UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
News and current affairs => A look at the news stories currently making the headlines. => Topic started by: Wonderfulspam on December 08, 2021, 08:18:25 PM
-
Daunte Wright: Manslaughter trial of ex-police officer begins
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/4B2E/production/_121964291_gettyimages-1236921515.jpg)
Body Cam Footage, Daunte Wright Shooting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTU9JFcB3mM
Opening statements have begun in the trial of a former Minnesota police officer who shot and killed a black motorist in April.
Kim Potter, 49, has said she mistakenly drew her gun instead of her Taser and killed 20-year-old Daunte Wright.
Ms Potter now faces first- and second-degree manslaughter charges for his death. Her defence team claims he was resisting arrest at the time.
Mr Wright's death sparked protests and clashes with police.
According to police officials, Mr Wright was pulled over for an expired tag on his car's licence plate when he was driving in Brooklyn Center, a Minneapolis suburb. His family, however, has suggested that he was being racially profiled when police stopped him.
Body cam footage released after the incident shows Mr Wright attempting to flee from police after they told him he faced arrest for an outstanding warrant. He had missed a court date for two earlier misdemeanour charges.
Ms Potter can be heard repeating the word "Taser" several times before firing a shot from her pistol.
In court on Monday, Assistant Minnesota Attorney General Erin Eldridge argued that Ms Potter - a 26-year veteran of the department - should have known the difference between a pistol and a Taser.
The loaded pistol weight more than twice that of the Taser, Ms Eldridge said, adding that prosecutors believe Ms Potter failed to live up to her sworn duty as a police officer.
"This case is about an officer who knew not to get it dead wrong," Ms Eldridge said. "But she failed to get it right."
The case is about Ms Potter's alleged "recklessness and negligence" she said.
"Evidence will show she flouted her training and flouted [department] policy," Ms Eldridge told the jury.
The former police officer's lawyer Paul Engh argued that Mr Wright's actions led to the incident, which the defence has argued was an accident, not a crime.
"All he had to do was surrender, but that wasn't his plan," Mr Engh said. "He continued on with the struggle".
Ms Potter sought to tase Mr Wright because she feared "he was going to kill her partner" the lawyer said.
"This is an accident. She is a human being," he said. "But she had to do what she had to do to prevent the death of a fellow officer."
Under Minnesota state law, a person can be found guilty of second-degree manslaughter if it is proven that they demonstrated negligence by creating unreasonable risk and "consciously take chances of causing death or great bodily harm" to another person.
Mr Wright's death on 11 April 2021 came amid already heightened tensions in the Minneapolis area during the trial of Derek Chauvin, the police officer later convicted of murdering George Floyd, an unarmed black man.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59572664
Opening statements & first witnesses give testimony today.
WATCH LIVE: Trial of Kim Potter, ex-officer who killed Daunte Wright — Day 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG0jnrraf8M
-
The media initially reported Mr Wright may have been stopped because of an illegal Magic Tree hanging from his rear view mirror (and possibly driving whilst black).
Daunte Wright shooting: How air fresheners became ‘pretext’ for police to stop Black drivers
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/air-freshener-police-stop-daunte-b1830334.html
The defence argument will be....(I believe)
Mr Wright was in fact stopped because officer Anthony Luckey (driving) had noticed Wright's vehicle indicating the wrong way in the wrong lane, they continued to drive behind him, then noticed his air freshener, so he then ran the license plate & found it was expired.
Mr Wright stopped his vehicle, wound down his window to speak to Officer, Luckey who then noticed the smell of cannabis.
Mr Wright was compliant, giving his name, when his name was checked he had no driving licence & a warrant out for his arrest. (Wanted for gross misdemeanour weapons violation)
When Mr Wright resisted arrest, re entering his vehicle, the police had no choice but to continue attempting to detain him.
Officer Johnson claims he had opened the passenger side door, leant into the vehicle & held onto the gear lever so Wright couldn't drive away.....(This is potentially a very crucial point in defence)
-
(cont)
Officer Johnson was now partly inside the vehicle. Had Wright continued to resist arrest & managed to drive away,
Officer Johnson would likely have been dragged by the vehicle.
So, now there is the situation that it could be argued defendant Officer Potter had little choice but to Taser him to protect Officer Johnson at that moment.
As it happens, in that situation (imminent threat of officer being dragged to death) lethal force, although unintentional, could potentially be justifiable!
-
Kim Potter in her 26 year career had never fired her gun or taser whilst on active duty.
(From the defence opening today)
Potter had never been disciplined in her 26-year career and only once recieved a verbal reprimand in 2007 for writing about squirrels while on an anti-robbery detail.
https://www.startribune.com/kim-potters-decision-to-testify-a-bold-but-effective-strategy-defense-attorneys-say/600123819/
-
Legal Analysis Of Day One.
Judge Declines to Define Law & Defense
IS JUDGE CHU, LIKE WALMSLEY, NOT WILLING TO MAKE TOUGH CALLS ON LAW?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26bvEeKC3f0
-
Daunte Wright robbery victim recounts 'evil' deed in exclusive first interview
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2021/12/1862/1048/Image-from-iOS-195-e1638942199413.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
At the time of his death on April 11, 2021, Daunte Wright had pending robbery charges for allegedly holding a woman at gunpoint and demanding $820 in cash she had to pay her rent.
MINNEAPOLIS – EXCLUSIVE: Struggling with loss, she moved out on her own at 18, got a job and did her best to make ends meet – until Daunte Wright showed up in her Minnesota living room with a handgun and tried to steal from her.
"Everybody feels so horrible for this man, but no one takes the time to see how horrible of a person he was," says a Minnesota woman who police allege Wright choked and robbed at gunpoint.
At 15, a concussion ended her dreams of a soccer career.
Still in her teens, her father died. And she found out she needed brain surgery. After that, she said, she fell in with an abusive boyfriend.
By 20, she kicked him out and let a friend sleep in the living room of her one-bedroom apartment to help pay rent.
And then a high school acquaintance brought Wright over, and he allegedly shoved a pistol in her face, choked her and threatened her life in a failed attempt to steal $820 she meant to give to her landlord one day in December 2019.
"What just blows my mind is that someone can literally strangle someone to where they can’t breathe, they can’t even gasp for air, because their airways are getting crushed," she told Fox News Digital in her first news interview. "No one should have to go through something like that and then have to accept death at 20 years old – looking into somebody’s eyes while they are holding a loaded gun to you."
The victim, now 22, asked Fox News Digital to withhold her name, although she was comfortable speaking about the incident on camera and said it was OK to show her face.
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2021/12/1862/1048/daunte22222.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Wright’s friend, Emajay Driver, had reached out to her over Snapchat. They decided to hang out at her apartment with her roommate.
Two young men arrived and the group drank alcohol and smoked marijuana. As the night went on, they got to talking, and she told the visitors about her abusive ex. They seemed supportive, she said.
"We had started talking, and [Wright] said that any man who puts his hands on a woman and abuses them deserves to rot in jail," she said.
That discussion left her feeling comfortable around the two – for a little while, she said.
When the women got tired and asked Wright and Driver to leave, they said they had to call a ride.
At one point, the duo said it came, according to their victim. But they went out and came back with food: "DoorDash or something like that," she said.
"And then I offered them, ‘OK, do you need ketchup?’ Because they're eating," she said. "So I was being nice, and I was going to get them water, doing what a host would do."
"Do you need a plate? And then I was like, ‘What about the ride?’" she recounted. "‘Oh, that person's not giving us a ride.’"
The snow was coming down hard, she said, so she let them stay over.
They kept their distance and behaved appropriately, she noted, making no advances overnight.
"I was like, ‘Wow, he's respectful,’" she said. "I'm thinking all these guys are actually nice."
That perception changed the next morning.
Her roommate handed her half of their rent money, she said. She put it with her part in her wallet – but for some reason, she said, she got the idea to hide it somewhere else.
"Something told me to put my money in my bra," she said. "I pulled it out of my wallet, the $820, and I put it in my bra. I didn't put it directly down. I put it to the side, under and tucked in, just because if I was trying to rob somebody, it would be a lot harder… what I thought would be the safest spot."
But Driver might've seen through the doorway, she said.
Her roommate left for work, and she got ready to go to her own job as Wright and Driver lingered in her living room, she said.
Wright said he had to go outside for a second, according to the criminal complaint. That’s when the victim believes he got a gun from an unnamed accomplice. He came back in and used her bathroom – and she said she heard the water running for an unusually long amount of time.
She said she went into the bathroom after Wright came out and noticed he’d emptied an entire bottle of hand sanitizer – and found a washcloth that reeked of rubbing alcohol. Possibly because of an urban legend that claims wiping down a gun with hand sanitizer will prevent fingerprints from being left on the surface.
He also told Driver they should "hit some stains," according to court documents, which authorities explained is slang for robbing people.
While in the bathroom, Wright took a short selfie video that shows himself playing with a black and silver handgun. Police later found it on his phone, according to an arrest warrant, and Fox News Digital obtained it exclusively earlier this year.
When the victim went to leave for work, Wright and Driver blocked her, according to court documents and her own recollection of the morning.
"DEFENDANT WRIGHT turned around and blocked the door, preventing VICTIM from leaving," the warrant reads.
Then he allegedly whipped out a black handgun with silver trim and pointed it at her head.
"Give me the f---ing money," he told her, according to the warrant. "I know you have it."
She froze.
"There’s something about him, where it’s like, you look into his eyes and it’s so evil," she said Monday.
When she refused to comply, she said he closed his fingers around her throat.
"That person was evil, and he didn’t care about me in that moment," she said. "It doesn’t make sense to me. Just go out and get a job."
Driver allegedly stood at the door for most of the ordeal, blocking the victim's escape.
At one point, after Wright allegedly tore up her shirt trying to fish out the cash, she said in a panic she believed the money had fallen out. She searched the floor and screamed, hoping to alert her neighbors.
When the two men left, she thought they'd taken the money. But she later found it, still tucked away in her bra.
Driver pleaded guilty to a first-degree aggravated robbery charge in connection with the case, court records show. It was his second felony conviction – but he wound up on probation.
A woman who answered the door Tuesday at an address listed for him said he no longer lived there.
Upon Wright’s death, his charges were dismissed.
"If he wouldn’t have gotten released on bail, he would still be alive," the robbery victim said.
On April 11, 2021, police in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, pulled Wright over for expired tags – initiating a traffic stop that would end his life and force one of the officers involved to resign from duty. That officer, Kim Potter, is now on trial for manslaughter at the Hennepin County Courthouse in downtown Minneapolis.
Wright had an outstanding warrant on a firearms charge at the time, after allegedly waving a pistol in public and running from responding officers, violating the terms of his release.
Video from Potter’s bodycam shows Wright surrounded by police officers. He broke free from their grip, jumped into the driver’s seat of his car and shifted it into gear.
Potter warned him she would use her stun gun to try and stop him.
"Taser! Taser!" Potter yells in the video, although she draws her handgun and fires a single shot, which struck Wright. She has maintained that she meant to use her Taser and shot him by accident. The car crashed up the road. Wright died and a passenger, girlfriend Alayna Albrecht-Payton, was injured.
Potter originally faced a second-degree manslaughter charge, but Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison later announced an additional first-degree manslaughter charge. A conviction on the more serious offense would carry a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison.
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2021/12/1862/1048/kim1111.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Potter’s defense attorneys have argued that the shooting was an accident.
"The State can’t prove any offense by playing the video, which shows an accident," her defense attorney, Paul Engh, wrote in a court filing ahead of the trial. "The prosecution can’t win on Officer Potter’s shouts of ‘Taser, Taser, Taser,’ words meaning she was going to use her TASER, so as to not harm Mr. Wright. Nor for reasons of her enormous after-the-fact regret of what could not have been a conscious act."
Wright's estate is facing three posthumous lawsuits alleging belligerent criminal behavior, one from the woman and two others from young men he was accused of victimizing in other ways. One got shot in the leg during a carjacking in which Wright allegedly played a role. The other was shot in the head and is now suffering from unresponsive wakefulness syndrome – unable to walk, talk or care for himself.
The whole saga left the victim traumatized, she said, constantly having to relive that morning whenever she saw Wright's face on TV in the break room at work or elsewhere.
She supports Black Lives Matter, she said, enough to have been marching across the bridge during the George Floyd protests last summer. But she also believes that Potter shot Wright on accident.
"It’s ironic that he died the way he could’ve killed me – having a gun pointed toward him, whether it was accidental or not accidental," Wright’s robbery victim said. "It just it made me start to think, how many more people could he have almost killed?"
The legal team for Wright’s family, led by civil rights attorney Ben Crump, described the litigation as "character assassination."
As to Wright’s character, his victim said he died before he could have made something of it.
"I hate that he didn't get that opportunity to be able to own up to his actions and deal with the consequences," she said. "To say he was a good person, I don't even know how you can say he was a good person."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/kim-potter-trial-daunte-wright-robbery-victim-interview
-
Officer Luckey, Prosecution witness, said under cross examination that he too would have attempted to taser Mr Wright had he the opportunity during the incident.
Mr Wright was not in control of the vehicle at the time & taser deployment in that situation would be permissible according to their training.
The defence is expected to call the former chief of police, he too is expected to testify that not only was the use of a taser justifiable, but also, that in the situation...(wanted suspect resisting arrest, putting another officers life at risk)......Lethal Force, not just a Taser, would also have been permissible.
