Kim Potter jury indicates potential deadlock, asks judge what happens 'if a jury cannot reach consen

https://www.foxnews.com/us/kim-pott...what-happens-if-a-jury-cannot-reach-consensus

personally I don’t know how the verdict can’t be agreed upon. The world is a better place without this guy but she definitely shot a gun when she clearly intended to taze him. That definitely equates to accidental homicide or in other words manslaughter. The law is the law right?

 

From the beginning I would have voted "Not Guilty" on all charges.

 

This, the vehicle could have become a weapon, and she didn't intend for that accident to happen. To me, it doesn't meet the criteria for manslaughter, as she arguably had the defendant's well being in mind(she could have deliberately decided to pull a gun but the fact that she clearly cried out taser shows where her state of mind was.)

The technicalities of the law do not fit this particular case, because no one in their right mind would send this late-40's woman to prison based on a mistake.

 

Just because she yelled taser didn't mean that she had one out and aimed. She could have been telling the stupid trainee to get his, he was standing there like a tree. And when Daunte continued his escape she shot him. The mistake was in saying that she made a mistake. And when the stupid chief showed up, he immediately threw her under the bus and here were are. But I am still a "Not Guilty" vote for what it is worth.

 

Manslaughter is unintended murder…. People get sent to prison for accidentally murdering people all the time. The crime is called manslaughter

 

Guilty on all charges. A tragedy all around started by a criminal violently resisting arrest and then clearly an accidental shooting.

 

Manslaughter is an unintended homicide not murder.

 

Not guilty. The world is a better place without idiots like Daunte Wright. Even his social media posts show him flashing guns around.

 

I agree I dislike the guy but he still has rights as an American citizen. One of those rights as stated in the 5th that states you shall not be deprived of life without due process.

This was manslaughter.

 

Sorry, but your due process ends once you decide to run. Had he complied he would still be alive to receive said due process...

 

Kim Potter trial: Ex-officer found guilty of two counts of manslaughter for fatally shooting Daunte Wright
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/k...-shooting-daunte-wright/ar-AAS5bPD?li=BBnb7Kz

 

Well at least they won't loot and riot now. Just kidding, they still will...

 

If this was manslaughter, then the US is royally screwed as a nation with its laws. We are headed, more and more gradually towards a North Korean State.
What, pray tell should the officer have done differently? Checked to make sure it wasn't a gun but a taser? But in those split seconds, the time of checking to make sure could literally be life or death(we know for a fact that the suspect was looking to get away)

This seems to be more to send a message, more then it is to adjudicate justice in this case.

 

I’m glad. Given the circumstances I hope she gets minimum sentences

 

Being a cop does not put you above the law. We trust our lives with the police. If they get caught neglecting those lives they too should be punished. This isn’t a liberal view. This is a constitutional view. Our constitution does not permit a cop to kill someone without reasonable belief that they must use self defense. They have no added rights that allows them to kill outside of the realm of self defense. This was just.

 

As someone else said, we literally saw in Milwaukee that a vehicle can be used as a weapon. I'm sure there probably has been civilian casualties to a high-speed police chase, would that have been preferable? Would we have seen innocents die for Wright to live? The officer made a mistake, but she had no ill will to it. The only one who had his life in his hands was Wright, and he failed to take the precautions for his OWN safety. Mens rea should absolutely be at play here, but it's not.

Our constitution doesn't permit cops to kill without reasonable belief in self defense, but it doesn't mean that mistakes unfortunately can't be avoided. The only way to avoid this incident truly would be to disarm the entire police force. But that would bring a travesty of its own, because do you think criminals will let go of their firearms?

Were I a member of the Jury, I would have remained steadfast on a not guilty verdict. The victim is responsible for his own death, and to me the mitigating circumstances do not indicate manslaughter.

 

Involuntary manslaughter at worst ... was the jury even offered that option? ...

horrible verdict ...

 

Also, if I were her defense I would immediately call for a mistrial:

-The judge was mistaken in allowing the jury to weigh the difference between a taser and a firearm in a cool and collected jury room. The only way for them to truly test out if it could be mistaken would be to simulate the experience. IE: Bring in a live dummy, go through the same training simulations as the police and then see if you're any better at actually making the right decision.

So we say we hold them to a higher standard, then we should also hold justice to that same higher standard. We have not disproven the defense, we have simply decided to go with what we want(in this case, a guilty verdict.)

 

My opinion still is what it is. I’m going to have to disagree. The 5th is more important to me than this cop. I wish obama felt the same way. This is a conservative ideal

 

Yes, it was an accident after all.

 

My stance is quite simple: If Wright had allowed himself to be taken neatly into custody, she doesn't feel the need to pull a taser(which tragically ended up being a gun), and he can have his due right processes just fine.(Though in lieu of the 21st century form of judgment, I truly come to question now whether or not a court system is due process in anyway.)

Only the individuals involved know what really happened(and their reasons for doing it.) What we're doing essentially is juxtaposing our own reasons onto it and then deciding verdicts based on that. I don't know if I can call that a legal process. Or if it is one, I don't know if it's one worth defending in the long run(especially given prison conditions.) Imagine spending 11+ years eating from a canteen and people would change their tune quickly.

 

It’s not legal to kill people for running

 

Would cops have been justified opening fire on all the jan 6 rioters for not following instructions?

 

So anyone who’s pro 2nd amendment should be killed by police?

 

It's not, but there should be mitigating circumstances involved. The idea that this law-abiding citizen is going to spend over a decade in jail for 0.5 seconds of her life, is probably the most devastating thing i'd read in this country. Again, if this is a judicial system it's not one we can exalt as some sort of beacon. I now find myself with an affirmative question to Senator Kennedy:

Yes, we should have morality first and foremost in our judicial system because without morality, there is no justice. Vengeance perhaps, but not justice.