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

[Swammerdami]

A Modest Proposal.

Not all cops need to carry guns.

Fifteen years ago or thereabouts there was an incident near Oakland, Calif. where a BART cop shot a man suspected of evading the $2 fare. The intention was just to tase the guy, but the BART cop accidentally grabbed his gun instead. A BART cop!??!! What the f**k was a BART cop doing with a gun in the first place. (ETA: My memory jogged. The $2 fare evader was DELIBERATELY shot dead in San Fran. Bart cop tasering with a loaded gun was a different incident, perpetrated on New Years against someone just celebrating loudly.)

Just yesterday a cop shot and killed a 14-year old girl in North Hollywood. The girl was trying on clothes in a department store changing room. Cop's excuse? She (or he?) didn't know there was someone in the dressing room! (Since firing into an empty room is not protocol, I would have thought their best defense would be to say they DID think someone was in the room. If the 14-year girl were a Bolshevist brandishing a sharpened Antifa flag, the killing would be "self-defense.")

That cop was negligent. A truck driver got 110 years for negligently killing 4 innocents; should this cop get 27 years for killing one? I don't think so, but wonder if those glad the trucker got 110 years are consistent enough to want to imprison this cop for 1/4 of 110 years. (No, the news article didn't say if the 14-year old was black or white if that's a crucial piece of information.)

Rather than psychoanalyzing the details of Every.Single.One of these horrid cases — and we seem to get several new incidents every week — why not generalize? What do all these incidents have in common?

Spoiler

Guns.

Is policing a dangerous job? I've Googled and shown the list twice; do your own Googling now. Spoiler: Law enforcement ranks rather low on the list of most dangerous jobs. Lumberjack, fireman, taxi driver, construction worker are all MUCH more dangerous than police.

Do cops need guns for protection?

The official count from the FBI is that 27 law enforcement officers were 'feloniously' killed in the line of duty in 2013 (the lowest in a 35-year period 1980–2014), and an additional 49 died in accidents (total: 76).

Twenty-seven. That's the total across all 50 states, all law enforcement agencies, 12 months. Number of LEO's "hit a low in 2013 with 626,942 officers." That's a felonious killing rate of .000043, or "Point Zero Zero Zero Zero Four Three." Those are Zero's with Zs. But I suppose it's better to kill several hundred citizens (mostly just blacks anyway) than to let a few dozen cops die.

Here's an article from 2015 that makes the same point I'm trying to make. American police killed more people in March (111) than the entire UK police have killed since 1900. Study that stat. (If you argue that Britain is a small country, kindly redo 3rd-grade geography.) And UK cops are not killed over-often either. Why the discrepancy?

Spoiler

Guns.

There is a clear-cut and obvious path to reduce the shootings of and by police. But it's hard to see America following that path when an under-age sociopath like Kyle Rittenshit is now being touted by half of America as a hero.

 

[laughing dog]

You are not seriously arguing that these justices are dyed in the wool leftists because they are Democrats?

I did not peruse their individual biographies but the "Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party" that you guys have in Minnesota is to the left of the mainstream Democratic party.

Because as we all know, elected judges improve their re-election chances in a predominately white state by letting a black man get a lighter sentence for killing a white woman.

There are a lot of self-hating whites on the Left.

This is also the state where you elected Keith "Nation of Islam" Ellison to a statewide post.

Your Islamophobia is speaking volumes. Your argument is long on bigotry and short on reason and facts.

There was no judicial meddling. Mr. Noor appealed.

And they should have rejected the appeal, as there was nothing wrong with the initial conviction, and the sentence, if anything, was way too short.

Please point to the legal reasons why there was nothing wrong with the initial conviction of Mr. Noor on 3rd degree murder with specific reference to Mn law and precedence.

There is no explaining to do. I am not an expert in law and you most certainly are not.

I.e. blind adherence to authority. "A decision is correct because a court made it".

A convenient straw man. I am not competent to explain it. Frankly, from your ranting, it seems to me that you are incapable of understanding any competent explanation at this time.

Neither I nor the prosecutor owe you an explanation - not that it would make a difference in this case.

Of course they owe us a legal justification. Or are you advocating judicial tyranny?

The local prosecutor owes you nothing. You are not a resident of this state. But, if you really want to know why, you should write them a letter and see if you get a response.

Wow. Really, simply wow.

Are you seriously suggesting that his race has nothing to do with the support he's been getting in some circles? Same people who want him freed immediately also want the book thrown at Potter. Explain that.

No, I am wowing at your hand-waved race-based diatribes. For someone who claims race shouldn't and doesn't matter, you sure seem obsessed with it as an explanation.

 

[laughing dog]

I think someone has been hitting the holiday eggnog pretty hard. I get you cannot grasp that people get upset when the police engage in unnecessary killing of civilians. That does not make them "woke" - it makes them decent human beings.

I prefer mulled wine.
But I can grasp that somebody is upset at unnecessary killing of civilians. And yes, that does not make them woke. Woke is saying that because Wright is black, he counts more than Damond who is white. That's woke.

Normal would be to say that Wright brought a situation where a mistake like this could be made on himself which reduces Potter's culpability. That is not given in the Noor case. His victim did not have warrants or flee arrest in a motor vehicle with another cop partially inside. Wright did.

Reduction of culpability is not equivalent to absolution from responsibility for one's actions. Ms. Potter and Mr. Noor made split-second mistakes. They both are paying for them. For some reason, you cannot grasp the notion that in Brooklyn Park and the greater TC area, the community does not think Mr. Wright forfeited his right to life.


Whether you like it or not, the people of the Minneapolis are entitled to enforcement of their laws in a manner they see fit, They don't need your permission to establish, enforce and sit in judgment of the rules they think reflect their ethos and preferred society.

12 community members sat as jurors in judgment of Ms. Potter. Their verdict reflects the fact of the case, the testimony and evidence they heard, and their values. Their verdict reflects all of that. It does not make them idiots any more than your hysterical and bigoted rants make you an idiot.

Someone really has hit that holiday eggnog extra hard to come up with that unwarranted bigoted observation.

It is a well known fact that Keith Ellison has been a Nation of Islam sympathizer. Nation of Islam is a racist, antisemitic, black supremacist organization.

Wow, persistent smearing of someone just because you disagree with them. Pathetic.

 

[Toni]

I think someone has been hitting the holiday eggnog pretty hard. I get you cannot grasp that people get upset when the police engage in unnecessary killing of civilians. That does not make them "woke" - it makes them decent human beings.

I prefer mulled wine.
But I can grasp that somebody is upset at unnecessary killing of civilians. And yes, that does not make them woke. Woke is saying that because Wright is black, he counts more than Damond who is white. That's woke.
Normal would be to say that Wright brought a situation where a mistake like this could be made on himself which reduces Potter's culpability. That is not given in the Noor case. His victim did not have warrants or flee arrest in a motor vehicle with another cop partially inside. Wright did.

Someone really has hit that holiday eggnog extra hard to come up with that unwarranted bigoted observation.

It is a well known fact that Keith Ellison has been a Nation of Islam sympathizer. Nation of Islam is a racist, antisemitic, black supremacist organization.

No one that I am aware of is saying that Wright counts more than Dammond, much less because of the color of their skin. Both people were killed by on duty police officers for no good reason, except panic on the part of the officers. What you refuse to acknowledge is that the cases happened at different times, in different circumstances and had different prosecutors, defense, judges and juries.

I definitely think that Noor should have been convicted and sentenced to time. The MN supreme court overruled one conviction, saying that the crime did not meet the conditions of the statue. He will serve time for the other convictions. We don't know (or I don't) what sentencing Potter will get. I think she should do some time. In both cases, I think the deaths were not intentional nor deserved. I am fairly certain that Dammond was a better person that Wright but that is not relevant in the trials of those who killed them nor the sentences these people received. In both cases, the deaths were tragedies which cost a lot more than just the lives of the two people who were killed.

Surely the lesson learned is that policing is not being done correctly. Philandro Castile was killed while attempting to comply with an officer who obviously profiled him and made up crap about him looking like a suspect in a robbery several days prior--which he could definitely tell at night while passing each other in a car. Not that he saw the suspect in the robbery. A child was nearly killed!

A police officer killed a man sitting in his own apartment because she was mixed up about whether it was her apartment. Armed officers burst into an apartment in the middle of the night and killed a woman and arrested her boyfriend who thought they were being robbed-and they had the wrong information.

It does not matter at all what color anybody's skin is but bad things sure do happen a lot to people of darker complexions, even if they are sleeping in their own beds or watching tv.

Policing in the US must change.

 

[J842P]

Fifteen years ago or thereabouts there was an incident near Oakland, Calif. where a BART cop shot a man suspected of evading the $2 fare. The intention was just to tase the guy, but the BART cop accidentally grabbed his gun instead. A BART cop!??!! What the f**k was a BART cop doing with a gun in the first place. (ETA: My memory jogged. The $2 fare evader was DELIBERATELY shot dead in San Fran. Bart cop tasering with a loaded gun was a different incident, perpetrated on New Years against someone just celebrating loudly.)

I mean, BART can be a pretty dangerous place. There are crazy, armed people on it.

There is a clear-cut and obvious path to reduce the shootings of and by police. But it's hard to see America following that path when an under-age sociopath like Kyle Rittenshit is now being touted by half of America as a hero.

Oh, I see. You aren't a serious person. That explains it.

 

[Derec]

A Modest Proposal.
Not all cops need to carry guns.

In the US they certainly do.

Fifteen years ago or thereabouts there was an incident near Oakland, Calif. where a BART cop shot a man suspected of evading the $2 fare. The intention was just to tase the guy, but the BART cop accidentally grabbed his gun instead. A BART cop!??!! What the f**k was a BART cop doing with a gun in the first place. (ETA: My memory jogged. The $2 fare evader was DELIBERATELY shot dead in San Fran. Bart cop tasering with a loaded gun was a different incident, perpetrated on New Years against someone just celebrating loudly.)

