Posted on 12/20/2021 10:50:27 AM PST by L.A.Justice
Former Brooklyn Center police officer Kimberly Potter took the stand in her own defense on Friday, telling jurors her account of what happened on April 11.
Potter said, after Officer Anthony Luckey told Daunte Wright not to tense up, the stop "just went chaotic." Potter then said she saw fear in Sgt. Mychal Johnson's face like "nothing I've seen before" and then didn't realize she'd shot Wright until Wright yelled he'd been shot.
Potter cried as she discussed Wright's shooting and as the state later played segments of her body camera video. She also was asked if she would've pulled over Wright if she was alone and not with Luckey, and responded, "Most likely not there."
The state highlighted the extensive training she received over her career, the fact that she'd carried a Taser since 2005 and, except for a brief period when she first got the Taser, that she carried the Taser on her left side and gun on her right for over a decade. Assistant Attorney General Erin Eldridge also noted the de-escalation training Potter had, specifically since she worked as a crisis negotiator.
Potter cried frequently during cross-examination, at one point saying through tears, "I'm sorry it happened. I'm so sorry." As Eldridge said Potter knew deadly force was unreasonable and grilled her for not trying to provide aid or relay information to other officers, Potter replied, "I didn't want to hurt anybody."
The former officer also said she resigned from the department after shooting Wright because "There was so much bad things happening. I didn't want my coworkers and I didn't want anything bad to happen to the city."
Her testimony came after Laurence Miller — who has a doctoral degree in psychology and has specialties in forensic psychology, neuropsychology and police psychology — testified about action error and how someone can think they're doing one thing, like grabbing a Taser, when they actually do another, such as grab a gun, when under extreme stress. The state pushed back against his testimony by highlighting the extensive training officers receive to handle that stress and the measures taken — such as the differences between a Taser and gun and the sides they're carried on — to mitigate weapon confusion.
The defense rested its case just before 2 p.m. and, after Judge Regina Chu reminded jurors not to discuss or watch anything about the case, dismissed them for the weekend.
Court is scheduled to reconvene Monday at 9 a.m. when closing statements and final jury instructions will be presented before the jury begins deliberations.
Potter is charged with first- and second-degree manslaughter in Wright's death.
Click here to read more in-depth notes or watch Friday's proceedings.
There will probably be a verdict before Christmas...
I think the jury will find her guilty...
I think that she has to get some jail time...But, less than 5 years...I think the prosecution wants her to get more than 5 years...
I think more than 5 years in prison is too much in this case...
I do remember times when officers did not carry tasers and guns together on the duty belt...
Wow, due to the season, I saw Potter and my first thought was George Bailey
Do they have a fail safe procedure for police officers dealing with a perpetrator resisting arrest?
I’m not a fan of the police these days. But in this case I will note that what happened was clearly an accident.
I say that because when she thought she had her Taser she fired it once in the expectation that it would only go off one time.
Had she intentionally fired her pistol in the belief that it was a pistol she would have emptied it into Wright because that’s what cops are trained to do these days. She would have dumped ten rounds into Wright.
So it’s safe to assume her assertion of an accidental shooting is truthful.
Still, she shot someone who did not need to be shot. She needs to be held to the same standard as she would hold anyone else to in the same circumstance.
Imagine her arresting you for accidentally shooting a perp once.
Even if you’d already disarmed yourself she’d aim her loaded weapon at you and shout orders at you.
She’d force you to the ground.
She’d possibly hit you several times before handcuffing you.
She’d toss you in the back of a patrol car.
She’d embellish her report and maybe even make up a few things to charge you with (loitering, resisting arrest, assault on an officer, etc.)
And then she’d testify that her report was accurate.
So yeah, hold her to her own standards.
Armed UK police usually carry their tasers higher up on the chest. That seems like a good idea to me.
“Do they have a fail safe procedure for police officers dealing with a perpetrator resisting arrest?”
Cops have a few tricks they like to use to get people to tense up. A jab in the ribs, standing way too close to you, shining a flashlight in your eyes, etc.
Then you naturally tense up and they attack you under the guise that you’re ‘resisting arrest’ sometimes even before you’ve been told you’re under arrest.
Myself, I want ‘resisting arrest’ charges to be immediately vacated if they’re the only thing someone is charged with.
It is utterly illogical to say someone ‘resisted arrest’ when there was no valid reason for the arrest.
That to me constitutes a fail safe.
I was actually going to make a joke but then realized how tasteless that would be. Thanks!
Jesus: You thought the joke out.
Me: *defensively* So what if I did?
Is appropriate here.
I'm guessing that shooting them is not one of approved procedures.
I believe Potter will and should be found not guilty. Both of the charges require conscience of action. Both require intent that you are aware that what you are doing will cause death.
So if convicted she will be convicted on unintentional consequences. This would totally eliminate “accidents”. Doctors would be put in jail every day. All car accidents would be cause for imprisoning people.
Sometimes an accident is just an accident. Anyone one who watches the whole video of the stop knows this was an accident from Potter’s behavior. Anyone who actually watched the trial could walk away thinking this was anything other than an accident.
If you haven’t watched the actual trial, don’t bother responding to this post. Knowledge gleaned from any other source is useless.
Had Wright gotten his car in gear and taken off, accidentally running over Potter and killing her in the process, would less than 5 years be an appropriate sentence for him too?
Under the circumstances, she still had every right to use her glock
What I found surprising, was that in 27 years of mostly patrol duty, she never had a reason to draw her gun on a suspect before and in 18 years, never once fired her drawn taser at a suspect
But I can’t get over the fact, that despite the similarities of the grip and especially being on opposite side of her belt, the difference between the 2 weapons should have been obvious
“Both require intent that you are aware that what you are doing will cause death.”
Second Degree Manslaughter doesn’t.
I’ve watched almost every minute of it, minus the hours and hours and hours of redundant testimony from people who weren’t there
The prosecutor was boring the jury to death pretty much for a week
“But I can’t get over the fact, that despite the similarities of the grip and especially being on opposite side of her belt, the difference between the 2 weapons should have been obvious”
The taser also has a safety.
The prosecutor was so boring because he was trying to make a case where there is none.
Sounds like it’s even a far different type of safety than most people would imagine
Of course, it’s a glock, so that excuse goes out the window
I truly hope she gets a NG, but I suspect that it’ll be a hung jury, or conviction on a lesser charge
Tasers for cops always were ridiculous. It’s been made obvious over the last two years what the demoncrat rank-and-file would be up to if the Thin Blue Line weren’t there to protect us, and expecting the police to be that tolerant of someone resisting arrest is an ask to far. If a suspect won’t submit and the cop can’t change their mind with a nightstick, shoot ‘em and leave them for dead. And if the ACLU howls about it, that only confirms that you’ve made the right decision.
This is only from memory of the jury instruction, but I think 2nd degree in this case requires conscience disregard of risk. Nothing Kim Potter did in the 8 or 9 seconds shows anything but thinking she had a taser.
Felony murder, so yeah.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.