Female cop. Need I say more?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl.../ar-BB1fzRQ1?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=UE01DHP

Oops!

One less boog.......

Jeeze....Tarqueen hates women now too. First the blacks, then the Mexicans.......

Whats going on in Salmon?

And if he had just complied and then hired a gung ho Minnesota lawyer.....

My questions are:

Why did he not comply?

And how many people whould he have shot/ killed if he hadnt gotten shot ? ( was he an honor student like all those saints before him ?).

Yep, but whatever family he has just won the ghetto lottery. They be fixin’ to get straight payed yo!

Plain and simple, the cop chick's head was up her ass. And she must have missed something in training. Or the training was piss poor.

They are calling it an accidental discharge. I had heard the guy had a warrant. Is that correct, and if so, a warrant for what?

Gin and Hennessey be flowin' like milk and honey in dey New Promised Land....'n sheeit!!!!

For carrying a firearm without a permit....

Instead of diversity training. The black population needs to be trained on what to do in a PoPo stop.
Hasbeen

Didn't that happen a few years ago?
Some old dude as a reserve officer tazed a guy and
gave him lead poisoning?

Thanks for the info. I hate to think he gave up his life for that!

Dillon

A security guard , I believe hispanic, did the " oops thought I pulled my tazer" on an unruly BART train I think around oakland several years ago.

Ouch, 2009. My timeframe was off

https://youtu.be/57ltk97xGwM

Allen

are tazers that much like glocks that you could make that mistake? carried on the same side? or is this bitch just completely unsuited for police work?

If a groid needs to be tased, he prob just needs to shot as well.


The End

Next

All he had to do is act normal and he wouldn't of been kilt.

Retards that cant remain calm under pressure. It happens enough that most Dept. require less lethal carried on opposite of strong side. City will payout.....the family won the ghetto lottery courtesy of tax payers for the city's mistake/negligence.

Yep!!!

Yep. Train them on how to stop acting like NBN.

Just another $20,000,000.00 award to his momma and his baby daddy. Standard stuff.

L.W.

They already are. According to them everyone of them has a father that pulls them aside and has a talk with them about how to deal with police and avoid getting shot because they’re terrified of all of the racist police out to kill them. Somehow the lesson they that nearly all claim to get doesn’t sink in.

Don’t forget dem Nike’s!

All valid questions.

yes, he was an honors student

It seems like resisting arrest can make a bad situation more dangerous. I'm hoping I can remember not to resist. Comply then get a pit bull of a lawyer if you've been wronged.

Bb

Dam Skippy!!!

White people know that fighting the cops gets you shot, black people seem to be a little slow on the uptake!

Wonder if she was a "quota" hire.

She used her 40cal taser.

And should be promoted for it.

That shouldnt have been funny, but it was. I guess it qualify's for dark humor?

Good thing wimmin is such good liars...


She musta' been so bloated her teaser was in the wrong place...

Edit,
Taser, but that too.

It seems that there is a certain portion of our population that just cannot understand what resisting arrest can cause.

Ding ding ding

Or she didnt learn crap.

High school course.

They view it as a really good lottery ticket.

Push everything to violence. Break every rule.
Because theyre black and cant be held accountable for damage they cause society.

Shes probably white.

They probably plan on surviving and being rich.

Fuqk him, cause I just don't give a damn. Niqqer should have complied.

I'm past giving a schitt anymore.







It's already out there.............

Must have been her time of the month. Mouse turns into a dragon. I watched a chick cop try to break up a bar fight once. A big time waste of taxpayer money.

carrying an illegal firearm.

She has changed her whole MO since last year,

Now, she head fakes and pretends she is suddenly one of us.



Brilliant.

I'm not sure how you mistake your sidearm for a Taser. They feel different and look different. She will rightfully lose her job and likely be sucessfully prosecuted for manslaughter.

That being said, what kind of meathead behaves like the deceased?

That being said, why the hell did the arresting officers manage to screw up the arrest? WTH were they thinking and doing?

Prince fairy upper mustache.

Had that going for him...

When Doves Cry.

Taser, taser, taser.....Oh, Shít !

If a LEO agency isn’t already requiring ongoing gun training, in addition to the basic qualifying with a sidearm each year. They should.

A lot of cops only shoot right before they are scheduled to qualify. And, then the day of qualification. That’s it.

Hard to develop muscle memory, if you’re not shooting under good supervision from solid training officers.

🦫

I think this is the best pump fake ever !


Taser Taser Taser........ glock !

Also really hard when you should've never been a cop, and are mentally challenged. This was a cluster f uck from jump street.

They are mandated by policy to carry less lethal on their support side so this [bleep] doesn't happen, yet she f ucked it up. If she wanted to help she could've put hands on homie before he tensed up and bolted.....but no.

She'll take a plea deal for like 5yrs on manslaughter....if she's smart....which she ain't.

yes a clus fggg fron the start.the hits just keep on coming.1st off if this wonderful black man would of just complied it would not of happened.obviously wonderful black man knew he was in fact a criminal and was going to do some time although in todays society maybe not.in his mind he was going to be in trouble.so what does he do,he says hmm time to break away and get in his vehicle to escape.didnt they say he had a firearm that was not registered and no carry permit.yes a fine young black man.so chaos ensues and a officer who should not be a leo cant tell the difference between her service weapon and tazer and shoots and kills him.well the black man put himself in this position by his own choice.cop who shouldnt be kills him.one huge mess.end result another well respected community loving decent black family was victimized.so now they will hire a racist bottom feeding attorney which are the vast majority and clean out the state for millions.becoming the new lottery for the wonderful black race..wouldnt shock me if they sit down in some dwellings in the future and draw straws for whos going to go out and be the family hero and take the hit for this new lottery win for all the rest.sound insane ? yes it does.but in certain situations i believe possible.

Maybe if he wouldn't have resisted she wouldn't have had a chance to make that mistake. He is the one who escalated the situation.

Comply survive fight die. I think I've got it correct.

Wow

One big run on sentence with no punctuation, capitals, or paragraphs. I couldn’t bring myself to try and read this, sorry.

Did you go to school in MN

She was incompetent, poorly trained and .....

This was bound to happen sooner or later, best it happened sooner with only the blood of one on her hands and not that of several, maybe even that of her fellow officers.

If everyone the cops encountered played nice, there would be no need for tasers or firearms. But since that is only a pipe dream in an Ozy and Harriet world, they carry, learn how and when or quit.

The question is ‘who vets the vettors’??

Now they backtracking on the warrant. His lawyer claims it was ‘failure to appear’ on Mahjiwanna possession.

The cop that shot him.

Potter has also been a union president for Brooklyn Center police officers, and was a longtime member of the Law Enforcement Memorial Association

God help us is there are more like her out there.

Once again, when you’re arrested, get in the car! Duh!!

People that never had a daddy/mom spank their behind have real trouble with this simple concept of "respect authority".

When fighting the cops while being arrested becomes socially acceptable and actually encouraged, funeral parlors are the benefactor.

+1

https://nypost.com/2021/04/12/officer-who-fatally-shot-daunte-wright-identified/

Here she is. A 22 year veteran of the police force. She got paid just as much as any male officer got paid. She looked good in her uniform, she specialized in being in the honor guard at funerals.
And in the time of crisis, she did as most females do, she panicked.
She has been incompetent for every day of the past 22 years but nobody knew, until today.

She makes $85,000 a year. At 22 years she has made $1,870,000.

And today, I bet she and her hubby wish they both had read the writing on the wall, and retired after having 20 years in, and stocked shelves at Walmart for some spending cash.

I don't see their golden years as being very golden......

https://nypost.com/2021/04/13/officer-who-fatally-shot-daunte-wright-was-training-a-rookie/

And look, she is also a Training Officer. A task at which she was, likewise, probably incompetent.
Back in the mid eighties they started bringing females into the little EMS where I worked in central Georgia. Over the next ten years they hired a dozen females. Some full time some part time.

And nobody ever asked if the female was competent. And half of these were incompetent. That is, they could not lift a stretcher with a 170 pound patient on it. You can't lift the stretcher you are an incompetent paramedic. But nobody ever asked, even when female medics dropped the stretcher and the patient got hurt. Nobody got punished, no female never had to undergo weight lifting. Nobody said anything about incompetent girls.

