Daunte Wright Kim Potter trial guilty manslaughter
Former Brooklyn Center police Officer Kim Potter, center, listens as Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu pools the jury after the verdict on Thursday, Dec. 23, 2021 at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis, Minn. Jurors on Thursday convicted Potter of two manslaughter charges in the killing of Daunte Wright, a motorist she shot during a traffic stop after she said she confused her gun for her Taser.(Court TV via AP, Pool)
Previous Post
Next Post

By Amy Forliti and Scott Bauer, AP

Jurors on Thursday convicted a suburban Minneapolis police officer of two manslaughter charges in the killing of Daunte Wright, a motorist she shot during a traffic stop after she said she confused her gun for her Taser.

The jury deliberated for about four days before finding former Brooklyn Center officer Kim Potter guilty of first-degree and second-degree manslaughter. Potter, 49, faces about seven years in prison on the most serious count under the state’s sentencing guidelines, but prosecutors said they would seek a longer term.

Judge Regina Chu ordered Potter taken into custody and held without bail and scheduled her to be sentenced on Feb. 18.

Potter, who testified that she “didn’t want to hurt anybody,” looked down without showing any visible reaction when the verdicts were read. As Chu thanked the jury, Potter made the sign of the cross.

Potter’s attorneys argued against her being held with no bail, saying she was not going to commit another crime or go anywhere.

“Her remorse and regret for the incident is overwhelming,” Potter attorney Paul Engh argued. “She’s not a danger to the public whatsoever.”

Chu rejected their arguments.

“I cannot treat this case any differently than any other case,” she said.

Potter shot and killed the 20-year-old Wright during an April 11 traffic stop in Brooklyn Center as she and other officers were trying to arrest him on an outstanding warrant for a weapons possession charge. The shooting happened at a time of high tension in the area, with former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin standing trial just miles away for the killing of George Floyd. Potter resigned two days later.

This still image taken from from police body cam video shows Daunte Wright during a traffic stop on April 11, 2021. Assistant Attorney General Erin Eldridge delivered closing arguments, Monday, Dec. 20, 2021, at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis, in the trial of former Brooklyn Center police Officer Kim Potter for Wright’s death during the encounter. (Court TV via AP, Pool)

Jurors saw video of the shooting that was captured by police body cameras and dashcams. It showed Potter and an officer she was training, Anthony Luckey, pull over Wright for having expired license plate tags and an air freshener hanging from his rear-view mirror. During the stop, Luckey discovered there was a warrant for Wright’s arrest for not appearing in court on the weapons possession charge, and he, Potter and another officer went to take Wright into custody.

Wright obeyed Luckey’s order to get out of his car, but as Luckey tried to handcuff him, Wright pulled away and got back in. As Luckey held onto Wright, Potter said “I’ll tase ya.” The video then shows Potter holding her gun in her right hand and pointing it at Wright. Again, Potter said, “I’ll tase you,” and then two seconds later: “Taser, Taser, Taser.” One second later, she fired a single bullet into Wright’s chest.

“(Expletive)! I just shot him. … I grabbed the wrong (expletive) gun,” Potter said. A minute later, she said: “I’m going to go to prison.”

In sometimes tearful testimony, Potter told jurors that she was “sorry it happened.” She said the traffic stop “just went chaotic” and that she shouted her warning about the Taser after she saw a look of fear on the face of Sgt. Mychal Johnson, who was leaning into the passenger-side door of Wright’s car. She also told jurors that she doesn’t remember what she said or everything that happened after the shooting, as much of her memory of those moments “is missing.”

Potter’s lawyers argued that she made a mistake by drawing her gun instead of her Taser. But they also said she would have been justified in using deadly force if she had meant to because Johnson was at risk of being dragged.

Prosecutors sought to raise doubts about Potter’s testimony that she decided to act after seeing fear on Johnson’s face. Prosecutor Erin Eldridge, in cross-examination, pointed out that in an interview with a defense expert Potter said she didn’t know why she decided to draw her Taser. During her closing argument, Eldridge also replayed Potter’s body-camera video that she said never gave a clear view of Johnson’s face during the key moments.

Eldridge also downplayed testimony from some other officers who described Potter as a good person or said they saw nothing wrong in her actions: “The defendant has found herself in trouble and her police family has her back.”

