Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

[jsharmon7]

I hope everyone is prepared for a "not guilty" in this one too.

I haven’t followed this one as closely. I know she pulled a gun instead of Taser and it’s all on video. Do you think she’ll be found not guilty because it was overcharged, or some other reason?

 

[HoughMade]

I haven’t followed this one as closely. I know she pulled a gun instead of Taser and it’s all on video. Do you think she’ll be found not guilty because it was overcharged, or some other reason?

I have been following this a bit. The evidence seems to be that she would have been justified in tasing him, but she made a mistake. There is no evidence to controvert that she thought she had pulled her Taser.

She was charged with 1st degree and 2nd degree manslaughter- these are somewhat different from the way this is done in Indiana.

The 1st degree manslaughter requires a finding of causing someone's death while committing or attempting to commit a lesser crime. I don't see the lesser crime here and the evidence does not seem to be there for this finding.

The 2nd degree manslaughter requires a finding of causing someone’s death through culpable negligence, by creating an unreasonable risk and consciously taking chances of causing death or great bodily harm. At first, the "culpable negligence" sounds right for this case, but as I bolded, there has to be evidence that she consciously took the chance of causing death or great bodily harm. The evidence was that she flat out screwed up and was not "conscious" that she had her gun until after the shot. Now, she "consciously" deployed a Taser (or so she thought) so the question is whether deploying a Taser is considered to be "great bodily harm" under Minnesota law. In other words, the statute uses the term "culpable negligence", but the further definition sound a lot more like "recklessness".

It does not appear that Minnesota has a straight "negligent homicide" outside of vehicular cases.

 

[nonobaddog]

I hope everyone is prepared for a "not guilty" in this one too.

The police have used this taser-gun mistake several times now to defend killing somebody, including in my town.
It seems like a very stupid mistake to make but when high adrenaline happens people make stupid mistakes.
I don't know if they will wear out this defense and it will become useless or if it will be accepted and become a standard defense.

 

[jsharmon7]

I have been following this a bit. The evidence seems to be that she would have been justified in tasing him, but she made a mistake. There is no evidence to controvert that she thought she had pulled her Taser.

She was charged with 1st degree and 2nd degree manslaughter- these are somewhat different from the way this is done in Indiana.

The 1st degree manslaughter requires a finding of causing someone's death while committing or attempting to commit a lesser crime. I don't see the lesser crime here and the evidence does not seem to be there for this finding.

The 2nd degree manslaughter requires a finding of causing someone’s death through culpable negligence, by creating an unreasonable risk and consciously taking chances of causing death or great bodily harm. At first, the "culpable negligence" sounds right for this case, but as I bolded, there has to be evidence that she consciously took the chance of causing death or great bodily harm. The evidence was that she flat out screwed up and was not "conscious" that she had her gun until after the shot. Now, she "consciously" deployed a Taser (or so she thought) so the question is whether deploying a Taser is considered to be "great bodily harm" under Minnesota law. In other words, the statute uses the term "culpable negligence", but the further definition sound a lot more like "recklessness".

It does not appear that Minnesota has a straight "negligent homicide" outside of vehicular cases.

Thanks! I’m not up on MN law, but I figured you had an angle.

 

[Bugzilla]

The former sheriff from Milwaukee gave a good description of how your senses act under high adrenaline situations, to contradict the theory that she would have been able to tell the difference between the gun and taser.

 

[HoughMade]

“In Minnesota, the definition of "great bodily harm" includes an injury that "causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ."”

State v. Moore, 699 N.W.2d 733, 737 (Minn. 2005 Minn.)

I don't see that applying to a Taser...but ultimately, it will go to the jury.

Again, we look at whether a Taser inflicts "great bodily harm" rather than a gun because the evidence indicates she thought she had the Taser. What makes 2nd degree Manslaughter depends upon the state of mind.

I don't know about other cases, but here, both during and immediately after the shooting, Potter's words and acts were consistent with someone who thought she had pulled her Taser.

If she were charged with an Assault of some variety, they probably could make that stick.

 

[BugI02]

I've forgotten a lot of the details about this case, Hough. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is not this the one where she can be heard on body cam audio saying 'Oh ****, I thought I had my taser' or some such immediately after firing her weapon

I think that would be powerful evidence of lack of intent harm

 

[HoughMade]

I've forgotten a lot of the details about this case, Hough. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is not this the one where she can be heard on body cam audio saying 'Oh ****, I thought I had my taser' or some such immediately after firing her weapon

I think that would be powerful evidence of lack of intent harm

Yes. This is that case.

I agree.

 

[JCSR]

Don't give an officer a reason to pull a Taser would be good advice.

 

[rhamersley]

Don't give an officer a reason to pull a Taser would be good advice.

 

[actaeon277]

Regardless of "don't break the law"... how about maybe taser manufacturers come up with a different design.
One that is more intuitive that it is different.
Don't use the trigger finger to fire.
Shape it completely different.

I'm sure if they thought about it, they could come up with other changes, that would work just as well.
In industry, one of the BIG safety corrections, is to ENGINEER out the safety concern whenever possible.

 

[Doug]

Regardless of "don't break the law"... how about maybe taser manufacturers come up with a different design.
One that is more intuitive that it is different.
Don't use the trigger finger to fire.
Shape it completely different.

I'm sure if they thought about it, they could come up with other changes, that would work just as well.
In industry, one of the BIG safety corrections, is to ENGINEER out the safety concern whenever possible.

YES!!
A different shape and thumb activated instead of using the trigger finger.

 

[Leadeye]

Maybe use something like a picana instead of a taser.

 

[printcraft]

Maybe use something like a picana instead of a taser.View attachment 171605

Problem deploying from outside of contact distance.

 

[Leadeye]

Problem deploying from outside of contact distance.

True, maybe a telescoping handle. They do put out a little more shock than a taser.

 

[nonobaddog]

Regardless of "don't break the law"... how about maybe taser manufacturers come up with a different design.
One that is more intuitive that it is different.
Don't use the trigger finger to fire.
Shape it completely different.

I'm sure if they thought about it, they could come up with other changes, that would work just as well.
In industry, one of the BIG safety corrections, is to ENGINEER out the safety concern whenever possible.

I don't see how they could not think of this.

There already exists a line of tasers by Air Taser that are used by police, etc that are not gun shaped. There has been enough taser-gun screw ups that it is almost negligence in itself to still be making/selling/using the gun shaped ones.

 

[Expat]

I read an article from somewhere that took the position that based upon the video evidence she would have been justified in shooting him anyway.

 

[printcraft]

I don't see how they could not think of this.

There already exists a line of tasers by Air Taser that are used by police, etc that are not gun shaped. There has been enough taser-gun screw ups that it is almost negligence in itself to still be making/selling/using the gun shaped ones.

Still in testing phase, a bit overpowered...

 

[HoughMade]

T

I read an article from somewhere that took the position that based upon the video evidence she would have been justified in shooting him anyway.

That argument is certainly out there....but it's pretty tough to back away from "I didn't mean to shoot him"....when you specifically said you didn't mean to shoot him.

 

[nonobaddog]

T

That argument is certainly out there....but it's pretty tough to back away from "I didn't mean to shoot him"....when you specifically said you didn't mean to shoot him.

Is that really relevant to whether or not a shooting would have been justified?