We had a barracks out in the country, we had 6 medics spending the night there every night. You might ask yourself, "What kind of gal wants to spend the night in a remote bunk house with five young men?"

Well, I can assure you for about half the gals, it was the type of gal who wanted to have sex with one of the boys while on duty.

Were any of the girls hot?

Normal for you, or normal for him? Normal is a relative term.

It seems there was a carjacking dispatch radio call out too.
Unclear itf it was about the car he was driving, but the response said the car matched the description of the stolen vehicle...

It's much more likely she started at $30k 22 years ago than she has been making $85k for 22 years.......not that it matters much.

That poor police officer is going to have to live the rest of he life knowing that she wasted a bullet on that perp. She could have wasted two.

A vehicle is a weapon, a very powerful weapon. Any police officer is authorized to use deadly force when a vehicle is involved. Think Glock 15 +1

Yes.

I support the cops, but confusing your side arm with a Tazor? seems a stretch.

Dante still had the typical Mpls ghetto attitude, run from the cops.... kinda like Raccoons trying to run away from a car coming down the road straight at them.... its not going to turn out good...

I trust Mpls area LEOs, but I don't trust Minneapolis nor Hennepin County Government, its leftist and corrupt, and has been that way, since I first moved there back in 1980...

Brooklyn Center use to be a nice suburban neighborhood, but also over the last 40 years it has declined dramatically, with the Blacks moving out into suburbia.. the entire Twin Cities use to be a wonderful place to live... but liberalism and importing all these minorities into town along with the migration of Chicago Blacks, up for a more tolerant world for their antics, it has turned into a cess pool...

and lets not forget how the Brothers just love to bang little blonde haired blue eyed bimbos, and make little oreos with them...
can't keep the foxes out of the hen house....seem the dramatic increase of little blue eyed blondes on welfare.. usually with little oreo kids..

sat in court one time, after my divorce with my ex.... here is some 21 year old black kid from Chicago, he has fathered 10 kids with 9 white chicks...
asked why he was not paying any child support, he told the judge he was retired.... at 21 years Old??? he was living on welfare and looked like he was living pretty well on welfare... ( evident he was supplementing that with dealing drugs and pimping).. Judge lets him walk....

Then the next guy was white, had been laid off his job and then the state unemployment dept was behind on sending out unemployment checks...
so since he wasn't having deductions taken out of the checks he wasn't receiving... ( the County's fault), judge has him locked up for 30 days, because he was 3 months in arrears in child support...

That's the mentality in Hennepin County MN.. totally ran by liberal leftists...

I have zero love for that damn place....

I'm going to test the system, the next time I get pulled over I'm going to throw open my door and run at the cop screaming like a banshee...

Roger where did you see this? I was looking for this yesterday and could not find what the outstanding warrant was for

RIP 😁

As unfortunate as this whole mess is the fact remains if the young man had not have struggled with the police and tried a getaway in the car he would have been alive today...when will these people realize that their own actions can have serious consequences.

And she is gone. And the police chief as well.

***************************************************

The Minnesota cop who shot and killed a black man after mistakenly grabbing her gun instead of her Taser resigned Tuesday, saying “it’s in the best interest of the community.”

News of Kimberly Potters’ resignation came as Brooklyn Center Mayor Mike Elliott announced that the city’s police chief, Tim Gannon, also stepped down Tuesday.

“I have loved every minute of being a police officer and serving this community to the best of my ability,” cop Kimberly Potter said in a statement, according to twincities.com.

“But I believe it is in the best interest of the community, the department, and my fellow officers if I resign immediately,” she wrote.

Family's already hired Crump...............KaChing!!!

Comment of the day.

Here's a thought. If Minnesota was a Constitutional Carry state, Wright wouldn't have had a warrant for carrying a pistol without a permit, and the entire scenario would have been avoided. Their nonsense gun law got him killed as much as his actions in resisting arrest.

the Taser is worn on the weak side of the body, meaning the side opposite to the firearms side( strong side) . The officer looks like her left hand is on the suspect. Her only free hand is her forearms side. So it looks like that was her only option without adjusting her position.

Even Money says the next Chief will be Black.

Last thought that went through his head..."didn't know a Taser made you sleepy??"

A case of the Liberals eating their own.
This gal is an Affirmative Action police officer. Obviously, unfit for the job. Yet she had worked there for 25 years and nobody said anything. Just like with the unfit female paramedics that I was stuck with at the EMS.

Feminists and Liberals in DC and New York had decreed that the female was equal to the man in any endeavour. And of course, she deserves the same pay as any man. Nobody dare question it.

In her Moment of Truth she failed in spectacular fashion.

I just read a report that felony charges will be filed on her tomorrow.

A week ago, if they had done a news story on this officer, she would have been held up as a wonderful example of how great it was to have female police officers.
A week ago, they well could have put her on the front page of the New York Times, a poster girl for feminism.

And now, to bow down to the Libs in the DA office and to Black Lives Matter, she will be up S*** Creek. She will spend years, and tens of thousands of dollars defending a felony case. She will be lucky to stay out of jail.

Pushed into a job that she was unfit for, by the Libs and Feminists, and now, destroyed by those same forces. Liberals eating their own.


https://kstp.com/minnesota-news/bro...in-daunte-wright-shooting-death/6074030/

Looks like it was a robbery warrant

Weren’t the dead guy 20 years old? Don’t you have to be 21 to be in possession of a handgun?

Failure to appear on a marijuana possession as the family’s lawyer said seems more likely.

Given.

I don't know how they're going to get felony out of that.

From another site, seems a solid breakdown (punctuation aside)...


1 - They pulled the perp over for expired plates ... joggers be dumb like that.

2 - The primary officer has the perp out of the car and is in the process of cuffing him. Retard Cvnt starts babbling about an open warrant BEFORE CUFFS ARE ON.

3 - Perp starts tensing up, primary is trying to talk him down, RC *inserts herself into the physical situation*

4 - Because RC is moving in, primary releases his grip on the right arm and moves off to the perp's left.

5 - RC utterly and completely fails to secure the right arm in any way.

6 - Perp dives for the driver's seat ( which would have been impossible had the right arm been secured ), primary attempts to fully engage in grappling again.

7 - RC circles around the back of primary moving to his left, DRAWS HER SERVICE PISTOL, and starts threatening to taze.

8 - Primary, naturally not wanting to be holding onto perp when he gets tazed, releases.

9 - RC now makes good on her threat to deploy her tazer ... which for some reason is firing bullets ... probably because it's a gun.

10 - Perp drives off leaking, crashes and dies not long after.

11 - Stupid RC drops her service pistol in the middle of the street, because that's how you insure there's no accidental drop fire discharge.



At NO POINT in this interaction did the RC do ANYTHING other than obstruct and interfere and foul the efforts of the primary officer, sure glad we got those federal diversity points though.

Jogger shouldn't have tried to run for it, that was pretty stupid as well.


Do I actually have to say it?

Joggers gonna jog, it's what they do.

I have a big Hummmmmmmmmmmmm?----- in the back of my mind.

She was said to carry her tazer on the left side of her duty belt and her pistol on the right side -------and had carried the pistol on the right side for 25 years.


And she "made a mistake" thinking her pistol was a tazer?


If she was just one of us lowly detestable citizens, and just as an example, was trying to get a known car thief out of her car who was in the very act of stealing it---- but then "mistook" a pistol for a Tazer, would she not be charged (just as any of us would be) with murder? Would our mistake be ANY excuse at all to a judge or prosecutor, or even a defense attorney?

But "police" is the new title of nobility, and bestows a higher more protected classification and status to those employed as such. Why is that?

The clause in our Constitution about not allowing "titles of nobility" is NOT about the words "king", "earl", "lord", "baron". "duke" or any other specifically but about the fact that titles bestow a double standard of justice.. Yet very few today study the history of our constitution anymore, and understand why things were written into it. It's the double standard that is unlawful, not the words per se.

Today we see several classes of people that are automatically "less guilty" or even 100% above the law, (politicians for the most part) and THAT my friends is why that clause was written into our highest law.
If you think real education is too time consuming or expensive, you can always try ignorance. Seems very common today.

black or hispanic lesbian

She was blatantly incompetent in this incursion.

What is your point?

Mistake or not, the lady should do some real time. It's way to late to say "oops" when one had launched a bullet.

Maybe, but the “black” community has just about as much hatred for the Hispanics as they do for The Crackers.

Might not be such a good idea.

Blacks shoot each other, at rates way above what whites and Hispanics combined do !

https://www.twincities.com/2021/04/14/daunte-wright-officer-charged-kim-potter-mn-brooklyn-center/

Second degree manslaughter. She is facing 10 years in prison. She is going to shell out $100 grand in legal expenses an maybe more.
There is a very good chance that she is going to the Pen because to me, it looks like she is guilty of manslaughter.

Folks if ol'Daunte complies he's not shot. Yes she made a mistake but we don't put mistake makers in prison. Personally I hope she walks.

Traditionally police liked to hire a big strong man for a policeman. Libs whined so they started hiring girls. Girl gets in a confrontation that 2 men could have physically handled easily. Girl panics and shoots him. Liberals are stupid.

No mistake was made. A vehicle moved in stop. Game on. Empty clip.

Almost seems like people wanna get shot nowadays.....idiots. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

The union will provide a lawyer for her, as they should. The Ethiopian immigrant Minnesota cop who shot the white Australian gal got 10 years for the same crime. What is it with Minnesota cops? All the so-called "bad cop" action is coming from Minnesota. Is the whole state poorly trained? Big difference between this case and the Ethiopian immigrant cop shooting though is that in this most recent incident, the guy resisted arrest and tried to flee. That fact should impact sentencing favorably for the female cop.

^^^^ Female cops are quicker to resort to force because they tend to be more fearful of their arrestees than men.

This.

Can't believe she was arrested and charged.

She should be.

Ya she didn't mean to, but her negligence caused his death. Should he have resisted arrest? No. Was using deadly force justified in seizing him? No.

Her department (like most) mandate via policy that less lethal (taser) be carried on the officer's support side. Most use a cross draw holster to draw the taser with their dominant hand, but they they have to reach across their body to do so. She was so retarded and in the black (Cooper color code) she went for her gun, a completely different draw stroke.


She was probably great on barking dog calls though....

You see a bunch of men working with chainsaws breaking up fallen trees, and you enter the scene and start a ruckus requiring them to try and subdue you. One of them meant to use his chainsaw to hold you down, and it accidentally got turned on during the struggle and kills you. Who's at fault?

The incident proves one thing. That 9mm is effective at point blank range. I wouldn’t have expected that. I think that the old 38 special argument would prevail. The 357 mag or SIG 357 makes more sense.

She'll do time, I'll guess 3 years.

Lieberals are worse than stupid. They are demonic.

She likely will, which is why she shouldn't have been charged. It's a civil matter, not criminal, when one causes death or injury due to mishandling their work-related equipment. There was zero malice on her part. There was no reckless disregard on her part. In the midst of mayhem (caused by the deceased), she accidentally grabbed the wrong piece of equipment. In law, that's called mistake of fact, which is clear here. Mistake of fact renders one innocent of criminal mens rea.

Truth.

There's a lot of if's, and's, and but's here..........however, the bottom line is as it always in cases like this...........the Negro would still be alive had he just complied with the police, and not resisted. Why can't they just understand that, even at their IQ level.

Who on earth told you that mistake makers don't go to prison?

Unfortunately that scenario isn't what occurred.

I agree it sucks, honestly for all involved; however she acted negligently and will do some time for involuntary manslaughter.

Actions have consequences, and she s hit the bed.

Some liberal told him I'm sure. Liberals live in an alternate reality

Mmmmm, no.

I didn't assert that this is what occurred. I'm clearly drawing an analogy. Your task now is to argue that my analogy is defective. You've yet to do this.

Look up "Mistake of Fact." That's what happened here. While mistake of law is usually no excuse, mistake of fact is a complete defense.

No.

It isn't.

Devastating rebuttal.

So, she just pretended to have grabbed the wrong piece of equipment in order to execute Daunte?

OK, Hawkeye.

I'll give you a rebuttal.

Mistake of Fact would be an officer believing a suspect matches the description of a wanted felon in their AOR. As a result the officer approaches the subject in an advanced state of readiness because the suspect has a history of violent assault and attempted murder. As he approaches the suspect the suspect pulls a phone out of their pocket and the officer believes it to be a firearm. The officer shoots and kills the suspect.

Mistake of fact would be 1.) It was not a gun. 2.) Although the appearance and location of the suspect were nearly identical to the individual the officer was looking for, he ended up not being the wanted felon.

You could interject mistake of facts in a case like this as a defense.

But "golly shucks officer, I forgot the pedal on the right make it go fast and the pedal on the left make it stop" is not an argument for mistake of fact. It means you're just a fugkin idiot that can't drive, and you killed somebody as a result.

I hope now that you see you don't know WTF you're talking about. But I doubt it.

That's a nonsense rebuttal. The criteria for a mistake of fact defense is that it be credible. Which means, to deny it to her, you'd have to assert that she actually knew it was a Glock and not a Taser at the moment she pulled the trigger. Is that what you're asserting?

That went exactly like I thought it would.

LOL

On that we can agree.

Hey, why did you run over that four year old?


Oh because I thought it was in reverse. Mistake of Fact, your honor.

LOL

Few would quarrel with that. The facts are he didn't comply, and one officer could not get the cuffs on him and backed off allowing him the opportunity to get away, then the woman cop interceded by the time he got in his vehicle and shot him instead of tasing him, as she was announcing she was doing. Had she been a rookie it would not look so bad but she wasn't. She was someone who trained rookies and killed a man regardless of the prior situation. If the person she foolishly killed had been anyone else's son, husband, friend they would demand justice, too, regardless of their skin color.

The sad, but undeniable truth here is that if she had shot a White guy, under the exact same circumstances, it would not have made the news.

That would be a civil case, not criminal, if the assertion that it was a mistake was credible under the circumstances, and not just a post hoc excuse to explain away reckless or malicious conduct. If the latter, then it's a criminal matter.

Cept, cops are and should be held to a higher standard than say, a logger with a saw.

If someone takes your cow with the intent to purchase but doesn't pay, is this civil or criminal?

No, she was negligent, maybe. Negligent or not, she was "Incompetent" at the very least.

To be negligent is to be neglectful. Negligence is an important legal concept; it's usually defined as the failure to use the care that a normally careful person would in a given situation. Negligence is a common claim in lawsuits regarding medical malpractice, auto accidents, and workplace injuries.

Former officer Kim Potter made a fatal mistake and many have had their lives changes forever. Obviously Mr. Wright paid a very high price. However in too many cases the "person of interest" has elevated the contact with failing to comply. His two count gross misdemeanor - possession of a firearm w/o a permit and fleeing a peace officer was going to lead to an arrest. His probation from an earlier aggravated robbery would also have been revoked. The lenient cost would most likely have increased his bail as their goal is to minimize the Hennepin County jail roster.
To repeat, none of this excuses Potter - but all would be with us today, but the media will never tell the entire story.

Nonsense comparison. Or you need to fill in a lot of missing factors.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/n/negligent-homicide/

Which is it? Or you simply don't know?

LOL

Just stop.

That's a legitimate argument, but one to be made in civil, not criminal, court.

Fill in the facts a bit more so we can discuss it. Too sparse.

See my above definition of Negligent Homicide.

Negligent injury, negligent homicide or both criminal

Why? Don't like losing arguments? You'd think you'd be well accustomed to it by now.

...and civil

No the facts aren't too sparse. If merchandise it is civil but livestock is criminal.

This isn't negligent homicide. In the midst of mayhem (brought about by the criminal conduct of the deceased), she mistakenly grabbed the wrong piece of equipment. Human beings aren't 100% perfect, and under high stress make mistakes regardless of their level of training, professionalism, and experience. Our criminal laws don't punish this. That's for civil law.

If the dead guy was a good ol boy wearing a Maga hat and driving a pickup, I'm guessing everyone would want the incompetent officer executed at the town square.


This situation is unfortunate, but she literally had 26 years to train, she failed to do so, and acted negligently.

I have literally witnessed with my own eyes people on FTO preform better in similar situations.

Yep, can be both

You just said a person can’t be charged criminally for running over a four year old.

But do continue with your bullschit.

I think you need some work on your reading comprehension.

100%.

Everybody is so nuts with division they will argue the case for this woman’s actions.

And they have no experience or clue what they’re arguing for.

She was most definitely negligent which resulted in a homicide.

well its to late for that young man he is dead , yes he should have not resisted but if i was a cop i would have just let him go and caught him later at home if he needed to be arrested. simple thing to do and no one gets hurt . some how some way someone needs to figure out how these young black people got to learn not to resist a police officer and behave themselves ????

I first turned this over to the sheriff department and they claimed the DA said it was civil. Which means the DA assumed the statue was the same as with merchandise. After reading the statue I knew they were wrong and I contacted the State Brand Inspector and he agreed it was criminal and he was getting close to making an arrest when the guy decided to pay me after 23 months of nonpayment.

I wrote this in another thread but it seems to fit well here too..

Will it be different when it's YOU, your friends, your life lost, your guns taken, your freedom gone, being a felon for what you legally own now, eliminated like Ashli Babbitt, or victims of red flag laws, and not some black thug?

You making an assumption that no one would be hurt at his residence

It resulted in a death. Homicide requires mens rea. The minimum mes rea for homicide is reckless disregard for human life. No level of mens rea, however, was in evidence here. It was simple negligence resulting in death, like a doctor, at the end of a double ER shift, grabbing the wrong hypodermic syringe off the table and injecting it into the wrong patient. That's the sort of thing we have civil actions for.

You are so far removed from reality or live in an alternate universe

26 year female cop. Probably didn’t attend training the last few years because “I’ve done my time”. Not surprised at all. Big difference from a pistol in the hand over a taser....purposefully so.

Negligent homicide is the killing of another person through gross negligence or without malice

This means an act of recklessness or negligence caused the death of another person. The death must not have been intentional or planned in any way. Rather, it was the result of an accident

Reckless disregard for human life is an element of that crime, which isn't in evidence. This case is analogous to the case of the ER doctor I described above.

Something like only 16 times in the US has there been a situation of grabbing a service weapon by mistake, instead of the taser....Not every instance ended in a death.

If that number is correct, it’s an extremely small number, compared to the thousands of times cops pull either their sidearm or taser.

Me thinks the cop had 20 years of dust covering her gun skills and defensive tactics.

🦫

HE HAD A WHITE MOTHER AND A DECENT WORKING BLACK FATHER WHERE HE LIVED WITH HIS PARENTS. " this is a very sad thing that has happened "

1. If he was white, nothing would happen anyway.
2. You have indirectly and apparently volunteered to be the resident expert on incompetence in law enforcement.

The defendant acted, or failed to act appropriately in a dangerous situation, and that action or inaction caused the victim's death

Definitely sad but he could have resisted at home

I guess we'll have to see how this pans out and what defenses will be proffered.

Easy. It's ingrained in them from the moment they slide out of the black house with pink shutters.

"PoPo bad!"

The defense will not be "mistake of fact"

Our criminal laws are not designed to punish mistakes made by well meaning professionals under high stress situations not wrongly brought about by them. That's what our civil laws are for.

So they will admit that she actually knew it was a Glock in her hand when she pulled the trigger? Interesting. We'll have to see. I bet you're wrong, though.

It’s worse than that, much worse, She Was A Training Officer, let that sink in.

She was also a Union rep.

No one is immune from mistakes. Even ER doctors with 20 years experience and immaculate records can grab the wrong hypo off the table after a double shift. That's what our civil courts are for.

LOL, he must be The Voice of Experience, when it comes to incompetence

I never mentioned race......clown.

Thanks for your retarded opinions.

Says the mental midget without a clue...lol.

I won't apologize for being correct.

No reckless disregard for human life isn't needed for negligent homicide or manslaughter which ever the case maybe

Doctors are charged with Criminal Negligence all the time, and rightfully so.
https://www.fuchsberg.com/blog/medical-errors-become-criminal-negligence/

How many of you arm chair quarterbacks have ever arrested and handcuffed someone likely 25 years younger than you, in better shape,with nothing to lose. The perp here was trying to avoid arrest and was resisting strenuously. If he was in possession of an unregistered firearm and on parole for robbery, that changes things up a bit.

Sadly the young criminal was shot and died. Sadly, the officer has a burden to carry to her grave. I doubt the officer could be convicted of murder as I don't see there being any criminal intent there. She was not trying to kill him. No "mens rea." Excessive use of force probably. High risk take downs are tough regardless what side of the badge you are on. Personal experience talking, here.

Glad it was't me that made the mistake. Sad times for all concerned.

Were I a jury member, and the situation was that the female cop in question had intentionally shot the perp to prevent him escaping onto the street via a lethal weapon ( his car). Were she to testify that a considered decision said shooting the guy was in the benefit of public safety vs high speed pursuit.

I would, as a jury member, pat her on the back and compliment her on a job well done.

But that is not what happened. She fucqued up. As a police officer she has a duty to become proficient with the tools of her trade. She also has the duty to recognize if she is not proficient and find other employment.

As a forklift operator, or the driver of a car on the street, I have the same duty of proficiency. If I am not able to drive a vehicle without jumping onto the sidewalk and killing pedestrians, I have a duty to recognize that fact and stop driving.

As an employee, operating a forklift, or a railroad locomotive, I have a duty to learn safe operation. If I am incapable of operating the tools of my trade in a safe manner, I have a duty to get my ass off of the machine and find other employment. BEFORE I kill someone.

Apparently this female cop, after many years in the occupation was still incompetent to use the tools of her trade. And she was negligent in her duty to recognize her own short comings. She should have sought other employment many years ago. She did not care enough about the people she was sworn to protect to sacrifice her paycheck to protect them.

I would convict her of negligent homocide and hope the judge gives her ten years in the state pen.

Because he’s calm and compliant at his house?

Criminal Homicide: Manslaughter

A homicide is the death of a person that was caused by the improper actions of another. A manslaughter charge is appropriate when a homicide does not rise to the level of murder. As such, while manslaughter is certainly a serious felony, the punishments are less than those for murder.

We will look at the two types of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. We will look at the elements that distinguish these crimes from each other and from murder. Finally, we will look at vehicular homicide which is often thought of as a subcategory of manslaughter.

Background on Manslaughter

Manslaughter is divided into the categories of “voluntary” and “involuntary” (or, in some jurisdictions, first- and second-degree) manslaughter. The difference between these two lies in the intent of the perpetrator. Intent refers to the state of mind that accompanies criminal actions. Intent can be divided into the following categories, from most culpable to least culpable:

- Purpose, which means specific intent that a result occur.

- Knowing, which means acting with knowledge that a result is likely to occur

- Recklessness, which means consciously ignoring a risk, and

- Negligence, which means unreasonably failing to perceive a risk that the defendant should have perceived.

Voluntary manslaughter

Voluntary manslaughter means homicide that meets the “purpose” or “knowing” levels of intent, but does not rise to the level of murder because it is mitigated by the fact that it was committed in the “heat of passion.” It occurs when the perpetrator is overwhelmed by emotion in the moment due to sudden circumstances, loses his sense of judgment, and kills another person in the heat of passion. To get the benefit of this reduction from murder to manslaughter, the perpetrator must have been “strongly provoked” into the act by the victim having created a situation that caused him to be distraught and overwhelmed to the extent that it is understandable, though not excusable, that his better judgment would be impaired.[1]

The circumstances that led to the killing determine whether the crime is murder or voluntary manslaughter, so an all-encompassing definition of applicable situations is not possible. The two classic examples of “heat of passion” are when one spouse catches another in the act of having an affair and when two people get into a violent fight or altercation. Another possible example of heat of passion might be where one finds vandals desecrating one’s parents’ graves. In such cases, killing is, of course, illegal and is a serious felony, but it is not considered as serious as murder.

The trier of fact (usually the jury) determines whether a reasonable person would have been provoked to act in a rash manner under the circumstances. If a “reasonable” person could be expected to lose control under the circumstances, a reduction from murder to manslaughter may be appropriate.[2]

Most jurisdictions require that the provocation be one that would ordinarily create a blinding anger or rage on the part of the perpetrator. In addition, there must not have been a “cooling off” period after the provocation. For example, if the perpetrator catches his wife in bed with his best friend and shoots one of them in rage, it is quite possible that a jury could decide that manslaughter is more appropriate than murder. However, if the perpetrator went to the store, bought a gun and then came back and shot and killed his best friend, the appropriate charge would be murder. The cooling-off period he allowed himself between the provocation and the murder brought this crime from one that could be described as “heat of passion” to one that can only be described as premeditated murder.

Some jurisdictions, such as New York, also call it manslaughter when the perpetrator assaulted the victim with intent to inflict serious bodily injury, but not to kill, the victim, but the victim succumbs to his injuries. Most states, however, follow the common law in defining this scenario as second-degree murder.

Voluntary manslaughter is a serious felony, and is punished accordingly. Potential sentences for first-degree felonies vary by jurisdiction, but will usually be many years in prison.[3] As with most crimes, the sentencing court is generally given broad discretion to determine sentences based on the applicable circumstances.

Involuntary manslaughter

Involuntary manslaughter occurs when the perpetrator engages in dangerous or illegal activity that causes the death of another. This crime requires recklessness in some jurisdictions, while others allow involuntary manslaughter charges in cases of criminal negligence. Involuntary manslaughter is known as “criminally negligent homicide” in some jurisdictions,[4] though other jurisdictions may use the term “criminally negligent homicide” to describe a separate, lesser homicide where the intent of the perpetrator does not rise to the level of recklessness.[5]



Examples of cases that have led to charges of involuntary manslaughter:

· Causing the death of an unborn child while in the commission of a crime.[6]

· Reckless discharge of a firearm into the air or into a crowd, causing a death.[7]

· A voluntary physical altercation, like a bar fight, where one person is accidentally killed.

· A ride operator at a fair does not strap a passenger in properly, causing the death of the passenger.

Vehicular homicide

The most commonly charged crime designated as “involuntary manslaughter” is vehicular homicide, where negligence or recklessness caused a car wreck that takes another person’s life. Here, the unlawful activity could be speeding, failure to control or distracted driving.

There are various degrees of vehicular homicide laws in various jurisdictions. One state, Ohio, breaks down three variations of this crime:



· Vehicular Manslaughter is causing the death of another person or unborn child while operating a motor vehicle because of a misdemeanor traffic violation. This is a second-degree misdemeanor and is punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a license suspension.

· Vehicular Homicide is death caused while operating a vehicle negligently or while speeding in a construction zone. This is a first-degree misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a license suspension.

· Aggravated Vehicular Homicide is a felony and is broken down into three types: Causing a death while recklessly operating a motor vehicle is a third-degree felony punishable by 1-3 years in prison. A death caused while driving under the influence of alcohol is a second-degree felony punishable by imprisonment of 2-8 years. Causing death while driving with a suspended license or prior conviction for the same crime is a first-degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison.[8]

Causing death while driving drunk or drugged is typically punished as a serious felony. Some states call it “aggravated vehicular homicide”, while most states simply call it “involuntary manslaughter”.

It should also be noted that, while death caused in the commission of a crime may be considered involuntary manslaughter, if the crime is a serious felony such as burglary, robbery, arson or rape, the death may constitute murder under the felony-murder rules that apply in many states. These rules are topics covered in our presentations on murder.

Conclusion

Manslaughter is a crime in which one person kills another person, but with mitigating circumstances or without the motivations that would justify a charge of murder. Manslaughter can be voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter is a “crime of passion,” while involuntary manslaughter is caused by criminal negligence or recklessness.


https://lawshelf.com/shortvideoscon...ghter-and-criminally-negligent-homicide/

Yes. He would absolutely not harm anyone on the way there....or potentially put others in harms way once he is home.....and calm.

He's reaching with his assumption

This brings up another question.

He had warrants out for his arrest.
LE knew where his mother lived and where he lived.
He was a criminal in possession of a firearm.

So, why didn’t the cops take proper steps to actually arrest him, and take him off the streets, before catching him in a traffic stop?

Or was it more than just a “traffic” stop and it was a planned arrest?

If it was planned, ALL involved should have been more prepared, much more, for what they knew was going to happen.

LOL

Is that even what she's being charged with, i.e., negligent homicide? That's clearly not what happened here. That would be something like she went against department policy and deactivated the internal safety on her Glock, resulting in the death of an arrestee when her Glock went off after hitting the ground. That kind of legal analysis would not apply to a case like this where, under high stress, she simply grabbed the wrong piece of equipment resulting in death. That's called a mistake, and is within the purview of civil, not criminal, law.

#pleadeal

LOL

Where do you come up with this fugking schit?

Bingo 3-5...parole...early release...covid serve at home...whatever other nonsense they offer every other dirtbag now

Years of study.

I hope you didn’t pay for it.

LOL

You clearly have no idea the meaning of negligence

And you?

Again, I suppose we will have to see how this pans out. To me, it seems like negligence within the context of civil law. I see no criminal fault in what she did.

Negligence: A failure to behave with the level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances. The behavior usually consists of actions, but can also consist of omissions when there is some duty to act (e.g., a duty to help victims of one's previous conduct).

And me what?

On what do you base your vast knowledge?

Negligent homicide refers to the killing of another person through reckless or negligent behavior. It differs from other forms of homicide due to the implied lack of malice and intent. Common examples of negligent homicide involve motor vehicle accidents that result in fatalities. To explore this concept, consider the following negligent homicide definition.

Right, but you're describing a tort, not a crime.

True, but some in certain professions are held to a Higher Standard than the average Joe.

If LEO, are not held to a higher standard in situations like this due to their “training”, their official duties and their experience, they should be.

Negligent homicide is not as simple as adding negligence and a death that results from it. Mere mistakes by well meaning professionals under exigent circumstances resulting in death are not crimes.

No it can be and is both

I watched a lot of NYPD Blue when I was younger.

Can be, but not based on the above.

https://reischlawfirm.com/criminally-negligent-homicide-vs-manslaughter-whats-difference/

B. S.

None of that would apply in a mistake of fact scenario such as we have here, i.e., a well meaning professional, under exigent circumstances, grabbing the wrong piece of equipment. Our criminal laws are not designed to punish people for that sort of occurrence. That's why we have civil courts.

Well meaning doesn't negate negligence

TRH, you ever pass the bar exam?

I’m gonna give you some really good information. For free:

If you shoot somebody, and they die? You can be charged criminally.

Happens every where except in TRH's alternate universe

Not tortious negligence. No. You're correct. She could easily lose a lawsuit for falling short of her level of duty of care, and that regardless of good and praiseworthy intentions.

Oh my God.

Is he a lawyer?

LOL

Never practiced as an attorney, thankfully

Too many tools to chose from. Too many different rules of engagement in too many different circumstances. When something happens fast I'm not going to bitch about an officer grabbing a gun instead of a taser because it's time to act. If you don't want to get your ass shot; DON'T RESIST ARREST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Judge Dredd defense.

Interesting.

And fortified.. with more weapons.

LMAO.

The traffic stop tactics gave Wright the ability to squirm away and get back into the car. The conversation was on the drivers side with the door open and in the traffic lane - poor tactics. Bring him to the rear or off on the right rear side. You removed his escape to the car and there was a second officer there.
Beyond the gross mis. warrant, the media WONT tell you that he was on probation for an earlier AGGRAVATED ROBBERY incident. So in addition to the fleeing and possession of a firearm w/o a permit (he was 19 at the time and incapable of a permit) his probation officer would have revoked his probation and likely he would be put in jail for an extended period of time.

She was a training officer and training the rookie that was attempting the handcuffing.

Ironic.

How do you prove a mistake of fact?

Typically, the mistake that the defendant made must be a reasonable one. In other words, in order to be able to use mistake of fact as a defense at all, the mistake that the defendant made must have been one that an ordinary person would have made under the circumstances

He'd probably forget about the outstanding warrant if at home too, you know be all chill.