Prosecutors also got Potter to agree that she didn’t plan to use deadly force. They said Potter, an experienced officer with extensive training in Taser use and use of deadly force, acted recklessly and betrayed the badge.

For first-degree manslaughter, prosecutors had to prove that Potter caused Wright’s death while committing a misdemeanor — in this case, the “reckless handling or use of a firearm so as to endanger the safety of another with such force and violence that death or great bodily harm to any person was reasonably foreseeable.”

The second-degree manslaughter charge required prosecutors to prove that Potter caused Wright’s death “by her culpable negligence,” meaning she “caused an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm” to Wright while using or possessing a firearm.

Under Minnesota law, defendants are sentenced only on the most serious conviction if multiple counts involve the same act and the same victim. Prosecutors had said they would seek to prove aggravating factors that merit what’s called an upward departure from sentencing guidelines. In Potter’s case, they alleged that her actions were a danger to others, including her fellow officers, to Wright’s passenger and to the couple whose car was struck by Wright’s after the shooting. They also alleged she abused her authority as a police officer.

The maximum for 1st-degree manslaughter is 15 years.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. This seems fairly reasonable. The second degree manslaughter may have been more appropriate than the first degree, but it is difficult to say. Her negligence was serious, criminal, and caused a death. That is manslaughter, and merits prison time. I’d say five years would be about right. Just my opinion.

    • …and heaven knows that the opinions of ‘Art out West’ are relevant to a LOT of people other than ‘Art out West’.

      • If I were on the jury she would have walked. Now if I am ever on a jury and a stressed art out west mistakes the gas pedal for the brake pedal while a coworker is engaged with a criminal and art out west runs over said criminal then I will not relent until art out west is imprisoned for life.

        • Little Debbie Downer,
          Criminal negligence is a real deal, and a man is dead because of it. Looks like justice was done in this situation.

        • Well, glad you’re not on her jury. That clearly wasn’t intentional, but you mess up so bad you kill someone when you didn’t mean to, that’s manslaughter. That’s what happened to the letter. Cops aren’t exempt.

        • Art Out West, simple negligence does not make it criminal. If someone dies in an auto accident, is the driver of the other vehicle criminally liable?

        • Montana Actual,
          Excuse me, but an officer with an impeccable record up to the day of the incident is a “thug”? Sounds like it’s a good think you were not on the jury. You would have been knitting a sweater, saying, “guillotine, guillotine.

        • If I were on the jury, I probably would have voted guilty on the lesser charge, probably not the greater charge.

          If any of us were to accidentally shoot and kill a human being in similar circumstances, we would be facing criminal charges. And, without some super extenuating circumstances, I would vote “guilty” for each.

          So called ‘qualified immunity’ needs to die a painful death because it has been abused so badly over the years. Without qualified immunity, the woman is plainly guilty of something.

    • “…opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one, and they are all full of shit.” – P.J. Klipangle

      • Montana Actual, Actually you Leftists are the real racists and thugs along with your buddies in ANTIFA and the BLM. I’ve already proved you wrong.
        I doubt that Montana would even allow such a racist in the state.

    • I absolutely agree with you!
      Although she didn’t mean to kill him, she did and that is the dictionary definition of manslaughter. 5yrs with possibility of parole after 3yrs sounds just to me as well.

      This is an all out tragedy all the way around, for all parties involved. We’re a nation of law & order that demands accountability and consequences for actions from all.

  2. “Chauvin standing trial just miles away for the killing of George Floyd”

    They can’t help themselves, can they? This trial has nothing to do with race. As a matter of fact, neither did Chauvin’s. They made it about race. The problem has nothing to do with skin color, the problem is the media and the politicians that push this BS.

    • They didn’t mention race at all. That is your world-view tinting what you take away from this article.
      The correlation with the Chauvin case isn’t race, it’s police accountability. There’s a very long history of police literally getting away with murder with a slap on the wrist being the harshest of punishments doled out by their Superiors for the most heinous of actions.
      “Justice for all”, means just that. It means that nobody is above the law and everyone has the right to a fair trial, irregardless of what past transgressions the have made or what walk if life they hail from.
      I’m sure you think that Floyd was a scumbag and deserved what he got, which is a skewed perspective at best. While I do not dispute that he was not a good person, he was an American and therefore deserved his day in court, he had a right to defend his actions, go to prison if found guilty and the right to possibly change himself and his life while incarcerated.
      Don’t say that you love and follow Jesus Christ if you do not love all of His/God’s children (we are all BROTHERS & SISTERS under GOD) and believe in redemption & salvation for all……

      • Cardboard Killer How about “justice for all” of those ANTIFA & BLM thugs that burned, looted and rioted all 2020’s summer?

