Reply to MN Police Shoot and Kill Daunte Wright

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "MN Police Shoot and Kill Daunte Wright"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I just don’t see the criminal intent or criminal behavior on the part of the police officer.  A terrible and tragic mistake, yes.  In no other profession would someone be held to these same standards.  A infantryman accidentally shooting another soldier (it’s called friendly fire), a driver stepping on the gas instead of the brake and hitting a pedestrian (it’s called an unfortunate accident), a paramedic, doctor or EMT not doing something correctly (it’s called a mistake or malpractice), but with a cop, it’s automatically criminal...[/quote]

Soldiers do get prosecuted sometimes for friendly fire. https://www.baltimoresun.com/sdut-marine-tanker-charged-friendly-fire-shooting-afgha-2012jan19-story.html
A driver hitting the gas instead of the brake will be prosecuted. https://boston.cbslocal.com/2018/03/20/westwood-anne-marie-mcinnis-eddie-thomson-fatal-crash-sun-glare-accident/
Michael Jackson's doctor was convicted of manslaughter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Murray

And, no, for a cop it is NOT automatically criminal - that's been the problem. Ever hear of Breonna Taylor?

I don’t think criminal prosecution was warranted in that case either.  George Floyd, yes.

[/quote][/quote]

People should read all of the articles that quote law professors at law schools in that state.  All say the prosecution is going to be hard or is not viable:

Richard Frase, a professor of criminal law at the University of Minnesota, said the second-degree manslaughter statute is worded narrowly enough that the case might prove difficult for prosecutors to prove, noting that it requires them to show that Ms. Potter consciously took a chance of “causing death or great bodily harm.”

“She thinks she’s firing a Taser,” he said of the former officer. “How can we prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she consciously took chances of at least causing great bodily harm?”

In other words they have to prove she intended to cause him great harm.  She intended to use non-lethal force.  What she used is not relevant to the elements of the crime.  Her intent is the element.  Her intent is pretty clear.    [/quote]

This.

The media should use this tragic incident to distinguish it from other recent incidents that were clearly more recklessly egregious.

This incident was not racially motivated. The media should explain that.

Someone I know irl posted something along the lines of, “I don’t know which is worse: the performative solidarity by white people or their silence.” About this incident? Really?

[/quote]

How do you know if it is racial. You know for a fact she would have tased a white female in the same situation?[/quote]

That’s not for us to judge.

Stick to the facts: the cops were placing him under arrest, he resisted and hopped in the car to flee.

The police should just shrug their shoulders and let him go?

Of course not.

Use of a taser was appropriate.

Unfortunately, the cop made a fatal mistake.

Do you really think cops shouldn’t be allowed to ever arrest people just because they are black? That seems to be the new standard. [/quote]

DP. I do think a lot of people are promoting the idea that black people should be allowed to resist arrest. That’s a double standard that ultimately won’t be in anyone’s best interest. [/quote]

Nobody is saying anybody should “resist arrest”.., but it happens. When it happens follow procedure. If it’s a misdemeanor... get them later, do not use force, do not chase.

All anybody is asking is gor police to be trained properly snd follow police training.[/quote]

Except, that’s not procedure. Please find me one jurisdiction that says that. Police use force when they feel a threat to their safety and the safety of others, which is what happened here. In addition, when you have a court ordered warrant, you are permitted to use force to effectuate an arrest. [/quote]

This is what I am thinking. Once he became combative, got out of the handcuffs and ignored multiple warnings that put it in another light. Using a gun would then be justified.
I also think once they saw the warrant that also made it a dicey situation.  In other cases yes let them go if there's no danger to anyone. Of course as someone pointed out they could keep running so that theory is probably only good on paper.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics