prosecution doesnt except the defense in daunte wirght trial

[horselightning]

Daunte Wright's family's legal team says ex-officer Kim Potter's defense is 'beyond comprehension'

Lawyers for Daunte Wright's family said his death "was absolutely preventable" and that ex-cop Kim Potter's defense is a "damning indictment."

www.businessinsider.com

crump strikes again.; of course he dont except it . he is racist and dosent know anything about muscle memmory cops deal with . just anothwer bunch of racistd whop think they know how cops does his job and they don;'t know shit.

 

[the other mike]

She'll come out of prison in 15 years with all kinds of muscle memory.

 

[Ringtone]

Accept

 

[the other mike]

"Sorry . I hit the accelerator instead of the brake. "
(Truck driver's excuse for rear-ending a family of 4, killing 2 children)

"Accidentally hit the release lever . "
(Said the crane operator who dropped a 3000 pound steel beam killing 12 bystanders.)

"Oops. I hit the fuel release button thinking it was the landing gear."
(Airline pilot's voice on the black box recording after runway crash kills 145 )

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Daunte Wright's family's legal team says ex-officer Kim Potter's defense is 'beyond comprehension'

Lawyers for Daunte Wright's family said his death "was absolutely preventable" and that ex-cop Kim Potter's defense is a "damning indictment."

www.businessinsider.com

crump strikes again.; of course he dont except it . he is racist and dosent know anything about muscle memmory cops deal with . just anothwer bunch of racistd whop think they know how cops does his job and they don;'t know shit.

Tell us Horseshitting, why do the cops never shoot anyone white with a gun when they were reaching for their tasor.

 

[BULLDOG]

Daunte Wright's family's legal team says ex-officer Kim Potter's defense is 'beyond comprehension'

Lawyers for Daunte Wright's family said his death "was absolutely preventable" and that ex-cop Kim Potter's defense is a "damning indictment."

www.businessinsider.com

crump strikes again.; of course he dont except it . he is racist and dosent know anything about muscle memmory cops deal with . just anothwer bunch of racistd whop think they know how cops does his job and they don;'t know shit.

Don't need to know what cops go through to know nothing justifies killing an innocent person.

 

[the other mike]

She would have been better off saying she had taken her anxiety medication that day and it makes her confused between left and right. All Pfizer's fault.

 

[horselightning]

Don't need to know what cops go through to know nothing justifies killing an innocent person.

sho
ws what you no. nothing. and he isnt inocent.

 

[horselightning]

"Sorry . I hit the accelerator instead of the brake. "
(Truck driver's excuse for rear-ending a family of 4, killing 2 children)

"Accidentally hit the release lever . "
(Said the crane operator who dropped a 3000 pound steel beam killing 12 bystanders.)

"Oops. I hit the fuel release button thinking it was the landing gear."
(Airline pilot's voice on the black box recording after runway crash kills 145

top two have happened and no one was prosicuted. tragi c accidents happen/

 

[BackAgain]

Objectively, her police conduct would have been ok except for mistaking her gun for a taser. But it clearly was just a tragic brain fart.

The body cam video shows clearly that she realized her mistake almost immediately after making it. Her reaction wasn’t “on my God, I just shot a poor undeserving suspect.” Her reaction was concern for the legal consequences to her (going to prison). That worry she expressed, captured on the audio part of the body cam video, may make her look bad in the eyes of the jury.

Otherwise, the video helps the defense. It is always difficult to predict a jury’s collective thinking. But I wouldn’t be surprised if she comes out ok on the criminal case.

Even If she dodges that huge problem, though, her civil exposure is big and that case looks bleak.

 

[horselightning]

Kim Potter's defense tells jury the officer was justified in using deadly force against Daunte Wright, even if she didn't mean to

Attorney Earl Gray also said Potter's partner was a "nice guy" to Wright, and "could have put his knee on his neck" during the fatal traffic stop.

www.insider.com

Ex-cop Kim Potter's tearful testimony could produce a hung jury in manslaughter trial

Former police officer Kim Potter elected to testify in her own defense at her manslaughter trial. She broke down and sobbed as she described her abject horror in shooting 20-year-old Daunte Wright.

www.foxnews.com

and we are in jury deliberations

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Objectively, her police conduct would have been ok except for mistaking her gun for a taser. But it clearly was just a tragic brain fart.