  3. I understand that Potter’s bail was revoked and that she was placed immediately in custody. I read that to mean that the judge is going to throw the book at her.

    What a mess.

    • @ Ralph
      Not at all. It’s just that every other defendant when convicted of a serious crime was remanded into custody by that judge and she wasn’t going to treat poor little X-cop Kim any different and she said as much.

      • no judge wants to be the one that gave a cop a pass on high bail to have them go home and cheat the hangman or run to another country.

  4. The problem was her compassion. She’ll sit in prison knowing her desire to NOT kill is what put her there.

    “I was being dragged and feared for my life.”
    Less lethal bullshit causes more trouble like an individual firing a warning shot. Just shoot to kill if you fear harm or death.

  5. I have to agree with the verdict. I believe it was a mistake, but a mistake indicating a lack of the minimum care and caution that we need to expect from anyone carrying a firearm. If we’re going to excuse police for mixing up a taser and a Glock, then we can’t afford to let them carry both. Still, I hope the sentence will be compassionate. She doesn’t deserve the maximum, or even close.

    • Sorry I don’t get the prison time. I get the negligence. She should have to pay the family a steady amount

      • The LAST thing a cop wants to do is going to prison. Generally when they fu– up, they just move on quietly to some other dept. I couldn’t agree more with prison time. If you’re a cop, you should know the difference between your firearm and a taser. Cops are trained to act and think quickly in high stress situations and not do galactic blunders like Potter did. She was an experienced officer after all!

        If there is no accountability, there’s little deterrent for other cops to use their head and not conduct themselves like they won’t get prosecuted and imprisoned.

        A person is many more times likely to be killed by a cop than the other way around.

  6. You think criminals are running rampant now, just wait. My advice, learn a trade and find five acres in a Red State at least twenty miles from a major city. It’s gonna get bad.

    • That is really good advice, but I’d suggest more like fifty plus miles from a large city (even in a red state).
      Learn a trade👍
      Five acres 👍
      Red state 👍
      Away from cities 👍

      I need to get my five acres

      • The NYT is flat out evil and so was that kid! It’s amazing how people haven’t caught on to the games played by the media. It’s too bad we didn’t have competent police to bring that kid in and a working justice system to throw the book at him.

    • I mean, same can be said for a lot of them…

      Doesn’t change the fact the real hoodrats gang is justifiably legal and carry badges.

      • Montana Actual Seems you have a real chip on your shoulder where police are concerned. Got caught DWI?

        • No chip. Just a deep understanding of why police exist. ACAB motherfucker. How’s that boot leather taste?

      • Ol’ walter the bitter ex-cop using dwi on you?…watch-out…next he will hurl insults at you and then threaten to send cops in your jurisdiction to your house… all while pretending how tough he is and not coming by himself…I have not seen him on TTAG until recently.

        • WTF?! What’s the matter, boy? Things getting a bit to hot for you now that I have exposed you for what you are? A drunk? I’ve been on TTAG for quite sometime. Seems you don’t pay much attention. Probably due to your alcoholism.
          ROFALMO. No “bitter ex-cop”; retired. Nice try, little fella.

  7. This is not the first such case. Dershowitz has reviewed about half a dozen. None of those officers have been convicted. Either they should have, or this woman was singled out.
    My suggestion; every white cop in the country should quit. My kids are half black and half white. I would rather they change sex than become police officers.
    The officers that know her (if they think she is competent, I have no way of knowing) should resign en masse. Every time they encounter someone who is not compliant they roll the dice. Let the good people who support this nonsense police themselves
    And then hold them to the same standards.

  8. Give her a job in sanitation. She has already proven herself capable of taking out the trash.

  9. She could have shot and killed him and been 100% justified. This political prosecution might not have occurred had she not stated that she intended to use the Taser and made an error, Tasers are Deadly Force, although less so than a firearm, they can and do kill.

    Her conviction is proof that the jury pool is so ant-cop, that a fair trial is impossible. The judge had a duty in this case to dismiss this case with prejudice, as a matter of law, as the facts show that she did nothing wrong.

    Every single police officer in Minneapolis seriously needs to quit and join a department in a non-woke state. F The people in that city. Let’s see how they get along without the police, as that is apparently the dream of many.

    Public service is a two way street and without the support of the populace, policing doesn’t work.

    Hopefully they can appeal her conviction and get it overturned.

    Also, the Judge is a complete asshole. This woman is not a danger to the community and she should have been released pending sentencing, at least to spend time with her family at Christmas. What a cruel sadistic pig to throw her in jail now. Makes be sick.

    • Cops support for the Leftist deep state has now come back to bite them in the azz.
      10 years ago the jury would have acquitted or at least had a handful of jurors that would give cops the benefit of the doubt and would have stood their ground and hung the jury.
      But the cops have burned their bridges to the point that the average conservative ain’t going to go to the wall for cops.

      So hey, the cops went to bed with the Left so now they have to suffer the consequences.
      They “chose poorly”.

    • Very good point, Mauser. That’s exactly what happened in other cases where a potential perp tried to flee in a car and the cop used the tried and true ‘get out of jail free’ card for cops. He or she ‘feared for their own or other’s lives and fired. Like the cop in Wisconsin who shot the guy in the back fleeing while trying to get away in his car with the justification, he feared the guy was going for a weapon, even though there was none in his hand, and he wasn’t attacking the cop, but running away from him. This is the one that started the Kenosha Kid jump off, I believe.

      There’s a double standard for a cop. Technically you can’t shoot someone down who is NOT assaulting you but is actually running away from you. How can you be in fear for your life in that situation? There’s no imminent dangerous ‘action’ against you The average Joe Shmucko CC guy wouldn’t get away with that, even if he didn’t get criminally charged, the subsequent civil lawsuit would break his balls for eternity. (unless it was a terrorist active shooter he took out with a backshot).

      But a cop has some ‘presumptive discretion’ in these situations supposedly because of the nature of the job. They used to get away with a lot of ‘summary executions’ for the ‘fear’ of ‘great bodily harm’ by being run over after a traffic stop or stopping obvious deadly recklessness while fleeing from police , or ‘resisting arrest’. or etc.

      So, yes, indeedee, Sweetie, the combination of her own absence of ‘presence of mind’ to shut her stupid mouth immediately after the shot, along with the dearth of a determined defense attorney’s ability to blow away ‘intent’ factor in the jury’s mind and to elevate her to more of a ‘victim’ than the ‘subject’ was, and the current political climate of anti-cop mob mind-sets sealed her fate.

      As far as why she supposedly made the mistake is more common than anybody might believe in these situations. And it could happen to any cop. Even more so with very experienced cops. I’ve seen it in military combat and in police work. Your mind gets twisted around in a time distortion and either gets ahead of your physical muscle memory or conditioning training, or conversely. She subconsciously really did ‘want’ to pull out her pistol. In most high adrenalin potentially dangerous scenarios this is what a cop is SUPPOSED TO DO. It is what they usually do. The disconnect came as to whether or not to pull the trigger which would be based on her perception of the dynamics and ‘imminent’ potential danger.

      But someone’s perception and interpretation of ‘imminent danger’ is much more ‘subjective’ than anyone who rarely gets into this type of situation understands. I know how this is going to sound, but it’s the reality. A female cop’s perception might be a little more ‘adrenalized’ with a more ‘fragile’ emotional content, than say a 6 foot 200 pound spring steel former Marine Combat Vet cop who does MMA for a recreational hobby and competes in pistol competitions regularly and virtually never misses. He might not even pull his gun because he has an immediate assessment derived from different personal experiences and abilities derived from his skill sets. Because he knows without a doubt that he could smack this guy down instantly with his bare hands faster than a blink of the eye so there’s not even an immediate ‘need’ to risk an escalation to any gunplay?

      While the older portly female cop thinks that she can’t physically fight with this pumped-up wildman, because she’ll surely get her ass kicked! she’ll opt for a weapon just to be on the ‘safe’ side. which is perfectly allowable in the professional discretionary authority of cop in a potentially violent confrontation. In the past, street cops had more options based on threat levels. The baton, a black-jack or sap. Sap gloves, were pretty useful because physical contact was commonly expected in most high speed police street work. But now it’s either ‘TASER TASER!” or a rapid-fire mag dump on center mass. This adds to the problem. You can’t use deadly firearm force for every violent situation. Modern police training leaves a lot to be desired.

      But The thought then entered her mind at the onset that she could possibly deploy her Taser instead but since the situation escalated pretty quickly her subconscious autopilot took over and she didn’t holster her pistol and draw her Taser but instead fired her pistol.
      Then in the shock of the aftermath, she realized in second thoughts ‘OUT LOUD’ in front of witnesses, that maybe she should have used the Taser.

      One might assume that experienced officers don’t make mistakes like that. They’re supposed to be ‘highly’ focused with nerves of steel and must always make the split-second decisions and critical choices in the perfect application

      Some are like that. Most are Not. Remember that cops are unfairly held to a so-called higher standard? But they come from the regular ‘standard’ like the rest of us. Same gene pool, same human issues. So why do they have to be held to a ‘higher standard’? Last time I checked there were no fucking classes at the Academy in ‘Higher Standards’? And everyone has a ‘bad day’ sooner or later. Maybe she had other problems bothering her that day, and she just wasn’t as sharp at the moment. It happens. Then the only question afterward is how good were you at ‘mitigating’ the ‘badness’ of it when it’s all over. Obviously she wasn’t. When they say, ‘Never talk to the police’, that goes for cops, too!

      Like Mauser said. Opening her mouth afterward was just a knee jerk from her own second thoughts but that amounted to an admission that you were Wrong in what you did. Bad way to get yourself out of this kind of jam. Giving a jury such an ‘admission’ can only hurt your case.

      Her life is already over as she ever knew it or will ever know it in the future. Hope the judge is merciful in this ugly fucking merciless world.

    • I understand that many LEOs will not carry “less then lethal” defense for just this reason. If she had planned to use the firearm because she had thought her life was in danger, the jury could have then second guessed her. Now maybe, her department would not allow her the option, but this is as stupid as someone saying, “just shoot the gun out of their hands”, like the Lone Ranger used to do. That works in movies, a lesson Baldwin never had.

  10. “Prosecutors had said they would seek to prove aggravating factors that merit what’s called an upward departure from sentencing guidelines.”

    Enough is enough.

    She is truly remorseful, that’s more than others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She admits it, that’s more than others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She made errors and mistakes, unlike others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She didn’t act with malice intending to kill, unlike others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She didn’t try to get away with it by trying to deny her actions, unlike others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She is a good person, unlike others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    She knows what she did was wrong, unlike others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it.

    Yet, others who commit their violent crimes intentionally and then try to get away with it are running around out on bail or early release and continue to commit their violent crimes intentionally. And prosecutors want to not only prosecute Potter but further persecute her too?

    Ok, I get the first-degree and second-degree manslaughter. But prosecutors got their pound of flesh and another trophy to hang on the wall, now that just want to dry hump the corpse for the fun of it. It would be different if there was some sort of intention to kill and/or depraved indifference here like real criminals, then I would say bring out the whole book and throw everything at them – but that’s not the case here, she made mistakes and there were errors and not intention of real criminals.

    4 – 7 years is enough.

    • You can be sure these prosecutors are tied to Soros.
      The Left has no mercy.
      Cops f’kd up royally when they went jack-booted-thug and alienated conservatives.

  11. what did every cop in America learn by today’s conviction

    NEVER SAY TASER TASER TASER! when you use one just in case you accidentally grabbed your REAL gun!

  12. She deserves 5 years for manslaughter imo. it’s ridiculous that tho that she was held without bail and that little black kid gangster that shot up his school was out on a cheap bail in less than 24 hours

    • I disagree. LA police shot a perp in a mall yesterday and a “stray” police bullet killed a 14 year old girl in an adjacent dressing room. These types of unintended deaths do occur and her reaction after the event (she was in shock) highlights her lack of intent to do harm. It was another show trial by Minnesota Marxist AG Ellison. But back to LA: do you think they will prosecute the officer who fired the round that hit the 14 year old? Because like Potter’s shot, it was not intended to do fatal damage to the innocent.
      And BTW, out of 15 such Handgun-Taser mixup episodes documented, only 3 convictions resulted, according to the Baltimore Sun.

