Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ButThreeLeftsDo

I think ‘negligent’ is probably a better description of what happened. But, I’m not sure if it’s a better description from a purely legal point of view. And/BUT, IANAL so maybe that’s not true.

In most jurisdictions, to be guilty of negligent homicide, you have to be doing something that is plainly reckless, perhaps even unlawful. IE, you’re speeding and you hit a pedestrian, that’s generally negligent vehicular homicide. But, if you’re not speeding and instead you hit the accelerator when you meant to hit the gas, that doesn’t necessarily meet the standard.

Clearly, she didn’t intend to kill him. Clearly, he was resisting arrest and his arrest was warranted and deploying the taser was almost certainly warranted..

Is incompetence a crime? I really don’t know.


4 posted on 04/13/2021 4:09:24 PM PDT by ScubaDiver (Reddit refugee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ScubaDiver

It depends on State law. Many States set recklessness as the threshold
Mens Rea for criminal conduct. A very similar incident happened to a female officer in Kansas a couple of years ago and the judge dismissed the charges as the preliminary hearing because while she was negligent, she wasn’t reckless and recklessness was the threshold for criminality.


11 posted on 04/13/2021 4:38:43 PM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: ScubaDiver

it clearly was not accidental. She pulled a weapon and shot him. She may have meant to use a nonlethal weapon but she meant to fire something at him. I have a problem with the use of accidental in that context. Mistaken or negligent works better imho


13 posted on 04/13/2021 4:46:54 PM PDT by Mom MD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson