What Was Wrong With Kim Potter Shooting Daunte Wright ?

[Faun]

She was not confused. She shot him LEGALLY in self-defense, but she was misfortunate to be in a Democrat city ruled by idiots, who don't understand what she was doing (just like some of the posters in this thread)

Then why would she say she accidentally grabbed her service weapon? Why wouldn't she just say all along she intended to grab her gun?

 

[Faun]

You still don't get it. The CRUX of the case is simple. The dum dum having zero education regarding police confrontations, allowed his hands to disappear, and thus, he got shot. That's really all there is to it. The taser talk is deflection.

So why did she say she meant to grab her taser? From what was she deflecting?

 

[protectionist]

It's what you said gramps. You said she claimed grabbing her service weapon was a mistake because she was wrongly being charged.

Yeah. So ?

 

[Faun]

Yeah. So ?

So... why would she say it was a mistake to shoot him if, according to you, it was totally legal to shoot him?

 

[protectionist]

AGAIN, you don't know shit.

If police shot everyone that didn't have their hands in plain sight, there would be more deaths than covid, retard.

"IF" ? HA HA HA. Another liberal airhead, openly displaying his cluelessness about guns and law enforcement. See folks. This is how ignorant they are. They don't know that suspects' hands disappearing, is justification for self-defense shooting.

Hey dum dum. How do you think police officers Philip Brailsford, Betty Shelby, and Jeronimo Yanez, all were cleared of any charges regarding the suspects they shot and killed ? YOU are who doesn't know shit.

 

[Faun]

"IF" ? HA HA HA. Another liberal airhead, openly displaying his cluelessness about guns and law enforcement. See folks. This is how ignorant they are. They don't know that suspects' hands disappearing, is justification for self-defense shooting.

Hey dum dum. How do you think police officers Philip Brailsford, Betty Shelby, and Jeronimo Yanez, all were cleared of any charges regarding the suspects they shot and killed ? YOU are who doesn't know shit.

Which of them said they accidentally shot someone?

 

[Faun]

WTF? RETARD.

The taser never left it's holster.

Potter saying "taser" doesn't mean the taser is involved.

Where did I say it left her holster??

 

[protectionist]

So... why would she say it was a mistake to shoot him if, according to you, it was totally legal to shoot him?

I already told you that I already have answered that about 10 times in this thread. Why don't you try reading it ?

 

[protectionist]

Which of them said they accidentally shot someone?

Irrelevant question. What is relevant is that they shot suspects in self-defense, because their hands disappeared, same as Potter.

 

[Smokin' OP]

" jury, attorneys, and judge" in a Democrat jurisdiction. Are you reading the thread ?

Of course, why didn't her teabagger lawyer appeal her case?

January 22 2022
(Brooklyn Center, MN) -- Many in the legal community are saying that any possible appeal by former Brooklyn Center police officer Kim Potter is unlikely to succeed.

Attorneys not involved in the case say the trial was well run and had few major legal issues, creating serious challenges for Potter's team to overcome in any appeal. Potter hasn't appealed yet. Her attorneys have declined to comment further on the case.

Potter was convicted last month of first and second degree manslaughter in the death of Daunte Wright after the former officer claimed she attempted to pull her taser during a traffic stop gone wrong, instead pulling her gun and shooting Wright, who died shortly after.

Potter is due to be sentenced on her conviction February 18th.

Anytime a suspect's hands disappear from the view of the officer, that is "an imminent threat of injury or death to themselves or their partners". You didn't know that ?

No, it isn't moron.

Suspects hands, disappear all the time.

It isn't always an imminent threat.

December 17 2021
Potter also said she had carried her firearm on her right side throughout her 26 years as an officer, while her Taser had been on her left since she first received one 19 years ago. But she said she had never discharged either weapon while on the job.

Eldridge also showed police dashcam footage in which Potter could be seen putting her hand on her gun holster on her right side even as she approached the vehicle.

Potter also agreed that as a field training officer she was expected to be very well aware of police training, use-of-force procedures, and pursuit policies.

The former officer was asked about comments made immediately after she fired the deadly shots in which she was recorded saying, “Oh, shit. I shot him. I grabbed the wrong fucking gun. Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God. I’m going to prison."

Potter said she could not account for her actions, including her failure to check on her fellow officers, as she was in shock.

Potter never stated Wright had a gun or anything else.

Potter conceded to prosecutor Erin Eldridge that she did not see any weapon in Wright’s possession and that he never threatened or punched her or her fellow officers.