-
Immediately after the shooting Officer Potter realises her mistake & is clearly shocked.
She lay on the ground screaming 'oh god' before later saying 'I'm going to prison'.
Officer Luckey attempts to console her, patting her on the back telling her 'no you're not'.
Officer Johnson tells her 'Kim, that guy was trying to take off with me in the car'.
Officer Johnson is expected to give evidence today & his body cam footage will finally be released.
This will either confirm or refute his claim he was leaning into the car when Officer Potter attempted to Taser Mr Wright.
Kim Potter's reaction after the shooting:
(6:28:00)
https://youtu.be/mG0jnrraf8M?t=23282
-
A use of force expert is due to give evidence in prosecution that in his opinion the use of a firearm was 'objectively unreasonable' & even the use of a taser 'unwise'.
The charges & descriptors are as follows:
First-degree manslaughter
“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.”
Second-degree manslaughter
Culpable negligence, “caused an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm”.
-
Trial Resumes at 3:00pm.
According to the prosecution, records show Officer Potter did not spark test her Taser for two days prior to the shooting, which was a procedural requirement.
This shows further negligent handling of weapons.
Wouldn't want to be Kim Potter, or on the jury either.
-
As ex-officer faces trial in Daunte Wright killing, many worry systemic change unlikely
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMMD64sTE8s
-
WATCH LIVE: Trial of Kim Potter, ex-officer who killed Daunte Wright — Day 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6wgtiJie_c
-
Daunte Wright's passenger in the vehicle was the first to give evidence this morning.
She claims Daunte was nervous & scared which was why he was reluctant to exit the vehicle.
She seems to have little to no recollection of what happened in the car, (or the state didn't want her to talk about it) making no reference to what happened in the vehicle with regard to Officer Johnson who was supposedly leaning right over her.
She does remember detail about the moments after Mr Wright had been shot & his vehicle crashed.
She was injured in the crash, cutting her lip & ear requiring stitches, a fractured jaw which had to be wired & concussion.
-
Under cross examination she testifies that on the morning of the incident both she & Mr Wright woke up around 10am.
They smoked a joint then around 11am Daunte said they had to go to his mothers house for an unspecified reason.
(According to his mother he asked for $50 for fuel & a car wash)
She does not remember if Daunte started the car or if the car was already running when he was shot.
The cross examination was short & the issue around Officer Johnson was never raised.
Under redirect, on her best recollection she claims the car was still running.
-
The 4th state witness, Patricia Lundgren (84), was driving a car with her husband Kenneth (86) that Daunte Wright's car collided with following the shooting.
At first Mrs Lundgren seems quite hard of hearing but is able to hear & answer subsequent questions well.
She saw Daunte's car headed toward her, his vehicle then cut in front of her & hit her car.
She had attempted to avoid him. (They appear to have collided almost head on, the front end was totally caved in)
The crash caused their airbags to inflate & she heard her husband moaning.
She was uninjured & able to get out but her husband sustained injuries.
Mr Lundgren was dazed, his head hurting.
An officer at the crash scene instructed them towards him.
(From the Officers body camera they have no visible injuries)
She said they had to wait quite a while before being seen by EMT's.
They spent several hours at the police station before being taken home.
They went to hospital the day after, Kenneth spent time in Hospice care, he has cognitive issues which Mrs Lundgren claims she hadn't noticed before the accident.
But she also agrees the accident did not cause his health issues but exacerbated them.
-
5th Witness.
Mrs Lundgren's daughter did not see the incident.
She gives brief testimony that her father's condition has been worsened by the crash.
Her father had a brain bleed some 20 years prior, he recovered but not totally, he had some cognitive function issues.
Prior to the accident he had still been able to drive, after the accident his reasoning & articulation worsened.
He's now unable to swallow pills & is incontinent.
(From her testimony & my knowledge of the illness he appears to be suffering from dementia)
-
6th Prosecution Witness.
Kerry Blanski, she lived in a house near the crash site.
She & her husband heard the crash, went out to investigate & witnessed an officer with his gun drawn so they stayed back.
She describes the crash scene, her home security also captured a partial view of the crash.
-
7th Prosecution Witness
Officer Alan Douglas.
He is a Field Training Officer (the same as Kim Potter)
He briefly mentions the medical qualifications FTO's have & regularly utilise.
He worked with Kim Potter who was President of Police Union.
...........
Turning to the events of April 11th at 2pm he was on a lunch break, he heard over the radio that officer Luckey had initiated a traffic stop.
Officer Douglas decided to head to the scene.