Standby for another paragraph of imaginary bullschit.

A woman panicked in a high stress situation, there's nothing unusual about that.

They shouldn't be cops or soldiers, period.

She was a LEO, she is taught the difference between a firearm and a tasser. She put them on her belt. Definitely negligence

She will also loose the criminal case for negligence

Agreed.

It's an affirmative defense, so the standard of proof would be mere preponderance of evidence, i.e., a reasonable person would conclude, based on the facts asserted by the defense (along with proffered evidence), that it's more likely the case than not. I think such things as her voice having been recorded saying, right before the shooting, "I'm going to Taser you," while holding the Glock, and then her voice, after the shooting, expressing surprise, stating "I just shot him," would satisfy the standard.

A reasonable person would conclude that she is a police officer trained in the use of deadly force and non lethal force. She knows the difference between a firearm and a tasser. She also puts each on her belt and knows where she put each.

Definitely a case of negligent homicide

My wife just shook her head and said" Women have no business being street cops. They can't handle the stress.". She had worked for a while as as dispatcher at our local PD and said she couldn't handle it. She's a real anomaly, a level-headed woman. She is the first to say the same.

Agreed.

Sorry, but that's incorrect. Negligent homicide is not a simple combination of 1) the standard for tortious negligence and 2) a resulting death.

She's correct, IMO.

You are totally clueless

Okay.

She clearly recklessly caused the death of another person.

I don’t think most 25 year veterans of Brooklyn Fugking Center, MN would consider that a high stress situation.

I’m pretty sure they’d classify it as a weekday.

Sure seemed high stress to her.

Holy crap , how many lawyers do we have on this thread ?

Need some "Day with no Police"

The wires must have pulled it out of her hand when the perpetrators drove away.

TRH managed to be 100% wrong in every regard.

LOL

Arrogance and ignorance is a horrible combination.

No argument there. Lol

Which means she was in the wrong line of work

Yep. I was a kid when they started pushing this crap. Before that, the ladies checked the meters, and that was it.

Soooo ol'Dante bears no responsibility for being warranted and doing stupid? It ain't homicide if you do stupid to the police. The police tend to do police things,sure she shot him instead of tazing but is that a prisonable offence? Sure it'll co$t her but she'll walk.

Prolly offer LEO's cake and kool-aid.

AND #INSURANCE LOTTERY

A lot of answers could be answered from one word used a lot in this thread "she"

Thank you. I couldn't have said it better myself.

There's a bit more to the story. The perp had been previously convicted of armed robbery. Was on probation or parole on that conviction. Then two more warrants. One for gun possession and another for eluding arrest.

He seriously did not want to face the judge.

He wasn't convicted for armed robbery, he was charged with it and was out on bail pending trial.

He chose his poison. You don't want to risk getting shot? Don't resist. Don't get stupid.

Lots of misinformation, apparently out there. I previously read probation rather than bail, plus additional warrents.

Like trying to find factual information regarding viral infections and vaccines against same. Bull Schitt abounds.

His previous arrests and convictions are irrelevant.

i gotta recant what i thought of Daunte Wright who was shot and killed by the police lady, the warrant for his arrest is for being accused of choking and robbing a woman at gun point, so yes there was some stress in that situation.

The female TSA carry guns and tazers too. Better not get them hyped up on adrenaline.

They might, had she shot him on purpose, rather than let him loose on the streets again.

But yes, totally irrelevant as she makes the claim of accidental discharge.

I sure am glad I never had one of those.

The minute he decided to fight and get in back in the vehicle is the minute I decided I didn’t care if it was a taser or pistol or howitzer. He picked his poison.

I don’t understand what’s the big deal about her shooting a thug who was resisting arrest. He escaped into his car where who knows what hidden weapons were available to him. Even a knife would have allowed him to the officers attempting to restrain him. The cops shouldn’t have to risk their lives while arresting this thug.

The hypocrisy of this case and the Ashli Babbitt shooting is astounding.

An example of a case where the mistake of fact was not found to be an adequate defense can be found in Allen v. State, 290 Ga. 743, (2012). There the defendant believed that the victim was not in the trajectory of the bullet fired at a third party. The Court ruled that his belief did not constitute the type of mistake of fact that would serve as a defense to malice murder or other crimes."

Of course. It has to be relevant and exculpatory.

We knew this officer’s name almost right away, as every news media outlet in the country reported it. And she was charged within a day or so.
We still don’t know the name of the officer who killed Ashli Babbitt. And nobody in the mainstream media is even asking, as they don’t care. And the power’s that be have already announced that that officer won’t be charged.

That Capitol shooter sure didn't mistake his weapon for a taser.

And nothing but crickets.

The dead guy is criminal scum. Not convicted yet but probably was guilty.
But the female cop screwed up big time and she is guilty of a felony.
That is my opinion.

Meanwhile, she is now in a Living Hell. One week ago she was making $85 K a year as an officer. Probably looking forward to retirement in 3 years at full salary. Had a nice house there in Minnesota. She was all set up for a good life.
Today, the cops have had to put up New Jersey walls around her house, because the media released her name and address 2 days ago. Several police cars are stationed at her house. Nice of the media to release her name, when we still don't know the name of the Capitol shooter.

She is at an undisclosed location, probably with armed police bodyguards, because BLM types would surely kill her if they found out where she was. She is going to have to go into hiding, more or less go into a Witness Protection Service so she can hide out and not be killed. This is insane.

I think she will be found guilty and will serve jail time which, in my opinion, she deserves.

I don't know how these police pensions work but she might be deprived of her fat union police pension, "retiring" at 27 years service. The union will pay her massive legal fees, but she is still subject to massive civil suit, which she will certainly be served with, and will probably lose. Bye bye to that nice house, if BLM hasn't already burned it down.

This female officer is now in a Living Hell. She is a victim of an insane Liberal media plus her own mistake.

I remember this same thing happened at a subway station (or maybe it was on a subway car). Not sure where. But the cops were making mass arrests, and had everybody on the ground. One of the suspects wasn't 100% cooperating, and the cop (a man this time) pulled his Glock and shot him square in the chest. He thought he was holding his Taser. I don't think that cop was even arrested. I could be wrong, but I remember no follow up report of him being arrested. The shooting was a viral video that we discussed here. Might have been ten years ago.

New Years '09 if my memory serves. BART officer.

And society spirals down the toilet bowl..... swoosh
And they aren't smart enough to figure it out.....
White flight is happening on an historical scale...

I generally like and support the police.... but they better figure out following the politicians whims will be a no win situation for them.

Absolutely no sympathy here. If one chooses to take the lives of other citizens into one's hands. One also accepts responsibility for care of those lives.

How about the babysitter who calls her boy friend over while she is on duty, and then the baby chokes to death on the bottle while babysitter is in the next room getting her jollies.

Same level of neglect.

Yes. That's it. Thanks. Did he serve time?

Uh ... no.

AGAin, I wouldn't swear to it, but I'm fairly certain he did a couple years after appeal.

Can you research into it?

"On November 5, 2010, Mehserle was sentenced to two years with double credit for time already served (due to California jail/prison overcrowding, one day in custody counts as two for most inmates), reducing his term by 292 days for the 146 days he has already spent in jail.[123] The judge overturned the gun enhancement, which could have added an additional 3 to 10 years to the sentence.[124][125] He was released from prison at 12:01 a.m. on June 13, 2011"

my apologies, the appeal was actually post-release.

You would be talking out of the other side of your mouth, were it you lying in the street bleeding out when you got tazed, er mistakenly shot, for getting between the cops and one of your dogs.

Idaho, the case you're comparing this to is one of making a choice to pursue pleasure at the expense of responsibility over an infant. This cop didn't make any such choice. She merely grabbed the wrong device during an exigent circumstance due to being flustered. A major screw up with a terrible outcome, for sure, but we don't measure degree of fault by the terribleness of outcomes under civilized law.

No, what I am saying is the cop spent her time pursing her pleasures when she should have been learning to use the tools of her trade.

No thinking person could consider that grabbing a handgun from the wrong side of the body and holding it in the hand and aligning the sights while still thinking she was holding a TASER was the action of a rational twentyfive year veteran officer with a career involving the training of junior officers.

