never mind, I see a verdict is about to come out
There’s a huge value in the police using body cams. We’re now able to see what they are dealing with.
I would ask the question from the other side. What is the risk/reward for resisting arrest and trying to drive a car surrounded by police? The best that could be hoped for in this case is adding to the previous warrant and legal issues.
Here’s part of the problem: from wiki: Wright had an open warrant for his arrest related to an aggravated armed robbery, for failure to appear in court, and for charges that he fled from officers and possessed a gun without a permit during an encounter with Minneapolis police in June. Wright also had a restraining order that forbade contact with a woman.
I refuted your unsubstantiated claim and all you can do is bail?
I guess I’m not sure why that’s relevant, if everyone (apparently including Potter) agrees that a taser was the appropriate level of force here.
Are you arguing that Potter may have been deciding between gun and taser, and that she was justified in considering both those possibilities, and that therefore mitigates the mistake she ultimately made? Her own reaction does not appear to support that interpretation of events.
And more than just fired. The constitution may not have anything to say about what police have to do by my state statutes and Attorney General Directives (which have the force of law in my state) do say what must be done in many cases. The situation in the Castle Rock case would have a much different outcome in my state. When it comes to domestic violence and restraining orders the law is filled with things the police must do. If those things are not done the cop would be lucky if all that happened was a firing and not arrested for official misconduct.
Ok, I agree that we should not base policy on the high drama of videos of isolated incidents with tragic outcomes, but rather on overall statistics. Do the statistics support the narrative that the job of a police officer is exceptionally dangerous?
1st degree manslaughter: Guilty
2nd degree manslaughter: Guilty
Man 1: guilty
Man 2: guilty
Why are they asked for two verdicts? Something to do with appeal perhaps, but doesn’t guilt of 1st degree entail guilt of 2nd degree?
No they are separate offenses with different elements. It is not a lesser included offense. I did not hear the jury instructions but a dry reading of the statutes makes me think that Man 1 doesn’t fit. There must have been something in the instructions that explained why it did.
And yet, this country manages to have an average of 1000 people a year killed by cops, and obviously more non-fatal shootings. Someone is shooting these people.
Since you haven’t responded, here are the statistics.
Being a police officer is ranked here as the 22nd most dangerous job in the U.S., with a fatality rate one-third that of a roofer, one-half that of a garbage collector or delivery driver.
Top 25 most dangerous jobs in the United States | ISHN
How many police deaths are a result of bad acts by the people the police are tasked with apprehending? The FBI says 48 per year.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2019-statistics-on-law-enforcement-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty
Numerous sources put the number of fatal shootings by police at around 1000 per year.
Obviously 100% of the 48 police deaths were unjustified, whereas many of the 1000 people shot by police may have been justified. But justification does not imply that deescalation could not also have been effective. And those numbers certainly indicate to me that the number of people that the police are shooting is not reasonably explained by the risk to the LEO themselves, and the police could recalibrate to be less ready to choose violence.
You cannot simply take statistics and ratio them with a statistic that shows being a dentist is more dangerous than being a cop. It is beyond apples and oranges.
One of the reasons being a police officer is statistically less dangerous than others is because police use trained tactics and use force (lethal and non-lethal) before they are assaulted and injured. The types of risk between career choices are entirely different. Show me a statistic in other fields that reflects those in it being assaulted as compared to just falling off a roof. Your numbers just don’t fit what you’re trying to prove or disprove.
And a huge majority of police involved shootings are found to be legally justified yet you still claim there is a problem with police shooting people and not a problem of criminality and non-compliance. You want to skew statistic to embolden your politics.
And that’s entirely my point. They are making themselves safe through violent tactics. The numbers suggest that the risk LEO face does not justify how readily they resort to force. If the cost of changing to less violent tactics in order to halve the number of people fatally shot by the police were to double the risk to the police, working as a LEO would still be no more dangerous than working as a delivery driver.
And we’d have a hell of a lot fewer people killed by the police.
I saw stats somewhere that the vast majority of police who kill someone have shot civilians before. And a huge majority of police officers never shoot a civilian. There are a small number of police who ought to be removed.
I’m inclined to say that every police officer who shoots a civilian be removed from a position where that can happen again. Most aren’t guilty of a crime, and I’m not suggesting they be punished. Just moved to a desk job or otherwise off the streets.
Anyway, Potter clearly made a mistake and was remorseful. I hope she’s never allowed to hold a gun again, but i also hope she makes it out of jail alive and healthy.
Absolutely I do. The “legal justification” standard does not remotely imply that deescalation could not have led to a resolution without harm to either the LEO or the suspect. A shooting can be legally justified when it turns out the panicked and confused civilian was stupidly reaching for a mobile phone.
Key question: is the life of a police officer equivalent to the life of a criminal? Your equation approach seems premised on the idea that there’s no difference. Others would disagree with that.
Killing someone by mistake is sort of what manslaughter is. I suppose she took it to trial on the not-unlikely chance the jury would refuse to convict a police officer.
That said, manslaughter in this case is the next thing to an accident. When you have an accident with a gun, someone might die.
Sentence her to five years in confinement suspended provided she complete five years of probation.
No, it’s not based on that premise at all.
My view is based on the low absolute risk of working as a LEO, and the current 1000:48 ratio. By no means all of the 1000 were criminals, they were not all justified shootings, and even where they were legally justified shootings of criminals they might have been resolved by deescalation with no harm to anyone.
To the extent that it’s a trade-off, I think a change to less violent tactics would save far more people killed by the police than the concomitant increased risk to the police. If (say) 500 of those lives (again, not all criminals) could be saved at the cost of 50 police lives, that would be desirable. And working as a LEO would still be no more dangerous than working as a delivery driver.
Is the life of a police officer worth 20 times as much as the life of a suspected criminal?