He did not make it to the traffic stop as from around 2 blocks away he saw a white vehicle heading toward him & witnessed the crash.
He called for back up & ambulances.
He testifies that he recieved no information that Daunte Wright had been shot by Kim Potter & recieved no radio call relaying any details from Officers Luckey, Potter or Johnson.
He therefore had to respond with his gun drawn & treat the scene as if a gun may be present.
When more officers responded they were eventually able to approach the car.
There was a delay of between 5 to 10 minutes before they could approach Mr Wright's car & attempt to administer aid.
Officer Douglas provided other Officers with his medical bag & was then ordered to secure the scene.
He later learns Mr Wright had been shot.
He briefly spoke to Mr Wright's parents who had arrived at the scene.
It was only from discussion from her that an Officer had shot Mr Wright.
He was ordered to return to the Police station & be isolated as a potential witness.
He was escorted by an Officer Irish to a meet a lawyer & make a statement as per department protocol.
-
There was confusion & a significant delay before Officers could attempt to help Mr Wright because Officers Luckey, Johnson & Potter did not report that Mr Wright had been shot by Potter.
This is going to be a problem for Kim Potter in cross examination & potential mitigation.
Although it's highly unlikely Mr Wright could have been saved, attempts could have been made to help him sooner.
-
Under cross examination, Officer Douglas testifies that responding with his weapon drawn was standard procedure & that the passengers repeated delay in exiting the vehicle when ordered also hindered his attempts to approach the scene.
-
8th Prosecution Witness
Officer Daniel Irish.
Another Field Training Officer from a neighbouring county.
He heard a call of shots fired on the radio & headed to the location.
He then arrived at the crash scene to find other officers with guns pointed at Mr Wright's car.
After approaching the car he found Mr Wright slumped over & unresponsive in the car.
Another Officer dragged Mr Wright from the car & away from the vehicle onto grass.
He assessed his injuries & located a single gun shot wound, he found no other injuries.
He applied a chest seal to Mr Wright, found he had no pulse & then attempted to use a defibrillator.
He & other officers administered CPR, some minutes later paramedics arrived.
After a time an EMT advised them to stop & Mr Wright was pronounced dead.
Officer Irish then accompanied another officer to the station.
-
Two EMT's gave further evidence of the details of the crash site.
The Prosecution spent the day calling witnesses from the crash scene & not witnesses to the shooting itself.
The evidence presented was largely irrelevant to the charges against Potter & the actual shooting.
It did, however, allow the prosecution to repeatedly show Mr Wright's lifeless body to the jury.
Day 2 ended.
Trial Resumes 4pm GMT Today.
Law of Self Defence
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 2: Judge Denies Defence Request for Mistrial
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D28dynmTSms
-
'I wouldn’t change anything'
Former Brooklyn Centre Chief of Police Tim Gannon on the firing of Kim Potter, handling of Daunte Wright killing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6WRFxrND0w
Tim Gannon is expected to give evidence in defence.
-
Some other instances of mistaking a gun for a Taser.
...................
The shooting of Eric Harris occurred on April 2, 2015, when 44-year-old African-American Eric Courtney Harris was fatally shot during an undercover sting in Tulsa, Oklahoma, as Harris ran from authorities unarmed.
While Harris was being subdued, Tulsa County Reserve Deputy Robert Charles Bates, 73, confused his personal weapon, a Smith & Wesson .357 revolver, for a Model X26 Taser.
Bates shot Harris in the back when he was on the ground. According to the Tulsa County Sheriff's office, he immediately said afterwards, "Oh, I shot him! I'm sorry."
Bates was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter (unintentional homicide resulting from criminal negligence) and sentenced to four years in prison, and was released after serving 18 months.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Eric_Harris
-
Shooting of Oscar Grant
Early on New Year's Day of 2009, Oscar Grant III was fatally shot by Bay Area Rapid Transit officer Johannes Mehserle, who was detaining the young man with others after a reported fight on the train.
At his bail hearing in late January 2009, Mehserle said that he had intended to use his Taser, but inadvertently grabbed his pistol instead.
In 2010 a jury convicted Mehserle of involuntary manslaughter, acquitting him of charges of voluntary manslaughter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Oscar_Grant
-
In 2019, a New Hope, Pennsylvania police officer shot and wounded an unarmed man in what he says was a mistaken use of his gun. Like Potter, he yelled “Taser” before pulling out his gun and shooting the man in the stomach. The victim was in critical condition following the incident. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that the officer violated a New Hope department rule that mandates that stun guns be worn on the opposite hip from a firearm. This officer wore his stun gun on his right side in front of his firearm, according to the police.
