Police shoot another unarmed black man

@I_Need_A_Detox

 Tox, you're just racist, bro.

@StumpTownStu

I doubt that in the heat of the moment, with less than a second to respond, her brain would have calculated the thought process of yelling 'taser' with the intention of shooting him. That is not the say she did not act recklessly and at the least, her actions were obviously horrific and not even close to the standard of even a poor officer. 

The body can do many things when it is under pressure, often opposite of the mind's intention. Like hitting the gas instead of the brake (most recently Tiger). Its not excusing what happened, rather explaining how it may have occurred. 

@djbrow

 Tiger Woods is a golfer who was under the influence of medication. This is a trained, veteran officer. I've been shot at. And once during an attempted carjacking, had a gun pointed directly at my head. I didn't lose my shit. Not to mention the tactile ability to tell the difference between a gun and a taser. Have you ever held a taser? They feel gun like but there's no mistaking the two. And this was a veteran cop.

The law change is what seals this case against her. It not that it was "apparent" he was going for weapon. It must be he had a weapon . Or he was going for a visible weapon. 

The reason the two weopon s are needed t aser and a hand gun. She knew that she needed the t aser but she held a handgun.

I can't see this upgraded to murder , I feel that intent was the issue between an accident and premeditated.  

She is charged made bail and awaits trial. 

But second degree manslaughter is not an over reach of the prosecutor.  The after math of this is just gruesome  . 100s of buisness damaged downtown is in riot . Not sure if her actions could be held accountable for the subsequent damage . But her conduct is morally and ethically reprehensible. 

The percieved immunity of police conduct has led us to the point of non accountability. 

Some how we have come to understanding that police can be judge jury and executioner in all police shootings where the crimes are not a capital crime this is unjust. 

We not living in an apocalyptic future and our cops are not modeled as a judge dread scenario.  If the crime and the incident is not a imminent danger of death or harm then the act of killing another human is not justice it's criminal behavior and should be procecuted.

This alone Is grievous,  but coupled with the back drop of the chauvin case literally 10 miles from the incident makes it necessary to attempt the prosecution of the person that took a young man's life over a misdemeanor warrant . 

This could of been a ticket or non arrest summons.  

You aren't saying anything different than I am except that there is not any evidence, at this time, that Tiger was under the influence. 

The question is whether she intended to shoot him. Perhaps she did. My point is that I don't think it can be concluded that she did so with the conscience directive of "I am going to kill this person." When he entered the vehicle, it would be reasonable to assume that there was a weapon. It was not an experienced and trained officer's reasonable response to mistake a taser for a weapon but that doesn't mean her conscience directive was to yell taser to protect herself from being charged for murder/manslaughter. 

Former Minneapolis police officer,
sentenced to 12½ years in fatal shooting of innocent woman
 - which many view as 'accidental'

CNN link to 2019 story:      https://tinyurl.com/2ze9kacr

Authorities said Justine Ruszczyk called 911 the night of July 15, 2017,
to report a possible sexual assault in an alley behind her house.

Officers Harrity and Noor were dispatched to the scene and arrived at 11:37 p.m.
Prosecutors said Noor was sitting in the passenger seat, pulled out his gun and shot
across the vehicle to hit Justine Ruszczyk, who was outside the driver’s side door.

Noor testified during the trial that Harrity’s terrified expression and the sight of
Ruszczyk  with her hand raised  jolted him into action.

Although he did not see a gun in the woman’s hand, 
he feared his partner might be shot, he said.

Speaking in court, Noor said:
       “The moment I pulled the trigger, I felt fear.
      The moment I walked around and saw Miss Ruszczyk dying on the ground,
      I felt horror.     I knew in that instant that I was wrong.”

@fubah2

 I remember that case. When people not involved die, officer's are usually found responsible if firing the gun was not justified. 

That officer's lawyers argued that the shooting WAS justified due to the officer's

apparent  BELIEF  that he and his partner were in imminent danger.

In the end, whether accidental or not, the officer was held responsible for his action,

and received a 12.5 year prison sentence.

Officer Potter's defense is virtually the same - despite not seeing any weapon,

she decided to shoot.

I reject the accidental grabbed a glock instread of the tazer located on her opposing hip -

as a 26 year police veteran who is also a trainer - is certainly aware.

Not disagreeing with the excellent points you have made at all.

Just that I believe officer Potter  *deserves* full accountability here, like officer Noor.

If she doesn't get prison, MINNESOTA WILL BURN

@djbrow

 I think you're missing my point. I'm not saying she maliciously set out to kill the guy. I think she pulled her weapon because she sincerely felt it was warranted. In that situation, it's the right move imo, and probably what they're trained to do. She probably fired because she felt an eminent threat. This isn't the most egregious police shooting. All i'm saying is I think all the "taser! taser!" talk was cap, as the kids say. When I heard the recording, it sounded disingenuous and, i'm sorry, but i'm a handicapper. I believe it's more likely that a veteran cop, knowing that she may have to use her weapon, would yell, "Taser! Taser!" to cover her own ass than that same veteran cop thinking her firearm is a taser. It's a veteran move. Every profession, every field has veteran moves and what's rule number 1? CYA.