  13. This is the problem with cops carrying Tasers and the only way to mitigate the problem is with many more hours training, with two sidearms one lethal and one less lethal and both of them actuated in the same way it will take way more than double the time devoted to training with just a pistol. When cops use to carry a weighted slap that was used an a very different manner and no one would pull the pistol when he intended to pull and use the slap. Less lethal is a fine idea but requires a very significant training component, otherwise this will continue to happen.

  14. When that a-hole repeat offender resisted arrest, got in the car with a cop hanging out of it and tried to drive off, she was more than justified in shooting him. She tried to use the lowest level of force but f’d up in the heat of the moment. What she did was stupid it wasn’t criminal – there was no criminal intent, it was an accident. She was poorly represented by her defense counsel.

    Once again, the repeat offender scumbag thug has been made into saint, but the world is better off without him.

  15. I never thought tweets were a good idea.

    If you can’t go hand to hand maybe you shouldn’t have a badge.

    • in a bordering affluent suburb of Chicago in the early 70’s one of the requirements for being hired was that you were over six foot and 200 pounds. The idea was that deadly force was the Last resort, not the first and only option like it is today. Citizens didn’t mind cops roughly physically dragging somebody away if he was resisting or acting wildly, but unnecessary bloodshed with just gunning them down didn’t go over well with the citizens there. It worked pretty efficiently at the time.

    • I tend to agree with your idea “if you can’t go hand to hand” you shouldn’t be a cop. Then again – how many cops are willing to get up close and personal? Very few, that’s why so many people get shot senselessly. And, it ain’t just black kids in the ‘hood. A few years back, a cop shot and killed a retired veteran . . . let me find that story for you.


  16. This verdict is a travesty! This was an accident pure and simple. The gross negligence belongs to the City of Brooklyn, MN for not providing adequate training.

    • Well the jury that was present for the trial and which heard all the evidence had a much different view of things didn’t they Walter E Beverly III (aka ‘traitor’)? Now run along, as you’re late for your daily massage session with James Campbell.

      • Nobody Asked You! The traitors are you and your Leftist Socialist masters. The law if very specific. There was no misdemeanor that she allegedly committed nor was she charged with one.
        Only can a Lefty make an accident into a major crime.

      • Nobody Asked You!,

        Son, it’s called a comments section. Actually, it is an open invitation for comments and opinions. Unless you’re Dan Zimmerman in disguise, I don’t think it’s your place to be going around deciding whose opinions are or aren’t welcome on this site.

    • To use your word, an “accident” is, definitionally, culpable negligence – the legal standard for conviction for 2d degree manslaughter – when the defendant states she did not intend to, but did, shoot and kill someone on video and in sworn testimony. And because the act giving rise to that charge is more than a misdemeanor, she’s also guilty of 1st degree manslaughter given, again her intent not to shoot, but to tase him. She may have a merger defense on appeal to the 1st degree charge, but the judge and jury disagreed. As would any litigator.

      At least that’s how it’s been in my 20+ years as one.

      • John A Smith, Culpable negligence does not make an accident a crime. Culpable negligence is a wide open phrase. Going through a stop sign could be culpable negligence. She made a mistake that should be subject to disciplinary action by her department. There was no “underlying misdemeanor” nor was she charged with any, which is require for conviction. Nice try, Lefty.

        • “She had been extensively trained on the use of tasers. She carried a taser in a different location on her person than her service weapon. The handles of her taser and her service weapon are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT. That’s THREE things she IGNORED in the moment – the location, the shape and her training. She shot the man, and DID NOT INTEND TO. And he died as a result of his wounds.

          That IS manslaughter. She did not feel the circumstances merited killing the man to “save other lives”. None of the other officers did either, or THEY would have acted in a more forceful manner.