The officer was obviously NOT rational. She was obviously in full panic mode. After twenty five years on the force, she had the DUTY to recognize her lack of rationality and the duty to resign, or ask for desk duty. Instead, she spent her career hoping she never really had to face a dire threat instead of preparing herself to face it.

She placed the size of her paycheck as greater importance than the safety of the public she was sworn to defend. Just as the aforementioned babysitter placed her pleasures before the safety of her charges.

Yes, if I were on the jury, I would do everything in my power to convict her.

As I wrote before, had she made a conscious decision to shoot the perp in order to protect the public from the danger he would pose fleeing on the highway, I would fully support that choice.

She was a FTO.

LOL

I believe her trainee was standing behind her.

She was a white Trump supporter and her killer was black. Therefore the shooting was justified and the shooter will be protected at all costs...

She was also a felonious burglar threatening the safety of elected federal officials. In all reality participating in insurrection and an attempted coup.
(burglary: the act of entering a premises with the intention of committing a crime.
the burglary is a felony, even if the qualifying crime is not)

Because we do not like the people elected to congress, does not give us a right to threaten their security. If one does, one better be prepared to pay the price as Ashlee Babbitt paid.

It was a good shoot.

Do not be surprised if every person who entered the Capitol Building gets charged with Felony Murder in relation to Ms Babbitt's death.

Remember, the price of liberty is the blood of PATRIOTS, as well as tyrants. And the standing government defines the crimes.

Every one of the founding fathers was a "felon". Just putting that out there.

Mistakes happen. Add extreme stress and fluid/ dynamic circumstances and bad things happen. She (officer) had less then 1/2 of a second to make a decision and try to deal with that issue. Welcome to the LE world. Remember that many of the things we do are lawful but still awful. Mistakes can cost you, your life or another LE partner. Or an innocent citizen and last the bad guy/ suspect. The job could not be more complex and no day is like the day before. Remember that if you were given those circumstances to make decisions in your chosen field or career you will have bad outcomes. There is no way, not to have bad outcomes. Even the haters cannot deny that set of facts. Last, remember that we in the LE profession can be charged for the things we do when we take action and things we should have done and did not. Not an easy job these days,

Well said.

And this is why LEO always deserve the benefit of a doubt

Yes, they absolutely were. They knew when they started that their lives depended on winning the war and avoiding capture by the Brits until the war was won.

A bunch of them died on the battlefield and I would think on the gallows, but I can find no confirmation on the latter. It is documented that many soldiers were killed after surrender by both sides, including two American women caught tending wounded blue clad soldiers.

If ever there was a Freudian slip, this was it.

Laughable is laughable and that woman's actions were 100$ laughable.

Especially for somebody that has done 25 years in Brooklyn Center's PD. Call me crazy but I do in fact expect experienced personnel in certain professions to have a distinguishing level of poise and professional bearing in the most extreme of circumstances.

I can't scrape up any sympathy on this one.

Reminds me of the scene in The Patriot, with Mel Gibson.

A bottomless pit of wisdom you are. ..


How many times over are you a felon?

There is no doubt in this case that the female officer was/is totally in competent

Not only that, but this clown of a cop was an FTO. I mean we've all seen them (worthless, lazy, incompetent, idiots just hanging on to get the measly stipend) but gawd dam......this worthless sack was teaching people lol.

Says a lot about that department.

It's not about sympathy. It's about acknowledging that no human being is a robot. Even the best have good days (when they are really on the ball) and bad days when they seem to have two left feet. There was apparently no mens rea on her part, which should put the matter outside the criminal courts.

And I agree that the ladies should be checking parking meters rather than interacting with dangerous felons as a profession.

26 year veteran and she doesn't know the difference between her taser and her pistol

Are you talking about the shooting of Oscar Grant?

That cop was charged with 2nd degree murder. Convicted of manslaughter.

All appeals denied.

It's a frequent example in use of force training. It's one of the reasons departments and agencies make sure you know the difference between "tick-tick-tick" and "bang-bang-bang."

Complicated schit, I know.

Bold is true. Everybody makes mistakes, but when you kill someone, there's more that a letter of reprimand coming down the pike.

There are some things you absolutely at all costs can't f uck up. And mistaking you gun for a taser is one (unless you have justification for the use of deadly force...in which you won't go to jail, just look like a clown)

In this day and age, the actual law will often go out the window in order to convict for the purpose of quelling the angry mobs. Sad reality.

She was/is totally incompetent 26 years and she doesn't know the difference between her taser and her pistol

Can you research this and cite examples

Your understanding of using force on other people is hovering between a zero and a zero.

You should listen more and type less.

Consider the case of Derek Chauvin.

If I did that, how would you ever learn?

Are your hands tired from having your ass handed back to you?

The gift that keeps on giving. LMAO

LMAOROTF

Chauvin exhibited no stupidity at all. His actions were in line with his training, as well as current case law.

Yet he will be convicted of something, and the reason for the conviction will be to quell the angry mobs rather than because the law and the facts were being correctly interpreted.

Unfortunately for you your point wasn't proven by your example. Chauvin hasn't been convicted, nor did Chauvin shoot anyone

When I saw that body cam footage I had at least six perfect real-life examples of that type run through my head.

He likely will be, and we were discussing a broader principle.

Intentionally shooting an unarmed woman at a distance is a “good shoot”?
Your a special kind of puke.

Osky

YOU'RE discussing a broader principle (that has existed for decades).

Everyone else is discussing Lil Miss Taze Ya.

You a fortune teller now

Except she said "Taser" at least 3 to 5 times. That most certainly takes much more than 1/2 second to say even when excited.

How she could have mistaken her Glock for her Taser is as out there as forgetting her left from her right.

There was no need to have gotten all worked up like she did either. The kid did not have a gun that she had seen and I don't believe one was found either.

She should have stayed back and let the cops do their job instead of jumping in.

But the cop that couldn't get the cuffs on the kid should be flipping burgers in McDonalds. He and her was the one that made this what it was.

Use of Force scenarios are like snowflakes and divorces. No two are exactly like and trying to move pieces that weren't moved is a waste of time.

His previous arrests and convictions have no relevance in this case.

Well, I don't know about that, but I did make a prediction. I guess we'll see if I'm right.

I'd be real cautious about passing that judgement.

Unless you've put cuffs on struggling subjects a few dozen times in your life.

That would be refreshing.

she was obviously scared schitless!~

I'd like to hear what you base that on.

You mean because it's refreshing for someone to be so consistent in this world of inconsistency?

No. Because you've made an idiot of yourself in this thread.

Should this cop be jailed for what seems pretty obviously an accident? On average, over 100 people die per day in car crashes in the USA. Someone's screw up cost someone else their life. Unless the driver is impaired or obliterating a speed limit, most drivers who kill someone don't face any criminal charges.

Okay.

Exactly.

Oh boy, here come Paul with some more brain teasers.

Oheremicus is Rocklin Wolley.


http://www.bikernet.com/pages/October_23_2003_Part_2.aspx
BIKERNET COP CONVICTION STUDY-- Bad Cop: Convicting a cop, nearly impossible... California - It's been more than three decades since a police officer faced criminal charges for fatally shooting someone in Santa Clara County.

As a county grand jury considers this week whether to charge a San Jose officer in the July shooting death of a Vietnamese woman, the long-ago case of former officer Rocklin Woolley illustrates the long odds involved in trying an officer for killing in the line of duty.

"It's always hard for a jury to convict an officer, particularly in our county, where the public has a high opinion of police,'' said Dave Davies, a retired prosecutor who unsuccessfully sought to convict Woolley of felony manslaughter.

Woolley's case bore many similarities to the July 13 shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran by San Jose police officer Chad Marshall. Both shootings drew public outrage and involved victims who were not white. The officers said they acted in self-defense and were accused of overreacting with deadly force to a harmless threat.

But what is especially telling about the failed prosecution of Woolley is that in some ways, his behavior seems more difficult to justify than that of Marshall, the officer in the Tran case. While Marshall faced a woman wielding a large, sharp instrument -- which turned out to be a vegetable peeler -- Woolley shot an unarmed man who was running away from him.

Woolley was a 27-year-old patrol officer when he stopped motorist John Henry Smith Jr., 37, for allegedly making an illegal U-turn Sept. 19, 1971. Smith, a black IBM research technician on his way home from a date, angrily protested the traffic stop when two off-duty officers who lived nearby happened on the scene.

Police said Smith threatened the officers with a tire iron. Woolley said he tried to subdue Smith with tear gas, then sent his police dog after him as he slipped free and fled toward an apartment complex.

As Smith reached the apartments, Woolley fired a single shot from his .45-caliber pistol, killing the unarmed man. Woolley later said he acted in self-defense, fearing Smith would arm himself once inside the apartments.

Community tension prompted calls for outside investigations. Two months later, a grand jury indicted Woolley on charges of manslaughter and using illegal tear gas.

At Woolley's trial, Davies told jurors the unarmed Smith posed no threat when he was shot. There was evidence Woolley threatened to kill Smith for suggesting he would sue over being tear-gassed. And officers said Smith had brandished a tire iron, but the tire iron turned out to fit one of their cars, not Smith's.

Then-Police Chief Robert Murphy said afterward that he no longer believed Woolley was justified in the shooting. Woolley, who was later fired along with another officer, lives in Placerville and declined comment. The city paid $30,000 to settle lawsuits on behalf of Smith's three children.

Though other fatal police shootings have been controversial since then, none resulted in charges against the officers, let alone convictions. Officials declined calls for an open grand jury hearing into the 1976 shooting of unarmed Latino bartender Danny Trevino by two San Jose officers.

The first such open hearing was held 20 years later over the 1996 death of Gustavo Soto Mesa, a suspected drunken driver fatally shot in the back as he ran from a sheriff's deputy. The grand jury declined to charge the deputy, who said his gun fired accidentally.

- See more at: http://www.bikernet.com/pages/October_23_2003_Part_2.aspx#sthash.dWsnA3v5.dpuf

As long as humans are policing humans the work product and the result will be flawed. I am not perfect and but can only strive to be. I you want perfection in every circumstance then find another way to police. I do not have an answer for you. Keep looking. Blue

People are sent to prison for accidents all the time. Have you two ever heard of negligent homicide or manslaughter?

No,it's not stupid at all to continue the restraint as the life slowly passes from the subject's body, then show no concern whatsoever when he stops moving, then stops breathing. Nothing dumb about it. Chauvin is a brilliant tactician.

It is simply not possible that anyone could be that stupid...but then, you are a lawyer.

Clueless is an inadequate term here

Not for accidents. At least our laws aren't supposed to place such cases within the criminal court system. If someone goes to jail for a car wreck where someone is injured or killed, there's usually drugs or alcohol involved, or other reckless or malicious conduct.

Your stupidity on the subject has been consistent.

If people think we have sh~ty cops now, just wait till you see the next run of transgender, animal loving, environmentally aware , social activist that comes to our citizens rescue !

I'm not following the trial, but has anyone yet figure out what Chauvin was holding onto so dearly in his pocket ?

You are dumb as a brick. You accidentally miss seeing a stop sign and kill someone, you have committed negligent homicide

When was the last time you heard of a motorist going to jail for killing someone in a crash when the driver was not impaired or traveling way over the speed limit. With 38000 killed each year in the USA, you should be able to post a laundry list if you are correct.

The bottom line is that it is exceedingly rare to be jailed for accidentally taking someone's life without some kind of aggravating factor. The numbers vary wildly, but some numbers have 250,000 patients dying each year due to medical malpractice. How often do you hear of a doctor being jailed?

Only to be met with yet another banal comment.

Is that how yall do it in New Orleans

Guys the benefit of a doubt is for the good and competent LEO's
Agreed this gal was not in that category

You dodged the question, and for good reason.

There are certain things the law presumes, as a matter of public policy, that folks are always obliged to take note of, stops signs, red lights, etc. (unless obstructed by overgrown bushes, etc..). You accept that as a condition of your drivers license. That's not relevant to a mistake of fact defense scenario like we're discussing here.

Hey if I record myself accidentally killing somebody with a gun, do you think I could/might be charged criminally?

Another "exactly". Only this one is correct.

Your honor, when my client clobbered his wife over the head with a Louisville Slugger, he thought it was a Nerf product.

MISTAKE OF FACT!

You would do well to quit while your behind.

could/might be charged criminally? Possibly. Should you be charged? Totality of the circumstances.

For ever action there is a reaction,

LE training and militarization play a part in things we see happening in society today that we didn't a few decades ago..

There is more to it that, but it contributes

What is a red herring Alex?

The only "MISTAKE OF FACT" is that she was mistaken for a police officer, she has proven to not be competent after 26 years of attempting to reach competence

Undoubtedly charged, but convicted would depend entirely on who you shot and whether I was on the jury or not.


And since I am not in America you should probably refrain from such.

It actually could be, but it would need to be backed by credible evidence, such as the defendant was at the time in the midst of a 106 degree fevered delirium. That would go a long way to satisfying the preponderance of the evidence test regarding the claim that he believed he was holding a Nerf bat. It would be up to the jury to make that credibility determination.

Short of lots of strong evidence that this was actually his belief, however, no, that would not be an acceptable defense, since it would lack credibility.

You're behind. Not your behind. Your is possessive.

Uh yep!

A local case here a few years ago.

A young father was driving the station wagon to town one day with six or seven of his kids, nieces, and nephews and his wife along for the ride. The driver was a devout Morman. He did not even drink coffee, and he was not speeding.

The kids got to screwing around in the back of the station wagon and the driver took his eyes off the road and looked into the rear view mirror as he scolded them.

Just at that moment he crested a hill with a car sitting square in the road in front of him. He rear ended the car at about fifty miles an hour.

Within the car was a young couple engaged to soon be married. They were sitting in the road waiting for oncoming traffic to clear so they could make a left turn. They had the steering wheel cranked to the stop to the left in preparation for the turn.

At impact, they were pushed into the left lane, directly into the path of an oncoming van. Both of the young lovers were killed.

The driver of the station wagon was jailed for his "mistake". His family went on welfare.

Where's Ltppowell saying some cop's never shoulda quit their shoe salesman job??

I miss that...

Therefore, the "mistake of fact" defense will be of no relevance when a 26 year police office doesn't know the difference between a taser and a pistol , this is a clear case of negligent homicide hence the charge of 2nd degree manslaughter

Perfect example of negligent homicide. Definitely an accident and unintentional

I'd like to read more about that. Being jailed for being at fault in a car crash is rare, absent impairment or excessive speed.

Do you feel like jail is the right place for that driver?

Okay, so you're asserting that she actually knew it was a Glock, not a Taser, and that she secretly intended to murder the arrestee, and just added the comments about him being about to be Tasered in order to plant exculpatory evidence into the record. That's a sound theory, but you'd need some evidence for it.

Your theory that she did in fact know the difference, at the time of the shooting, between her Glock and her Taser, of course, totally negates your negligent homicide theory. You realize that, right? If she actually knew the difference at that moment, then yours is just a plain old first degree murder theory, not a negligent homicide theory.

Surely a mistake of fact. The driver believed the road ahead of him to be clear of cars. The fact was otherwise.

What has "feel" got to do with it?

Agree or disagree doesn't change the law

Thanks for that captain obvious. Do you believe sending that driver to jail was the right thing to do?

Sure it is.

I want to know if on a human level he believes jail is the right thing for that diver. It's a curiosity, that's all.

My assertion is that after 26 years of on the job training she was negligent. Any reasonable person with 26 years should know the location of their taser and their pistol on their belt. To not know is negligent

What I "feel" is irrelevant. We are discussing LAW here, not "feelings".

Now, had the driver an IQ somewhere above 90, and the means to hire a lawyer, instead of depending on God and a public defender in a poor rural county to defend him, he probably would have never seen the inside of the jail cell.

But no one ever pretended to believe the world was not affected of a two tier justice system.

Nailed it

Apparently a jury of his peers thought so, and most likely the relatives of the dead would too.


If they were my relatives I would have been keen on capital punishment as well.