Do you mean the case of Kenneth Harding?
A news report from when it happened:


He may have evaded the $2 fare, but to reduce the shooting to it is like reducing St. Daunte to his "air freshener" and ignoring the warrant and the robbery and such.
SFPD Recovers Gun Missing From Fatal Bayview Shootout

Facts:
- Harding was sought for a homicide in Washington state
- Harding was armed with a gun
- He was shooting at police while fleeing
- He wasn't actually shot by police. He shot himself.

But no. "Innocent black man shot by evil BART cops just because he evaded a $2 fare" fits better the anti-police narrative the far left is pushing so you are going with that.

As to Oscar Grant, the NYE reveler who got accidentally shot by police, that only shows that this type of mistake happens rarely but it does happen. Also, Oscar Grant had a criminal record (just a coincidence that most people shot by police do?) and was not merely too loud but was also involved in a fight on the train.

Just yesterday a cop shot and killed a 14-year old girl in North Hollywood. The girl was trying on clothes in a department store changing room. Cop's excuse? She (or he?) didn't know there was someone in the dressing room! (Since firing into an empty room is not protocol, I would have thought their best defense would be to say they DID think someone was in the room. If the 14-year girl were a Bolshevist brandishing a sharpened Antifa flag, the killing would be "self-defense.")

You are again omitting pertinent information in order to make police look worse. You make it sound like they were shooting at the changing room for shits and giggles. Instead, they were shooting at a guy attacking a woman who was taken to hospital with serious injuries. One of the bullets missed its intended target and unfortunately struck the girl. A tragedy, yes, but quite different from what you wrote.
Teen killed in a Los Angeles store after a police officer's shot penetrates wall of dressing room, officials say

On route, they received multiple calls that there was a "possible shooting in progress" and that people were sheltering in place, the LAPD said.
Upon arrival, officers found a female who was bleeding and suffering from various injuries.
The officers then encountered a man suspected in that assault a short distance away and shot at him, the statement said. He was struck by gunfire and declared dead at the scene, authorities said.

That cop was negligent.

You don't know that he was criminally negligent. I doubt there will be a criminal prosecution, although this is a rare case where I think the city should pay up.

A truck driver got 110 years for negligently killing 4 innocents

A very different case, very different circumstances and there is already a dedicated thread about trucker boy.

Rather than psychoanalyzing the details of Every.Single.One of these horrid cases — and we seem to get several new incidents every week — why not generalize? What do all these incidents have in common?

Spoiler

Guns.

Drop the psycho. Just analysis. We need to analyze the circumstances of each case because every case is different and needs to be examined on its own merits.

Is policing a dangerous job? I've Googled and shown the list twice; do your own Googling now. Spoiler: Law enforcement ranks rather low on the list of most dangerous jobs. Lumberjack, fireman, taxi driver, construction worker are all MUCH more dangerous than police.

Of those, only the taxi drivers are comparable in that much of the danger comes from criminals rather than just being accidental. Also, cops are still on those lists of most dangerous occupations, which means that rank pretty high among all occupations.

Do cops need guns for protection?

Yes. There would be a lot more dead cops if they did not have firearms for protection.

There is a clear-cut and obvious path to reduce the shootings of and by police. But it's hard to see America following that path when an under-age sociopath like Kyle Rittenshit is now being touted by half of America as a hero.

He is not a sociopath. He was just a kid who got attacked by three actual sociopaths, all with criminal records, and had to defend himself. And what does that have to do with whether police should be armed?

 

[Toni]

Just for some context, in 2020, the FBI reports that there were 385 duty related deaths of police officer, 254 of which were due to COVID19.

2020

451 law enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty in 2020.

www.odmp.org

As of December 24, 2021, 907 individuals had been killed by shooting by a police officer in 2021. Of course, that would exclude deaths such as George Floyd’s who was not shot by police nor killed in 2021. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/)

 

[Swammerdami]

A Modest Proposal.
Not all cops need to carry guns.

In the US they certainly do.

Why did you think that is? Did you click the Spoilers in the message you quoted?

You are again omitting pertinent information ...

Yep. Guilty as charged! I spent a few seconds whacking out a post to make my point. I've invited Infidels to spend time writing nuanced essays but there's been no interest. (Witnesses testified the $2 fare-evader was running AWAY from, and therefore less of a threat to, the cop. And the gun was allegedly planted. Google might present BOTH versions. You picked your click. I didn't waste a Google at all. Same-same. )

Will you start that project, Derec? A thread in which you carefully explain what you believe, if anything? If we were forced to guess from your posts, we might think that the ONLY thing that matters to you in police encounters is who's wearing the badge. What are your politics? You and Lauren Boebert both seem to be fans of guns. Is she your political inspiration?

He is not a sociopath. He was just a kid who got attacked by three actual sociopaths, all with criminal records, and had to defend himself.