Though the officer violated policy, District Attorney Matthew Weintraub said he did not violate the law, claiming it was “was neither justified, nor criminal, but was excused” in a letter to the New Hope police chief. The officer was not charged with a crime.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/daunte-wright-shooting-officers-mistaken-guns-stun-guns/story?id=77049415
-
In May 2018, a Kansas police officer was initially charged with aggravated battery after she shot a Black man following a traffic stop. He was wounded in his back and later taken to a hospital. Then-Lawrence Police Department officer Brindley Blood also yelled “Taser” before firing her gun at the man, who had hit and slammed an officer to the ground using his body. The rookie police officer told investigators she had meant to use her stun gun. Criminal charges were later dismissed when a Douglas County judge ruled that the evidence didn’t prove that Blood reacted recklessly to the situation.
May 2018, a Southwestern Regional police officer in Pennsylvania, Stuart Lee Harrison, allegedly tried to use a stun gun against a subject’s thigh while he was handcuffed and instead shot him with a firearm. According to the York Daily Record, the arrestee was hospitalized and his condition was unclear. Harrison was charged with simple assault and the criminal case is ongoing, but he is free without bond. The police department disbanded in 2019.
There is no national data on these kinds of incidents, but law enforcement experts agree that mistaking guns for stun guns, while relatively rare, does happen.
An Americans for Effective Law Enforcement article from 2012 found nine more instances of these accidents between 2001 and 2009.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/daunte-wright-shooting-officers-mistaken-guns-stun-guns/story?id=77049415
-
Slips and capture
Slips and capture is a type of error that may occur in high-stress situations. It has been described as a phenomenon in the psychology of human error, such that a person may inadvertently perform one action while intending to do another.
The term "slips and capture" became more widely known in the early 21st century in the United States, after being referred to by law enforcement in two prominent fatal police shooting cases in 2009 and 2015. In both cases, the police officer claimed to have shot a suspect while intending to use a Taser.
The concept of "slips and capture" has been studied in the psychology of human error, and efforts to prevent error. It was thoroughly described in 1990 by James Reason.
The concept has been addressed in efforts to improve business, including computer and program design, and medical practices in order to avoid preventable error.
Both terms are used in error terminology: slips are defined as "errors in the performance of skill-based behaviors, typically when our attention is diverted;" and capture refers to "a type of slip where a more frequent and more practiced behaviour takes place when a similar, but less familiar, action was intended."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slips_and_capture
Weapon Confusion and Civil Liability
This article briefly examines four lawsuits that addressed civil liability issues arising
from an officer’s weapon confusion, in two of which the suspect died. It also includes a
list of nine known instances in which officers drew and fired handguns while intending to
fire their Tasers. The article concludes by making some suggestions. It is followed by a
listing of some relevant resources and references
https://www.aele.org/law/2012all06/2012-06MLJ101.pdf
-
Analysis on Taser intention
Force Science explains "slips-and-capture errors"
And other psychological phenomena that drove the fateful BART shooting
Jul 22, 2010
......
Mehserle, testifying in his own defense at the trial, said he thought at that moment, This has to go quick.
“All his actions from that point forward—except one—are consistent with a Tasing intention,” Lewinski says. “Enhanced video frames show his hand canting and tugging at his holster at an angle that suggests a Taser-draw effort. He persists in this effort to the point that he defeats the restraints on his gun holster. His thumb then moves as if to arm the Taser, he backs up to create a better dart-spread, he only fires once instead of double-tapping, and so on.
“The only inconsistency—and, of course, a critical one—is that he reached to the right side of his belt and gripped his gun instead of crossing his hand about a foot away to the left where his Taser was.
“This is the slip and capture. Under time pressure to address a perceived threat, his intention to draw his Taser slipped off his agenda, so to speak, when it was captured and completed by a more well-rehearsed motor program; i.e., going to the location where his gun was in order to manage a threat. He was not conscious of this unfortunate switch until after the shot was fired.”
Such errors are common in civilian life, Lewinski explains, ranging from experienced pilots who inadvertently activate the wrong controls at a critical moment and crash airplanes to drivers who floorboard their accelerator when they think they’re tromping on the brake. “In a very simple illustration,” Lewinski says, “think of renting an unfamiliar model of car. You know you’re in a different vehicle, but when you go to insert the key you may automatically and unconsciously direct it toward the spot where the ignition is located on your own car at home.
“The fact that you do this once is not unusual, but the fact that some continue to do it several times before their behavior changes shows how powerful old programs are and how hard they are to change.