          The law is the law. Cry about it if you want. Lobby to change it so cops can make mistakes and kill people and walk away scott free.“

        • The kid being a stupid criminal is irrelevant to her guilt in accidentally shooting him with the wrong weapon. She needs to be held accountable, and we need to figure why this happened. People should be trained better or not put in positions they aren’t competent in.

          With that being said, I see no reason to throw the book at this lady and give her the maximum sentence. The wanted criminal created the chaotic situation that forced the police to react, and Potter has shown extreme remorse from the very beginning. She isn’t a threat to society as long as she isn’t a cop.

        • Miner49er No it is not “Manslaughter.” She was NOT trained “extensively on the Taser”. When you go though Taser training is is no more than a one hour class. The fact is that she THOUGHT she had her Taser in her hand. Why would she say, “Taser, Taser, Taser” if she knew she had her gun out.
          This is a very simple case of confusion due to stress of the situation. The perpetrator was attempting to escape. If the little POS had not tried to escape he would not have been in this situation at all, now would he?
          Her partner was in danger as the perpetrator was attempting to leave in the car, while the officer was attempting to get the perp back out of the car. I agree that the trainee should have CLOSED the door once he had the perp out of the car which would have precluded him (the perp) from getting back in.
          As far as I am concerned the officer is CIVILLY liable but there should be NO criminal liability.

        • Dude, that the “kid” was being stupid is VERY pertinent.
          First AGAIN, she thought she had her Taser in hand. That she drew her gun is due to inadequate TRAINING and extreme stress.
          I find fault with the Department on counts:
          1) Inadequate training of the officers in general with regard to the use of force.
          2) This female officer shouldn’t have been a Field Training Officer (FTO) to begin with. While she had the prerequisite time on the job, she clearly lacked good judgement and EXPERIENCE in Use Of Force Situations in spite of her complaint free record.
          3) FTO’s when they observe a trainee take inappropriate action of fail to take proper steps to insure safety of the subject and his/her brother officers, should immediately step in and take over the situation. Most departments do NOT do this until AFTER the situation if resolved when the FTO “counsels” the trainee.

    • Regular people are routinely charged with criminal offenses when they make mistakes that result in the death of another human. The travesty here, is your lack of understanding of the law.

      • Paul, Every mistake is not a criminal act. Oh, trust me, I understand the law very well. I am a retired law enforcement office with 35 yrs of service. Maybe you should get an education about law and law enforcement.

        • If I make a mistake(or not even a mistake) in driving and the wrong cop writes me up for my driving, I could get a vindictive DA that wants me prosecuted for driving after taking the prescription meds I have been taking for 10 years. They can argue in court(even against my doctor) that the pills I take could have affected me. I could be looking at 5 years or so for manslaughter.
          I do not think it is fair to have to carry weapons that have similar features on your belt(1 that is lethal and 1 that is not lethal) I can see the possibilities for error.
          I doubt that this LEO was hired because she was a woman, she did work hard for it, but they had to change the parameters in order to hire her. I would bet that the first 10 years after she was hired, she got preferential duty(because not sergeant wanted to be to first with a woman cop that got hurt on his watch). I do not know, but I remember when women came into the construction/maintenance unions in the 70s, they were always given jobs where they were not in harm’s way(cleaning the eating area, sweeping the tool room, staying away from rigging and hot welding/cutting). The foreman was covering his workers.
          I am not blaming these female hires, but their training was different. They were spared the crudest of the criminals, in many areas, there were no women guards in the men’s jails.
          Her showing how tough a woman can be to a recruit could be a disaster waiting to happen.

        • Walt,

          Your loyalty to tyrants and racist opinions are the reason the left has an argument.

          You’ve been called out by multiple people and even miner49er is right here. Wow.

        • tr66Paul, Sorry bud, but if you are taking a drug which impairs your ability to drive even if it is prescribed, you should NOT be driving. That “wrong cop?” Nope, the right cop. And a “vindictive DA?” Nope, you broke the law. I don’t give a rat’s behind how many years you have been taking that drug. If your ability to drive is impaired in any way, you have broken the law and are too dangerous to be behind the wheel.
          But this has NOTHING to do with the case in hand.

        • Montana Actual You are a real live racist. My loyalty is to the law. Something you Leftists think you have the option to break if you don’t like the law.
          Go back to your buddies in ANTIFA and BLM. They are your brethren.

Comments are closed.