What was Kid Rittenshit even doing there? Was he lost on his way home from Grandma's house? Did he find an assault rifle lying on the grass and thought it was a present from Santa? Was he even old enough to hold a gun?
Gosh, do you think you are again omitting pertinent information?

 

[Derec]

As of December 24, 2021, 907 individuals had been killed by shooting by a police officer in 2021.

How many of those were unjustified or even controversial enough that they may not be justified?
Vast majority of police shootings are pretty clear cut like this one from Christmas Eve at a DeKalb County, Ga Walmart.
Police fatally shoot suspect on Christmas Eve at DeKalb Walmart
A shoplifter was shot when he started shooting at the responding police officers.

 

[Derec]

Why did you think that is? Did you click the Spoilers in the message you quoted?

As you say, guns. Too many perps have guns. You will not rectify that by disarming police though. You will just shift the balance of power in favor of thugs.

(Witnesses testified the $2 fare-evader was running AWAY from, and therefore less of a threat to, the cop. And the gun was allegedly planted. Google might present BOTH versions. You picked your click. I didn't waste a Google at all. Same-same. )

Alleged by whom exactly? The .38 was matched to the bullet that killed him. Are you suggesting the police also faked the autopsy and/or ballistics? Because if he was really shot by police the bullet trajectory would look nothing like him shooting himself while shooting backwards over his shoulder.

Will you start that project, Derec?

No. Regular posting here takes up enough of my time as is.
If we were forced to guess from your posts, we might think that the ONLY thing that matters to you in police encounters is who's wearing the badge.

What are your politics?

Independent. Fiscally moderate. Foreign policy realist. Socially libertarian as far as personal behavior. Against illegal immigration but for smart legal immigration within reasonable limits.

You and Lauren Boebert both seem to be fans of guns. Is she your political inspiration?

No, she is not. And I am not really a fan of guns. I do not own any, and have only been at a shooting range a few times, you know, just for fun.
I do think we need to impose stricter gun laws in many areas (stricter background checks and closing the gun show loophole would be a good start), but I also think many of the proposals by gun-haters go too far. Like being able to sue gunmakers for selling legal products. Or trying to ban so-called "assault weapons" when most gun crime is committed by regular handguns. Things like that.

What was Kid Rittenshit even doing there?

Misnaming Rittenhouse in such a juvenile manner makes you look like a Kindergartener. Just saying.
As to what he was doing there, what were the pedophile and the other Antifas doing there themselves?
Are you suggesting they had the right to be there but he did not?

Gosh, do you think you are again omitting pertinent information?

That silliness is hardly pertinent. What is pertinent here is that he was defending himself from attacks by several angry, violent Antifas who fucked around and found out.

 

[Swammerdami]

A Modest Proposal.
...
Rather than psychoanalyzing the details of Every.Single.One of these horrid cases — and we seem to get several new incidents every week — why not generalize? What do all these incidents have in common?

Spoiler

Guns.

...
There is a clear-cut and obvious path to reduce the shootings of and by police. But it's hard to see America following that path when an under-age sociopath like Kyle Rittenshit is now being touted by half of America as a hero.

Derec seemed interested in responding to my post, but ignored a key sentence. (He also managed to miss "of" — blame me for that: two little letters got lost in the rampage) Many thousands of Americans die by gunfire annually. Many tens of thousands are brutalized inappropriately by police. Studying details of specific cases is often a waste of time. Can we at least agree that when a cop kills a civilian by confusing his or her gun for a taser, that something has failed miserably?? I dimly recalled a previous case from many years ago when the killing cop was just a BART cop — almost by definition a wannabe cop unqualified to be a real cop. I misremembered details, conflating with another case originating on Bay Area transit. And Derec thinks my poor memory is a gotcha that invalidates my point?? Do I need to use even bigger fonts???

Anyway, if Derec cannot acknowledge that Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman are pieces of shit who should not have been trying to act as vigilantes, then I think his opinion on these matters is worthless.

Anyway, writing their names as "Kyle Rittenshit and George Zimmerfuq" isn't Kindergarten: It's a way to save time! It reminds intelligent readers — without repeating a mini-essay — that these brats are scumbags who should never be allowed to possess a gun.

Why did you think that is? Did you click the Spoilers in the message you quoted?

As you say, guns. Too many perps have guns. You will not rectify that by disarming police though. You will just shift the balance of power in favor of thugs.

Oh my. Do I need to spell everything out for you? Hint: I wrote "Guns." I did NOT write "Police guns."

I thought I gave it away with the title "A Modest Proposal." For millions of Americans, eating babies would be much more acceptable than putting limits on civilian guns.

What about you, Derec? Do you think the 2nd Amendment was Written By the Finger of God atop Mount Sinai? Or do you just fall back on "Can't repeal it. Ha ha ha!"

But if we ARE going to go with the Second Amendment and insist that Nazis and QAnon addicts are entitled to AR-15s; then what about my well-regulated militia of antifa? We need flame-throwers and missile launchers to cope with our enemies.