Intent isn’t a necessary component of second-degree manslaughter in Minnesota. The charge — which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison — can be applied in circumstances where a person is suspected of causing a death by “culpable negligence” that creates an unreasonable risk and consciously takes chances to cause a death.

Wright family attorney Ben Crump said the family appreciates the criminal case, but he again disputed that the shooting was accidental, arguing that an experienced officer knows the difference between a Taser and a handgun.

Source. https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/04/15/daunte-wright-read-criminal-complaint-kim-potter/

The other unspoken problem exists with the d.a. And police. DA office has no resources for field investigation into crime. Their entire case load directly depends on the police .

Finding themselves in a situation where they are taking a combative stance against the entity they are directly dependent on the investigation and report of crime will not sit well. 

This alone Is often a direct problem into prosecuting police conduct and makes the office a very poor avenue to prosecute such crime.

@fubah2

 The facts you presented are a little off. See below. Also, the officer was Somali and the victim a white female. See my other posts in this thread and my points in that are proven by this case. 

As the officers prepared to leave, Noor "entered 'Code Four' into the cruiser's computer, meaning the scene was safe". Harrity would later indicate "that he was startled by a loud sound near the squad" and, just then, Damond approached the police car's driver-side window. Harrity drew his weapon, but pointed it downward and did not fire. Noor, however, fired once through the open window, fatally striking an unarmed and barefoot Damond in the abdomen. The officers attempted CPR to no avail; Damond died 20 minutes later. Harrity later told a supervisor "We both got spooked."

At Noor's trial, Harrity testified of hearing "something hit the car and I also hear some sort of murmur" and that he feared an "ambush" but deemed it "premature" to use deadly force. Noor testified that he did not see Damond's hand or any object in it, but nonetheless believed that his partner "feared for his life" and "there was a threat". The prosecutors presented evidence that Damond's fingerprints were not on the police car, suggesting she had never made contact with it, and called two expert witnesses on police use of force, who testified that Noor's decision to shoot was unreasonable.

@StumpTownStu

 I hear you. I think the reality is the mind simply doesn't work that quickly. I have watched thousands of police videos and can see that the reason the present sense impression hearsay exception exists in law is because contemporaneous statements are not such that one will be able to create a 'version' to suit themselves. 

Not saying it is impossible here but from what I know (and what will come out) there is nothing we will find in her background that suggests she was trigger happy or racist. 

But if you ask me would she have been likely to make the same mistake if the victim was white, I say no way because she would not have felt the need to reach for the gun/taser in the first place. Obviously, just my opinion but it fits with my premise that I made on the way society views black victims as opposed to white. 

EXACTLY.  That's the point I was making.

He felt fear because he "believed" - WITHOUT PROOF OF ANY WEAPON - there was an imminent life-threatening danger to him and his fellow officer, so he shot.

Virtually the same (not identical but close) defense the Potter lawyer team will advance,

claiming the shooting was "justified" because of that belief.

Nevertheless, regardless their "beliefs" it was deemed not justified.

and  officer Noor was held responsible for his action, receiving a whopping 12.5 year prison sentence.

I believe officer Potter *deserves* full accountability here too, like officer Noor.

If she doesn't get prison, MINNESOTA WILL BURN

@fubah2

 Not even close to the same defense. Not even in the same ballpark. A person (and a Somali) whose partner testified to no imminent threat (and who also did not fire) versus a case where an individual broke free and jumped in his car where every officer present stated they had no way of knowing if he had a weapon in the vehicle. 

You are wrong about Minnesota burning on this case. 

Ok then  we shall agree to DISAGREE  

And I can't be "wrong"  NOW  about a prediction on a future event

One may disagree on a prediction, sure, but that doesn't make either right or wrong until AFTER the event result is known.  Pretty much a truism on a handicapping website. 

PS.  my prediction for a future event is:

If she doesn't get prison, MINNESOTA WILL BURN

You can absolutely be wrong on the defenses in this case which you are. Obviously, you can make any prediction you want about what will happen and even make it in size 20 font to highlight it. 

Ok. 

You're repeating yourself and it isn't necessary, because I heard you clearly the first time.

And as I said we shall agree to disagree.

PS.  my prediction for a future event is:

If she doesn't get prison, MINNESOTA WILL BURN

excellent points 

The most ironic post in the history of covers. 

ya   i saw that being discussed on msnbc this morning and how it relates in some ways to this event

chilling

Minnesota's exact stature for use of deadly force.

Cops think they are at war. Reality doesn't support this but that's there belief. Covid killed more cops in the line of duty last year than guns but to here cops tell it, the job is so dangerous they are in constant fear for their lives.

while i dont believe u intend to paint all cops with a very broad brush

certainly your point seems to have merit when applied to a significant percentage of police

i am not black so i cant speak for firsthand prejudices specific to this issue but it does seem unacceptably high

I think prejudice is the correct word to use. The media like to serve up this narrative that cops are on the hunt for black me. The push this narrative because it's engaging, not b/c it's necessarily right. Prejudice is in many ways more dangerous. It doesn't have to be, "I intend to kill a black person." It can simply be, "Do I feel more threatened by this person because they are black?"