“In a situation like that, you get the benefit of an attentional check—you see what you’ve done wrong and then you pay attention and correct it. But there wasn’t time for that for Mehserle.
“In his urgency, his concentration was focused exclusively on Grant’s back, where he intended to place the Taser darts. Because of what’s called ‘inattentional blindness’—meaning that he wasn’t consciously paying attention to and registering it—he wouldn’t have been aware that the feel and weight of the gun was different from that of a Taser. The video clearly shows that the gun was never brought up to his line of sight, where he might have seen that it wasn’t his yellow Taser.
“His first indication that he’d made a mistake was when he pressed the trigger and the bullet tore into Oscar Grant’s back. The video shows him experiencing a definite reflexive, startle reaction. His left hand comes away from the gun as if he’s touched a hot stove. His hands go to his head and he exclaims, ‘Oh my God!’ His response is consistent with a sudden realization that he’d done something drastically wrong.”
In his testimony, Lewinski cited the research of Drs. Alexis Artwohl and Audrey Honig, both experts on police psychology and graduates of the certification course in Force Science Analysis. In their studies, Artwohl and Honig have documented that the vast majority of officers default to automatic, unconscious defensive behavior in threat situations, similar to some of what Mehserle experienced.
https://www.police1.com/police-products/firearms/training/articles/force-science-explains-slips-and-capture-errors-oIgwS6PRaoKWsQPJ/
-
Trial Resumes- Day 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeJTYB7C3Yg
-
Sergeant Michael Johnson.
Sergeant Johnson was Kim Potter's supervisor on April 11th.
They worked in the same department since 2005 but never actually worked together until 2019, as he worked nights up until then.
He left the police department & moved to another department October 2021.
He testifies he recieved Taser training since 2002, before becoming an Officer in 2005.
As part of training officers are voluntarily shot with a Taser.
He has also been inadvertently shot by his partners with a taser during active duty.
.......
Turning to the events of April 11th
He responded to the call from Officer Luckey to the traffic stop, he knew Luckey was in training with Potter.
When he reached Luckey's squad car he spoke to Potter & learned Mr Wright had a warrant, gross misdemeanour weapons violation.
When approaching Wright's car he approached the passenger side.
It was customary for Potter to be stood back in her role as an FTO.
............
When he saw Wright resist he opened the passenger door, he leaned in across the passenger & put his hands against the ignition & the gear shift.
He pushed the lever toward the park position, he can't remember if the engine was running, he was attempting to turn the vehicle off.
When Wright re-entered he presumed he was going to drive away, he held onto Wright' right arm.
He didn't know what Potter or Luckey was doing.
He heard Potter say I'll tase you, he heard the taser command & let go of Wright, he saw Wright go for the shift knob & started backing out of the vehicle.
He did not got to the crash scene because he saw the other Officers car arrive at the crash scene.
He reported shots fired & requested additional vehicles to the area.
As involved officers they couldn't leave the scene.
He requested other supervisors from other agencies to the scene (as he could no longer supervise due to involvement)
He testifies he doesn't remember saying that Daunte was trying to drive off with him in the car.
He swapped guns with Potter to preserve evidence. (on video)
Later he took his weapon back & all the ammunition when told by another officer that Potter may attempt to kill herself.
He was taken back to the station by an officer from a different department & then met with another investigating law enforcement agency to give a statement.
-
In the aftermath of the shooting Potter requested Johnson call her union rep.
This has been objected to & dismissed as evidence, but the jury still got to hear it.
Cross examination on this witness will be critical to Potter's defence.
-
Cross Examination.
Agrees that Mr Wright does not stop resisting arrest during the incident.
Agrees when he heard 'Taser Taser Taser' Mr Wright had made no attempt to stop resisting.
He was disorientated when he got back out of the car.
Agrees that if Mr Wright had taken off with him in the car, he could possibly be killed.
Agrees that by state statute Potter, in that instance, would have a right to use deadly force.
-
Lawful unintentional use of deadly force!
Interesting.
-
On redirect.
He was in passenger side when Potter fired, he was a foot away from Wright, Wright's passenger was underneath him. (implication being unsafe to apply deadly force)
Was not dragged by the car.
Stood up after incident.
Feet were against kerb.
Car did not move until after Wright was shot.
Mr Wright tried to grab shift knob, he was able to prevent it.
Leant against passenger to prevent her getting involved.
There is no training on entering cars that might flee.
Was taking a risk entering car, alleviated risk by moving shift knob.
-
Agrees that a fleeing car can be considered a weapon.
Never had specific training on shooting into vehicle.