I'm not sure what to think about chemical weapons. Doesn't the Second Commandment written by Yahweh or the Foundingfathers supercede any agreement signed by mere mortals?

One problem I have with Yahweh's Second Commandment is that it seems to apply only for White people. @Derec, what about the black guy who told cops he had a gun in his glove compartment and a permit; but did NOT reach for it? He was shot dead. Self-defense? Did that guy have an outstanding parking ticket?

 

[Jarhyn]

A Modest Proposal.
...
Rather than psychoanalyzing the details of Every.Single.One of these horrid cases — and we seem to get several new incidents every week — why not generalize? What do all these incidents have in common?

Spoiler

Guns.

...
There is a clear-cut and obvious path to reduce the shootings of and by police. But it's hard to see America following that path when an under-age sociopath like Kyle Rittenshit is now being touted by half of America as a hero.

Derec seemed interested in responding to my post, but ignored a key sentence. (He also managed to miss "of" — blame me for that: two little letters got lost in the rampage) Many thousands of Americans die by gunfire annually. Many tens of thousands are brutalized inappropriately by police. Studying details of specific cases is often a waste of time. Can we at least agree that when a cop kills a civilian by confusing his or her gun for a taser, that something has failed miserably?? I dimly recalled a previous case from many years ago when the killing cop was just a BART cop — almost by definition a wannabe cop unqualified to be a real cop. I misremembered details, conflating with another case originating on Bay Area transit. And Derec thinks my poor memory is a gotcha that invalidates my point?? Do I need to use even bigger fonts???

Anyway, if Derec cannot acknowledge that Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman are pieces of shit who should not have been trying to act as vigilantes, then I think his opinion on these matters is worthless.

Anyway, writing their names as "Kyle Rittenshit and George Zimmerfuq" isn't Kindergarten: It's a way to save time! It reminds intelligent readers — without repeating a mini-essay — that these brats are scumbags who should never be allowed to possess a gun.

Why did you think that is? Did you click the Spoilers in the message you quoted?

As you say, guns. Too many perps have guns. You will not rectify that by disarming police though. You will just shift the balance of power in favor of thugs.

Oh my. Do I need to spell everything out for you? Hint: I wrote "Guns." I did NOT write "Police guns."

I thought I gave it away with the title "A Modest Proposal." For millions of Americans, eating babies would be much more acceptable than putting limits on civilian guns.

What about you, Derec? Do you think the 2nd Amendment was Written By the Finger of God atop Mount Sinai? Or do you just fall back on "Can't repeal it. Ha ha ha!"

But if we ARE going to go with the Second Amendment and insist that Nazis and QAnon addicts are entitled to AR-15s; then what about my well-regulated militia of antifa? We need flame-throwers and missile launchers to cope with our enemies.

I'm not sure what to think about chemical weapons. Doesn't the Second Commandment written by Yahweh or the Foundingfathers supercede any agreement signed by mere mortals?

One problem I have with Yahweh's Second Commandment is that it seems to apply only for White people. @Derec, what about the black guy who told cops he had a gun in his glove compartment and a permit; but did NOT reach for it? He was shot dead. Self-defense? Did that guy have an outstanding parking ticket?

He injected the liquid Marijuanas. Two of them!

Obviously the guy was as dangerous as one of those angel dusters!

Edit: just in case it wasn't already clear, only a complete fucking idiot would seriously believe, after reading and seeing decades of evidence that marijuana does not contribute to violence or even contribute to crash culpability in the absence of alcohol, that this has any bearing on whether a guy needed to be shot.

 

[maxparrish]

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!

The two medical examiners who conducted autopsies on Floyd's body ruled it a homicide. A doctor and several experts in the use of force testified at trial that it was a homicide. A jury of 12 people presented with the evidence in the case ruled it a homicide. Multiple people who witnessed the killing first hand, including a paramedic, testified that Chauvin killed Floyd. And Chauvin himself recently pled guilt in a Federal Court to violating Mr Floyd's rights and to using excessive force. Yet here you are, repeating this lie over and over again.

One of these days you may get arrested during a vice sting, and get your ass beaten in the process, and you will discover for yourself exactly how the police in this country treat the communities they are paid to serve and protect. Maybe you will change your tune then.

At the risk of starting a tangential discussion of the Chauvin case, you should also note that aside from unsupported opinion there was little evidence, save for one expert witness, that the death could be confidently attributed to an unlawful killing. The County ME initially made no ruling then, under the obvious pressure of the unrest, simply changed his finding based on nothing. If you read the ME report, there simply wasn't any evidence that Chauvin's knee or forced prone position was the proximate substantial contributary cause.

In addition, a bunch of people who witness a death may render their own non-expert conjecture, as might the jury, but the epidemiological evidence is consistent with several theories of death, including his mostly blocked heart arteries, enlarged heart, drug overdose, etc.

Finally, Chauvin recent decision to plea over using excessive force is not an admission that he murdered Floyd. It's a practical choice he made given that his resources are depleted, can't get a public defender, and the piling on makes it nearly impossible for him to win. As it is, if (as was implied in a news article) he continues with the pro bono state appeal and gets a new trial, a favorable result at a State trial would setup a possible pardon for the federal conviction under a Republican President. Otherwise, he best save his retirement funds for his old age release.

 

[maxparrish]

She was an experienced officer who trained younger officers in the use of force as part of her job. A man is dead because of her reckless actions, and she should have known better. Any common civilian, who did not have the specialized training that Ms Potter had received, or the experience she had gathered over two and half decades working a LEO and a trainer, would likely also be convicted of a similar charge under similar circumstances. Why should Ms Potter be treated any different?

First, her actions under Minnesota law and the evidence provided, did not meet the criminal requirement for "recklessness".

Two, "she should have known better" is a civil law criteria for negligence, but recklessness is a concept under criminal law ('culpable negligence') which requires the person to have an awareness of drawing and firing a gun AND a thereby showing conscious disregarding for its "foreseeable" unjustified great bodily harm or death.

Three, why should anyone be "treated different(ly)" under the law, agreed. However, training is mostly immaterial to slip and capture (action error) and because such training intentionally tries to make actions automatic, so when it works its fine. However, as shown in many areas of human endeavor (doctors, pilots, police officers, etc.) when automatics actions derail, the person is almost always unaware.

Kim Potter made a mistake, which is not by itself unlawful. She also might have been negligent in some manner, which is not criminal by itself. But she was not reckless because if you are not even aware of the correct weapon you hold in your hand, you can't have knowingly disregarded its risk since you didn't have it.

Her conviction was a miscarriage of Justice, prompted by a Judge without the will to find and instruct the law during trial (or to do so in jury instructions), a prosecution which wrongly confused the jury with fake claims, and a jury whose deliberations were based on a gross lack of understanding of the law.

 

[TomC]

Any common civilian, who did not have the specialized training that Ms Potter had received,

As a common civilian myself, I know exactly what I'd do in her position. I'd jump in my car and drive off as fast as I could. I'd make someone else deal with the problem.
She didn't have that option.
Tom

 

[atrib]

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!

The two medical examiners who conducted autopsies on Floyd's body ruled it a homicide. A doctor and several experts in the use of force testified at trial that it was a homicide. A jury of 12 people presented with the evidence in the case ruled it a homicide. Multiple people who witnessed the killing first hand, including a paramedic, testified that Chauvin killed Floyd. And Chauvin himself recently pled guilt in a Federal Court to violating Mr Floyd's rights and to using excessive force. Yet here you are, repeating this lie over and over again.

One of these days you may get arrested during a vice sting, and get your ass beaten in the process, and you will discover for yourself exactly how the police in this country treat the communities they are paid to serve and protect. Maybe you will change your tune then.

At the risk of starting a tangential discussion of the Chauvin case, you should also note that aside from unsupported opinion there was little evidence, save for one expert witness, that the death could be confidently attributed to an unlawful killing. The County ME initially made no ruling then, under the obvious pressure of the unrest, simply changed his finding based on nothing. If you read the ME report, there simply wasn't any evidence that Chauvin's knee or forced prone position was the proximate substantial contributary cause.

In addition, a bunch of people who witness a death may render their own non-expert conjecture, as might the jury, but the epidemiological evidence is consistent with several theories of death, including his mostly blocked heart arteries, enlarged heart, drug overdose, etc.

Finally, Chauvin recent decision to plea over using excessive force is not an admission that he murdered Floyd. It's a practical choice he made given that his resources are depleted, can't get a public defender, and the piling on makes it nearly impossible for him to win. As it is, if (as was implied in a news article) he continues with the pro bono state appeal and gets a new trial, a favorable result at a State trial would setup a possible pardon for the federal conviction under a Republican President. Otherwise, he best save his retirement funds for his old age release.

You failed to mention the fact that Chauvin continued to asphyxiate Mr Floyd for nearly three minutes after he became aware that Mr Floyd had stopped breathing, failed to render first aid to try to revive him, and that his own colleague advised him that Mr Floyd should be rolled on his side so they could try to revive him. That is the most damning piece of evidence in the case, even if you were somehow able to overlook the unjustified assault that was intended to inflict pain and suffering on a person who was restrained with handcuffs and did not pose a threat to anybody. The assault was illegal, and Mr Floyd died as a result of the assault - that adds up to felony murder in most jurisdictions. Most reasonable people, well versed in the law or not, recognize that when they watch the video, but some people continue to defend the murdering thug in this story.

 

[maxparrish]

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!

The two medical examiners who conducted autopsies on Floyd's body ruled it a homicide. A doctor and several experts in the use of force testified at trial that it was a homicide. A jury of 12 people presented with the evidence in the case ruled it a homicide. Multiple people who witnessed the killing first hand, including a paramedic, testified that Chauvin killed Floyd. And Chauvin himself recently pled guilt in a Federal Court to violating Mr Floyd's rights and to using excessive force. Yet here you are, repeating this lie over and over again.