The body cam video shows clearly that she realized her mistake almost immediately after making it. Her reaction wasn’t “on my God, I just shot a poor undeserving suspect.” Her reaction was concern for the legal consequences to her (going to prison). That worry she expressed, captured on the audio part of the body cam video, may make her look bad in the eyes of the jury.

Otherwise, the video helps the defense. It is always difficult to predict a jury’s collective thinking. But I wouldn’t be surprised if she comes out ok on the criminal case.

Even If she dodges that huge problem, though, her civil exposure is big and that case looks bleak.

Irrelevant, she unjustly took a man's life and claiming she grabbed her gun instead of her tasor is no excuse for a 26yr veteran.

 

[BackAgain]

Irrelevant, she unjustly took a man's life and claiming she grabbed her gun instead of her tasor is no excuse for a 26yr veteran.

She accidentally took a man’s life based on an obvious mistake. A horrifying mistake. But still a mistake. And as excuses go, “I made a mistake” when you obviously DID make a mistake ain’t that bad an excuse.

It turns out that it ain’t just rookies that make mistakes. Pass it on.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

She accidentally took a man’s life based on an obvious mistake. A horrifying mistake. But still a mistake. And as excuses go, “I made a mistake” when you obviously DID make a mistake ain’t that bad an excuse.

It turns out that it ain’t just rookies that make mistakes. Pass it on.

Sorry you can take that weak ass argument somewhere else; you can't take a man's life and then write it off as a mistake.

 

[JoeMoma]

Sorry you can take that weak ass argument somewhere else; you can't take a man's life and then write it off as a mistake.

So you believe she killed him on purpose?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

So you believe she killed him on purpose?

Does it matter? She killed him and for that I guess they should just say, "Oh she made a mistake, don't do that again." and let her go on her way.

 

[JoeMoma]

Does it matter? She killed him and for that I guess they should just say, "Oh she made a mistake, don't do that again." and let her go on her way.

Yes, it does matter. Do you believe she killed him on purpose?

 

[BackAgain]

Sorry you can take that weak ass argument somewhere else; you can't take a man's life and then write it off as a mistake.

Should she be on the job? Nope. Is she likely to be sued? Of course. If she has immunity, she may not be on the hook for the civil damages, but the victim’s family will be taking home a big old chunk of change.

Still and all, a tragic mistake is still just a tragic mistake.

 

[BackAgain]

Since the defendant is not charged with any “intent” crime, the fact that it was an accident alone doesn’t save the defendant. The actual issue is more precisely defined under the law in Minessota as far as I read them. I quote an excerpt from one case I just looked at:

“Recklessness" and "negligence" may be defined in the following manner: A person acts "recklessly" when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the element of an offense exists or will result from his conduct; the risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation. A person acts "negligently" when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the element of an offense exists or will result from his conduct; the risk must be of such a nature and degree that his failure to perceive it involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation. The difference between the terms "recklessly" and *320 "negligently," as thus defined, is one of kind rather than of degree. Each actor creates a risk of harm. The reckless actor is aware of the risk and disregards it; the negligent actor is not aware of the risk but should have been aware of it. 2 C. Torcia, Wharton's Criminal Law § 168 at 272 (14th ed. 1979) (footnotes omitted) (emphasis in original). ….”

State v. Frost, 342 N.W.2d 317 (1983).​

So let’s get down to it. Exactly what “risk” did she consciously disregard? You imagine her mistake of confusing her gun for a taser was a conscious disregard of the risk of the gun? I don’t think that is a meaningful interpretation of what the law says.

 

[BackAgain]

Sorry you can take that weak ass argument somewhere else; you can't take a man's life and then write it off as a mistake.

So, your weakness rejoinder is rejected.