No it’s a note about a kid who he shot..had not been tried for at a filling station a few months prior and the gal he choked. The kid he shot in the head..cannot speak or move his limbs. His mom wa# commenting on Daunte… @nd the other comments were from the chick he choked and held a gun on. Lovely guy. Looks like they took that down..I would bet Crump..the families civil attorney threatened because he had not been convicted of those crimes, though witnesses said he did. The kid to the right in the pic I posted up a couple , is the poor kid he allegedly shot in the head this summer.Link doesn't work. Is this what you're trying to post?
Daunte Wright estate faces third lawsuit from woman he allegedly choked at gunpoint in attempted robbery
The estate of Daunte Wright, a 20-year-old Black man fatally shot by a White police officer during an April traffic stop, was slapped with a third lawsuit on Monday – this time on behalf of a woman whom Wright allegedly choked and attempted to rob at gunpoint back in December 2019.www.foxnews.com
In what way was she actually guilty of this - other than jurors wanted to be home for Christmas?
Can’t keep people incarcerated forever. We need to think about the effectiveness of our criminal justice system, especially when you realize that most people are jailed for nonviolent crimes. As for Potter, I realize she didn’t mean to do it and that’s why she got convicted of manslaughter rather than murder. In my mind, it’s clear she acted in a criminally negligent manner. Note that it wasn’t intentional.
Accidents happen. Not all of them require prison terms or law suits.
This one probably does require a lawsuit, but not a prison term. I really hate what the jury did here. I didn't watch the trial, so maybe there is something that I missed, but ultimately, I have a hard time understanding how her attorney wasn't tearing the prosecution to shreds on a charge that sure seems like a massive overreach.
If you fight with police resisting arrest because you don’t want to go to jail, and you clearly accidentally get yourself killed in the process, there absolutely should not be a lawsuit that holds water.
The force used was excessive. It wasn't intentional, but it was excessive. In a civil suit, I believe they allocate pct responsibility for the bad outcome. So a jury would have to decide what portion was on him for resisting and what portion was on her for grabbing the incorrect weapon. Totally appropriate in this situation for the dept/city insurance to take a hit. Then the department and their insurance can decide what training they need to add/change to mitigate the risk of similar situations in the future.
Tasing is what he required by his behavior. That is what she on video stated she was doing. It was justified to do it. She clearly was mortified when she shot him 1x. She immediately initiated life saving measures.
I mean I think she got a rough deal, but he got shot with a gun instead of a taser because of her negligence/lack of training not because of his actions. She fvcked up in a way she shouldn’t be able to. I haven’t followed it closely but I believe that she was not carrying her weapons properly (both on the same side). Hopefully those able to make the required changes do so that no officer grabs a gun thinking it’s a taser ever again. I’m not educated enough to know what could/should be done but something needs to.
It’s what appeals are for. Not arguing with you, just pointing out there is a resolution that is available if that is the situation.
In the end, nobody in their right mind should want to become a police officer or continue to be one.
And as I said, in the end few if any will want to accept that responsibility. That is a major problem, and BBC a much bigger problem than combative criminals accidentally getting killed because they were fighting the police.
Have you ever had your mind on a problem from work while walking to your car in a parking lot and walk to another car that is the same or similar to yours and in the same vicinity? That's what she was doing. Her immediate problem was the struggle in front of her. That was taking her main attention and she didnt' notice when she drew the wrong weapon.
This is a poor analogy for several reasons. Also, I wasn’t commenting on what she does or doesn’t deserve. Just the fact she was negligent. It’s not her fault that she was put in that position. Her response to that situation is her responsibility.
There is criminally negligent and civilly negligent. She is clearly the latter. Some think she is the former. I just think that is too much to put on an officer who was attempting to act in good faith. Seriously, why would anyone EVER take that job if an honest mistake lands you in jail?
Civilly negligent? So put a dollar sign on the dead criminal’s life and let an insurance company pay for it? You’re good with that?