One of these days you may get arrested during a vice sting, and get your ass beaten in the process, and you will discover for yourself exactly how the police in this country treat the communities they are paid to serve and protect. Maybe you will change your tune then.

At the risk of starting a tangential discussion of the Chauvin case, you should also note that aside from unsupported opinion there was little evidence, save for one expert witness, that the death could be confidently attributed to an unlawful killing. The County ME initially made no ruling then, under the obvious pressure of the unrest, simply changed his finding based on nothing. If you read the ME report, there simply wasn't any evidence that Chauvin's knee or forced prone position was the proximate substantial contributary cause.

In addition, a bunch of people who witness a death may render their own non-expert conjecture, as might the jury, but the epidemiological evidence is consistent with several theories of death, including his mostly blocked heart arteries, enlarged heart, drug overdose, etc.

Finally, Chauvin recent decision to plea over using excessive force is not an admission that he murdered Floyd. It's a practical choice he made given that his resources are depleted, can't get a public defender, and the piling on makes it nearly impossible for him to win. As it is, if (as was implied in a news article) he continues with the pro bono state appeal and gets a new trial, a favorable result at a State trial would setup a possible pardon for the federal conviction under a Republican President. Otherwise, he best save his retirement funds for his old age release.

You failed to mention the fact that Chauvin continued to asphyxiate Mr Floyd for nearly three minutes after he became aware that Mr Floyd had stopped breathing, failed to render first aid to try to revive him, and that his own colleague advised him that Mr Floyd should be rolled on his side so they could try to revive him. That is the most damning piece of evidence in the case, even if you were somehow able to overlook the unjustified assault that was intended to inflict pain and suffering on a person who was restrained with handcuffs and did not pose a threat to anybody. The assault was illegal, and Mr Floyd died as a result of the assault - that adds up to felony murder in most jurisdictions. Most reasonable people, well versed in the law or not, recognize that when they watch the video, but some people continue to defend the murdering thug in this story.

However, if you do a deep dive into the case you will find that Chauvin's actions were not, beyond a reasonable doubt, actually asphyxiating Floyd and that the three-minute meme's length of time was a falsehood invented by the prosecution (the time period of the Chauvin's alleged asphyxiation was half that). Also, his colleague's comment was seemly unheard or not understood by Chauvin above the noise of the radio traffic and crowd.

Of course, Chauvin was insensitive, preoccupied with the threat of the crowd, and restrained under the presumption that Floyd was in the throes of drug induced delirium. But it did not amount to assault. Finally, the bottom line is that there isn't any evidence that Chauvin's knee to the shoulder or base of the neck (see the still shots taken from another angle) had any substantive contribution to Floyd's death.

The only narrative of guilt supported by the "evidence" is the video-based analysis testimony of one of the prosecutions
'experts' who, apparently for this trial, said he had a method (non peer reviewed) where in he claimed he could calculate the percentage (down to tenths of a percent) of breath through a cell phone video.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that. The subject of this thread is Potter, and unlike Chauvin, even jury does not believe (according to a juror) she knew she was shooting a gun.

 

[Harry Bosch]

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!

The two medical examiners who conducted autopsies on Floyd's body ruled it a homicide. A doctor and several experts in the use of force testified at trial that it was a homicide. A jury of 12 people presented with the evidence in the case ruled it a homicide. Multiple people who witnessed the killing first hand, including a paramedic, testified that Chauvin killed Floyd. And Chauvin himself recently pled guilt in a Federal Court to violating Mr Floyd's rights and to using excessive force. Yet here you are, repeating this lie over and over again.

One of these days you may get arrested during a vice sting, and get your ass beaten in the process, and you will discover for yourself exactly how the police in this country treat the communities they are paid to serve and protect. Maybe you will change your tune then.

At the risk of starting a tangential discussion of the Chauvin case, you should also note that aside from unsupported opinion there was little evidence, save for one expert witness, that the death could be confidently attributed to an unlawful killing. The County ME initially made no ruling then, under the obvious pressure of the unrest, simply changed his finding based on nothing. If you read the ME report, there simply wasn't any evidence that Chauvin's knee or forced prone position was the proximate substantial contributary cause.

In addition, a bunch of people who witness a death may render their own non-expert conjecture, as might the jury, but the epidemiological evidence is consistent with several theories of death, including his mostly blocked heart arteries, enlarged heart, drug overdose, etc.

Finally, Chauvin recent decision to plea over using excessive force is not an admission that he murdered Floyd. It's a practical choice he made given that his resources are depleted, can't get a public defender, and the piling on makes it nearly impossible for him to win. As it is, if (as was implied in a news article) he continues with the pro bono state appeal and gets a new trial, a favorable result at a State trial would setup a possible pardon for the federal conviction under a Republican President. Otherwise, he best save his retirement funds for his old age release.

You failed to mention the fact that Chauvin continued to asphyxiate Mr Floyd for nearly three minutes after he became aware that Mr Floyd had stopped breathing, failed to render first aid to try to revive him, and that his own colleague advised him that Mr Floyd should be rolled on his side so they could try to revive him. That is the most damning piece of evidence in the case, even if you were somehow able to overlook the unjustified assault that was intended to inflict pain and suffering on a person who was restrained with handcuffs and did not pose a threat to anybody. The assault was illegal, and Mr Floyd died as a result of the assault - that adds up to felony murder in most jurisdictions. Most reasonable people, well versed in the law or not, recognize that when they watch the video, but some people continue to defend the murdering thug in this story.

However, if you do a deep dive into the case you will find that Chauvin's actions were not, beyond a reasonable doubt, actually asphyxiating Floyd, that the three minute meme's length of time was a falsehood invented by the prosecution (it was more like half)

I'm sorry, but the above is crazy. The vast majority of cops in the US are good and are appalled at Chauvin's actions. Peddling the above nonsense hurts the credibility of cops. If you want to help the police, stop parroting the above nonsense.

 

[TomC]

However, if you do a deep dive into the case you will find that Chauvin's actions were not, beyond a reasonable doubt, actually asphyxiating Floyd, that the three minute meme's length of time was a falsehood invented by the prosecution (it was more like half)

Another aspect that gets overlooked is that Chauvin knew Floyd. He knew Floyd as a burly bouncer at a big dive bar, because they both worked there. Not as a delicate flower to be handled carefully, or even an unknown quantity, but as a powerful man. One who got physically violent enough for the other cops to take back out of the car Floyd was safe in.
Tom

 

[atrib]

She was an experienced officer who trained younger officers in the use of force as part of her job. A man is dead because of her reckless actions, and she should have known better. Any common civilian, who did not have the specialized training that Ms Potter had received, or the experience she had gathered over two and half decades working a LEO and a trainer, would likely also be convicted of a similar charge under similar circumstances. Why should Ms Potter be treated any different?

First, her actions under Minnesota law and the evidence provided, did not meet the criminal requirement for "recklessness".

Two, "she should have known better" is a civil law criteria for negligence, but recklessness is a concept under criminal law ('culpable negligence') which requires the person to have an awareness of drawing and firing a gun AND a thereby showing conscious disregarding for its "foreseeable" unjustified great bodily harm or death.

I have a concealed weapons permit, and I sometimes carry a firearm on my person when I am legally allowed to do so. The first thing you learn in gun safety training is that you never pull a gun unless you are willing to use it, and you never point a gun at somebody unless you are willing to kill them. I am not a trained LEO with 26 years of experience and I don't train other LEOs in the use of force - yet I am fully able to recognize the potential consequences of pulling a gun and using it. I also know exactly what my gun handle and trigger feel like, and exactly what I need to do in order to make it go boom, because I constantly practice these maneuvers in a safe environment so I can rely on my muscle memory if I am ever faced with a situation where I need to make this happen. To suggest that a veteran LEO who has been carrying a gun at her side for 26 years or more, pretty much every day of her working life, lacks the ability to foresee the consequences of knowingly putting herself in a position where she might misuse that gun is preposterous. Or that she is unable to distinguish between a gun handle and a taser handle in the heat of the moment, when this stuff should all be ingrained in her muscle memory through constant practice and repetition.

Three, why should anyone be "treated different(ly)" under the law, agreed. However, training is mostly immaterial to slip and capture (action error) and because such training intentionally tries to make actions automatic, so when it works its fine. However, as shown in many areas of human endeavor (doctors, pilots, police officers, etc.) when automatics actions derail, the person is almost always unaware.

Kim Potter made a mistake, which is not by itself unlawful. She also might have been negligent in some manner, which is not criminal by itself. But she was not reckless because if you are not even aware of the correct weapon you hold in your hand, you can't have knowingly disregarded its risk since you didn't have it.

She should have been aware that she was pulling her gun and not her taser; she should have been aware that she was pulling the trigger on her gun and not her taser. A Glock 17 feels NOTHING like a taser in the hand. That is the whole fucking point. She should have known how to distinguish between her gun and her less-lethal option. She was not a rookie, and it is preposterous to suggest that she had not trained herself sufficiently to recognize the difference.

The only mitigating circumstance I can think of is the fact that most LEOs today get issued single action automatic pistols (Glocks and Berettas) where all you need to do to make the gun go boom is pull the trigger. Unlike the old days where police carried double action revolvers (which have a longer, heavier, multi-stage trigger pull), or a single action auto with one or more safety features (like the grip safety, the slide safety, and firing pin safety that is found on many modern 1911s). But even with that fact, she must have put tens of thousands of rounds through her service Glock as part of her range work training, and she must have been aware of exactly how here Glock felt in her hand, and the fact that it has no safety features.

Her conviction was a miscarriage of Justice, prompted by a Judge without the will to find and instruct the law during trial (or to do so in jury instructions), a prosecution which wrongly confused the jury with fake claims, and a jury whose deliberations were based on a gross lack of understanding of the law.

I think the jury got it right.