-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Here we go again...
- Thread starter Biggredchev
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Who's arguing otherwise?
Many people that I have seen.
From a civil perspective, this case is a done deal. The only issue is how much.
From a criminal perspective, in Minnesota, this looks like 3d degree murder (no intent to kill). I don't see a greater charge.
That this guy may have been a felonious mope only gives context to why there was an interaction. Because it is, essentially, admitted that lethal force was not needed, there is no real self-defense claim that can defeat the 3rd degree charge.
Doesn't that entirely depend on the state? Pretty sure that in some states a taser is regarded as lethal.
There is "lethal" as defined for use in statutes, and "lethal" as it is used in a self-defense claim. Look at it this way- when a person says "I didn't mean to shoot him" (or some such) whether or not a Tazer is involved, it makes it pretty hard to go back later and say: "I killed him in self-defense" because you have already admitted that you don't believe you needed to kill him.
Fair enough, my only point was, if it was one of the states that classified a taser as lethal force, then I believe the case might be moot. Lethal force is lethal force.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
My take on it is that the only way she skates is if she is on a plane to a non-extradition country right now
Last edited:
No, not saying there is any justification for the officer’s negligence at all. If any one of the sequence of steps did not happen then the final outcome would not have happened. There were several opportunities to change the trajectory of this event. He had a warrant for a violent crime and chose to try to evade the police on top of that. On him. Officer not in control of her situation. On her.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Big surprise. Second degree manslaughter, as reported by BBC.
Part of the pre-riot advertising campaign.
That’s why took the “w” questions out as far as the information given. If only he’d have remembered to update his license tags, he’d still be alive. Therefore, Root cause: forgetfulness.
Asking the right questions to arrive at a root cause does not require questions that start with the 5 w’s. It just requires asking the right questions.
Here’s one that was missed. Would attempting to get back in the car have resulted in his death from the officer’s glock if she’d have grabbed the correct tool?
And then there’s the whole thing about root cause altogether. It does not imply that there are no other causes in which responsibility obvious. I think that officer is in a lot of trouble.
The abject dishonesty and race-baiting of anyone (like Crump) who asserts that Potter shot Wright intentionally is nothing short of spectacular. Do they think she forgot about the body cameras or didn’t care? Do they think the department would cover for her? Do they think she wanted to be jailed? Charged with a crime? Pay $100,000 beil? Not be able to return to her home? Lose her career? All of this not to mention the emotional anguish and distress she must be going through right now… What do they think? I know what I think. It’s tragic. It shouldn’t have happened. It was clearly an accident. So I think they’re intellectually dishonest ****-stirrers with an agenda.
Wow, I added to my post while you were quoting me and we ended up using some of the same language.