"We were struggling. We were trying to keep him from driving away. It just went chaotic,” Potter told the court in her first public remarks on the deadly April 11.

 

[Faun]

I already told you that I already have answered that about 10 times in this thread. Why don't you try reading it ?

Cause what you said made no sense no matter how many times you said it.

You idiotically claimed she intentionally used her gun but lied and said it was unintentional because she knew she would be charged. Why would she need to lie if it was a legal shoot?

 

[Faun]

Irrelevant question. What is relevant is that they shot suspects in self-defense, because their hands disappeared, same as Potter.

LOL

You attempt to dismiss the question because it blows up your hallucination. Of course it's relevant since her defense was she grabbed the wrong weapon. That never goes away just because it's inconvenient for you.

 

[BackAgain]

What Was Wrong With Kim Potter Shooting Daunte Wright ?​

Wrong weapon.

 

[protectionist]

Wrong.

1,2. The video clearly shows the Travis and the others chased Arberry in vehicles, from behind.
The fact they got in front of him to cut him off, is irrelevant.
He was then NOT running AT Travis, but trying to get PAST him and escape.

3. When you point a gun at someone, it can easily go off by accident, so it is the felony of "conduct regardless of life", or "wreckless endangerment" to point at someone unless they posed a lethal threat first.
The only times this risk is justified is if there already is a visible deathly threat that you then have the right to counter with an equal threat.
And NO, you can NEVER shoot and kill an unarmed person just because of a physical altercation. If they are unarmed, then you can not legally shoot an attacker.

4. The fact someone can die from a physical attack without a deadly weapon like knife or gun, is irrelevant. You still are NOT allowed to escalate. If they have no specific weapon intended to be deadly, like a knife or gun, then you can NOT use one either. If they have a stone, then you are more than welcome to grab a stone yourself, but you can ONLY achieve parity, not exceed it.

5. I not only have a CCW, but have studied all aspect of law for decades. You on the other hand, sound like a military veteran who is still using entirely wrong rules of engagement that the police frequently are incorrectly taught.

6 When police shoot because hands disappear from view, that is totally and completely illegal. Any cop who does that needs to be jailed for a very long time.

1. Nothing indicates there was "chasing"

2. They did not get in front of him to cut him off. Their truck was already there, stopped, before he got there.

3. Are you stupid ? Arberry ran straight at Travis, attacked him and punched him. All on video.

4. Anyone charging at you (as Arberry did) is a lethal threat.

5. You can shoot and kill people who attack you, whether they are armed or not. You can also shoot and kill people who are not charging you, merely if they reach into a car (Terrence Crutcher), reach into a jacket or car console (Philando Castille), or if they reach behind them (Daniel Shaver), and their hands disappear. In all these cases, cops shot and killed the suspects who allowed their hands to disappear from view. All were cleared by reason of self-defense.

6. I also have a CCW, but for you, I would say your CCW is worthless, because if you hesitate for 1 second to shoot somebody that you are in an altercation with, and he lets his hand disappear from your view, in 1/4 second, you might be DEAD.

7. FALSE! It is NOT illegal for police to shoot suspects who let their hands disappear from their view. It happens all the time, and the cases I mentioned in # 5 of this post prove without any doubt, that it is 100% LEGAL to do this. You appear to be brainwashed by anti-cop, leftist idiots. I hope you recover.

8. If cops did not shoot suspects whose hands disappear from their view, there would be many more dead cops than there are, and there are already far too many.

 

[Faun]

1. Nothing indicates there was "chasing"

2. They did not get in front of him to cut him off. Their truck was already there, stopped, before he got there.

3. Are you stupid ? Arberry ran straight at Travis, attacked him and punched him. All on video.

4. Anyone charging at you (as Arberry did) is a lethal threat.

5. You can shoot and kill people who attack you, whether they are armed or not. You can also shoot and kill people who are not charging you, merely if they reach into a car (Terrence Crutcher), reach into a jacket or car console (Philando Castille), or if they reach behind them (Daniel Shaver), and their hands disappear. In all these cases, cops shot and killed the suspects who allowed their hands to disappear from view. All were cleared by reason of self-defense.

6. I also have a CCW, but for you, I would say your CCW is worthless, because if you hesitate for 1 second to shoot somebody that you are in an altercation with, and he lets his hand disappear from your view, in 1/4 second, you might be DEAD.

7. FALSE! It is NOT illegal for police to shoot suspects who let their hands disappear from their view. It happens all the time, and the cases I mentioned in # 5 of this post prove without any doubt, that it is 100% LEGAL to do this. You appear to be brainwashed by anti-cop, leftist idiots. I hope you recover.

8. If cops did not shoot suspects whose hands disappear from their view, there would be many more dead cops than there are, and there are already far too many.

Never alters the reality that on the witness stand, under oath, Travis McMichael testified that as Arbery was running towards him and his truck, he pointed his shotgun at Arbery, at which point Arbery changed his direction and headed towards the passenger side of the truck.

 

[protectionist]

LOL

You attempt to dismiss the question because it blows up your hallucination. Of course it's relevant since her defense was she grabbed the wrong weapon. That never goes away just because it's inconvenient for you.

And I told you (repeatedly) WHY she made that defense claim. And all your blabbering about a taser, is just a deflection away from the CRUX of the case, that she shot the guy in self-defense, and should never have even been charged. In a conservative town, she wouldn't have been.

 

[Smokin' OP]

"IF" ? HA HA HA. Another liberal airhead, openly displaying his cluelessness about guns and law enforcement. See folks. This is how ignorant they are. They don't know that suspects' hands disappearing, is justification for self-defense shooting.

Just like a retarded republican.

April 8 2015
Can police officers shoot at fleeing individuals?

Only in very narrow circumstances. A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, Tennessee vs. Garner, held that the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer or others in the community. That means officers are expected to take other, less-deadly action during a foot or car pursuit unless the person being chased is seen as an immediate safety risk.

In other words, a police officer who fires at a fleeing man who a moment earlier murdered a convenience store clerk may have reasonable grounds to argue that the shooting was justified. But if that same robber never fired his own weapon, the officer would likely have a much harder argument.

“You don’t shoot fleeing felons. You apprehend them unless there are exigent circumstances — emergencies — that require urgent police action to safeguard the community as a whole,”

Hey dum dum. How do you think police officers Philip Brailsford, Betty Shelby, and Jeronimo Yanez, all were cleared of any charges regarding the suspects they shot and killed ? YOU are who doesn't know shit.

You're STILL FOS.

Philip Brailsford.

May 27 2016
Daniel Shaver, a 26-year-old father of two, was staying at the La Quinta Inn & Suites in January on a work trip from Texas.

A 911 call was made claiming a gun was being pointed out the window of a hotel room, according to court records. Police say they found two pellet guns, which he used for his pest-control job, inside the room after Shaver had been killed.

Reports of a gun being pointed out the window, idiot.

May 18 18 2017
On September 16, 2016, Crutcher’s SUV was found stalled in the middle of the street. A witness called 911 and said a man was running away from the vehicle, warning it was going to blow up.

Shelby testified she arrived on the scene and approached the vehicle and cleared it, not seeing anyone inside.

As she turned back to her patrol car, she saw Crutcher walking toward her, she testified. He alternated between putting his hands in his pockets and putting them in the air, Shelby said.

Reports of vehicle blowing up?

November 17 2016
The officer was interviewed July 7 by investigators.

Yanez said Castile told him he had a gun at the same time he reached down between his right leg and the center console of the vehicle, the complaint said.

“And he put his hand around something,” Yanez was quoted as saying. He said Castile’s hand took a C-shape, “like putting my hand up to the butt of the gun.”

WTF, retard, NONE of that happened to Potter.

You STILL don't know shit.

 

[Faun]

And I told you (repeatedly) WHY she made that defense claim. And all you blabbering about a taser, is just a deflection away from the CRUX of the case that she shot the guy in self-defense, and should never have even been charged. In a conservative town, she wouldn't have been.

Yes, you said because she was being charged. You literally claimed she lied about which weapon she intended to use because she knew she was being charged.

Which makes no sense. If it was legal to shoot him with his gun, there was no reason for her to lie and claim it was an accident. If it was legal to shoot him, she would have said from the start she intended to use her gun and she wouldn't have been charged.

 

[protectionist]

Never alters the reality that on the witness stand, under oath, Travis McMichael testified that as Arbery was running towards him and his truck, he pointed his shotgun at Arbery, at which point Arbery changed his direction and headed towards the passenger side of the truck.

We've been all through that weeks ago, and the scenario you claim is FALSE. Put it to rest. For the 10th time, the video does NOT verify what you say. It does NOT show Travis pointing the shotgun at Arberry before Arberry attacked him.

You can make your idiotic (anti-video) claim 1,000 times if you like, and I will refute it every time. Ho hum. Yawn*****

 

[Faun]

In a conservative town, she wouldn't have been.

So you're saying because she was in a Liberal city, she knew she was going to be charged? Whether she said she intentionally shot him or accidentally shot him.