And…?
Legalism is usually boring.
From your link.
The judge said for first-degree manslaughter, prosecutors must prove that Potter caused Wright’s death while committing the crime of reckless handling of a firearm. This means they must prove that she committed a conscious or intentional act while handling or using a firearm that creates a substantial or unjustifiable risk that she was aware of and disregarded, and that she endangered safety.
For second-degree manslaughter, prosecutors must prove she acted with culpable negligence, meaning she consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm.
Anyone think she acted deliberately or consciously here? No, I think it was a mistake.
It was definitely a mistake, and not a conscious act.
1 Like
The Minnesota legal code has examples of 2d Degree Manslaughter. It includes accidentally shooting and killing someone while hunting because you mistook them for a deer. No intent, but the trigger was pulled before knowing the target. In this case no intent, but the trigger was pulled before confirming what was in her hand.
1 Like
I was making that point earlier in this thread…Its pretty much the same scenario imo.
Yeah, and the fact that she is an experienced training officer doesn’t offer any mitigation. She made a professional mistake that took a life. She can’t claim lack of training or experience, or a lack of awareness of the seriousness and risk involved with firearms. The elements of the statute seem pretty clear.
Didn’t know that…that makes it even worse.
None of that means she did it deliberately. My understanding is the judge instructed the jury that is what they needed to convict.
But the hunter was still intending to use a firearm to kill something. She wasn’t conscious of the fact that what was in her hand was indeed a firearm, she thought it was a taser.
Yeah that’s negligent homicide.
She was intending to fire too btw. Fire her taser. It’s a lot more like someone pointing what they believe to be an empty gun at someone
All you’re saying is that it is well known that one can be mistaken for the other when in a moment of stress.
Verdict is coming in.
Guilty on both charges.
Once again jury came to right conclusion. Speaks volume IMO.
2 Likes
I don’t think there can possibly be any doubt that she’s guilty. It’s all on tape…a man is dead and she shot him. The question is what will the punishment be? Just as there’s no doubt she’s guilty, there also is no doubt that she didn’t intend to shoot him. The question then becomes, what punishment is fitting in such a case as this?
1 Like
I’m hoping her sentence is on the light side, but the conviction was warranted. Sad for everyone involved, a stupid mistake, but a man’s life was taken and justice served.
1 Like
They pulled him over for an air freshener on rear view mirror. They used the stop for a training opportunity. Two big strikes against.
No mastery of weapon…poor training.
On the flip side.
The joyous raucous display of emotion outside the courthouse was off-putting. An innocent person is no less dead. Justice is better served dispassionately.
5 Likes
Not gonna lie…I was hoping for a different result…
Somehow I don’t see America as a safer nation when we start locking the veteran law enforcement officers after a mistake during a chaotic episode like this was.
1 Like
If pure recklessness without any intent to harm gets you 20 years, it makes no sense to go into a field where this can happen. If I were a cop I would quit tomorrow unless I just had 5 yrs or less to retire…and in that case I wouldn’t be doing much.
1 Like
