", any more than when a drunk driver strikes and kills a pedestrian. It was a error in judgment in the use of a deadly weapon, which resulted in bv the death of a person.

Why should this officer receive special treatment? Imagine a civilian in the same situation. They kill a person, but claim they only intended to intimidate and pulling the trigger was an accident. Is that a viable defense against a murder charge?

 

[Patooka]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit. For 2nd degree, it seems that it would need to be considered negligence for any copy to carry both a gun and a taser.

I think context matters in this situation. Being an experienced firearms instructor and confusing the gun with a taser can be construed as negligence.

 

[Jarhyn]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit. For 2nd degree, it seems that it would need to be considered negligence for any copy to carry both a gun and a taser.

I think context matters in this situation. Being an experienced firearms instructor and confusing the gun with a taser can be construed as negligence.

Not to mention that as I said repeatedly about this it comes down to muscle memory in that if you are only generally drilling on drawing the gun, and not drilling against cross-confusion, you will be drawing your gun instead of your taser.

This is entirely a failure of training, and the officers so failed by their training may be ruined without extensive and what I think ought be mandatory re-training.

But I don't blame the cop in this one.

 

[Jarhyn]

Yeah, I think it's obvious it was an accident. She is charged with 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not clear on how the law would apply here, but 1st degree doesn't seem to fit.

Accidents happen and they are tragic. This woman going to prison isn't going to improve society. She needs to pay a cost, but time in prison doesn't seem appropriate. Our judicial system is wholly incapable of measuring out justice appropriately in so many cases.

By this reasoning, the person who incorrectly assembles a scaffold, which later collapses and kills a construction worker, should not face a prison sentence. The modern world is filled with situations where simple decisions made by a person who is in a position of responsibility can result in a loss of life.

I'm saying prison time /= justice. She made a terrible mistake, but I'm objecting to prison time being what pays for it.

The definition of first degree murder depends upon a state's specific definition. In my state, Louisiana, a charge of first degree murder is very rare because any element of emotional distress in the defendant can be used by the defense and reduce the charge to second degree. However, the law also allows a sentence of life without parole for some cases of second degree murder.

Isn't this manslaughter, not murder? I'm assuming that distinction matters in this state.

The term "Napoleonic Code" gets mentioned anytime Louisiana law is considered. What this means in bv reality is every degree of the a crime defined and has to meet certain criteria. Most appeals are based on an argument over degree.

In the case at hand, we need to recognize this is not a matter of an ordinarily innocuous object becoming deadly, such as knocking a flower pot off a 3rd floor window and killing a pedestrian.

This officer went into the situation knowing she had a deadly weapon. She used this weapon to kill a person. We cannot call this kind of action an "accident", any more than when a drunk driver strikes and kills a pedestrian. It was a error in judgment in the use of a deadly weapon, which resulted in bv the death of a person.

Why should this officer receive special treatment? Imagine a civilian in the same situation. They kill a person, but claim they only intended to intimidate and pulling the trigger was an accident. Is that a viable defense against a murder charge?

The cop has been forced for long hours under direction of instructors to repeatedly draw their gun when faced with adverse circumstances.

It is highly likely that the training to do so for a taser is lacking, and "training to draw exactly a _____ when drawing for a _____" is also probably lacking.

That is the defense against criminality.

It still shouldn't be defense of a job in law enforcement, and absolutely indicates a need for immediate mandatory re-training of the rest of the force. Or, see my last post.

 

[Patooka]

Not to mention that as I said repeatedly about this it comes down to muscle memory in that if you are only generally drilling on drawing the gun, and not drilling against cross-confusion, you will be drawing your gun instead of your taser.

This is entirely a failure of training, and the officers so failed by their training may be ruined without extensive and what I think ought be mandatory re-training.

But I don't blame the cop in this one.

Except the cop involved is one of the instructors. Or field training officer if you prefer. It's not a good look. I do agree that the most productive outcome of this incident is a review and revision of police policy and training. Unfortunately, I suspect that is also the least likely outcome.