Brooklyn centre has policy against using a taser on someone driving a vehicle.
Agrees, vehicle was not moving when Daunte Wright was shot.
Testimony ends.
-
Chief Tony Gruenig, supervises officers & sergeants.
Recieved despatch at around 2:15 of officer involved shooting.
Contacted SGT Johnson, who informed him of the involved officers (only Potter & Luckey) & that Mr Wright deceased.
Arrived at scene around 2:40.
Only then learned that Johnson was an involved officer.
Spoke to Johnson, discussed incident, doesn't know why Johnson hadn't already left the scene.
Contacted BCA to report to crime scene around 2:45
-
Chief of Bureau of Criminal Investigations.
Arrived at scene at 3:45
Has details of the crime scene & investigation, collects officer training records.
Has nothing of direct relevance to the charges against Potter.
Trial resumes 3pm GMT Monday.
-
EXPLAINER: What's behind dual defense in Potter trial?
Defense lawyers for suburban Minneapolis police officer Kim Potter say she made a mistake when she drew her handgun instead of her Taser and fatally shot Daunte Wright.
Lawyers for the suburban Minneapolis police officer on trial for killing Black motorist Daunte Wright are arguing that she made a mistake by drawing her handgun instead of her Taser before she fatally shot him. But they're also arguing that she would have been justified in shooting him anyway.
Legal experts and attorneys following the case say it can be a bad idea to offer two defenses that may seem at odds — but not in this case. Lawyers for former Brooklyn Center Officer Kim Potter — she resigned two days after killing Wright — have said repeatedly that Potter didn't consciously intend to pull her handgun from her holster. Their other argument is that Potter, 49, was entitled to use deadly force in order to prevent the 20-year-old Wright from driving off and potentially dragging one of her fellow officers with him.
"There’s an old saying with attorneys that the only thing worse than one bad defense is two defenses,” said Joe Friedberg, a Minneapolis defense attorney who isn't involved in the case. “Ordinarily, one defense detracts from each other, but I don’t think this one does.”
Friedberg said the defense team would have to use careful wording so as not to confuse or frustrate the jury, but that the two defense arguments are consistent with one another and could provide multiple rebuttals to the charges.
Prosecutors are trying to convict Potter of first- and second-degree manslaughter. The most serious charge requires prosecutors to prove recklessness, while the lesser requires them to prove culpable negligence, meaning that Potter “caused an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm” to Wright.
Potter, who is white, killed Wright, who wasn’t armed, during an April 11 traffic stop in Brooklyn Center in a shooting that was recorded by police cameras.
“The theory of the defense is that it was a mistake. The evidence shows that clearly,” said Joseph Daly, an emeritus professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law.
Right after the shooting, Potter is captured on body camera footage saying “I just shot him. ... I grabbed the wrong (expletive) gun!”
But Daly pointed out there was a problem with solely relying on that argument because police department policy bars officers from using a Taser on someone who is driving a vehicle, so Potter could still be found reckless or culpably negligent.
“How do you deal with that reality?” Daly said. “If you are trying to stop a fleeing felon or trying to save the life of a person, then you can shoot him. You have permission under the law to shoot him.”
In court, Potter’s attorney Paul Engh has asserted that the other officers who were trying to arrest Wright were partially in the car as he attempted to drive away.
“You’re in a vulnerable position if he drives away? If he takes off, you could be seriously injured? Or die?” Engh asked one of the officers, Anthony Luckey, during cross-examination.
“Yes,” Luckey answered to each question. Another officer at the scene who was on the passenger side of Wright’s car, then-Sgt. Mychal Johnson, testified that he could have been dragged.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/kim-potter-daunte-wright-lawyers-explainer-taser-b1974001.html?amp
-
The total number of mistaken weapon incidents since the introduction of tasers isn't clear, although I've read that further research & documentation is now in process.
In some instances, officers will have drawn their guns (when intending to draw the taser) & realised their mistake before firing, or, weren't actually required to/didn't fire or missed the target in the instance, before finally noticing their error.
Daunte Wright's shooting is only the 4th fatal shooting involving weapon confusion, but there are several other instances of non fatal shootings.
Video: Deputy who meant to pull out Taser shoots teen (Non fatal)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-deputy-who-meant-to-pull-out-taser-shoots-teen/
Deputies said Jackson struggled when they tried to place him under arrest. In the video, a deputy can be heard yelling, "Taser, taser," during the confrontation. Gillis can then be seen pulling out what appears to be a gun, before one shot is heard.
-
Video: Brindley D. Blood, non fatal, mistaken weapon shooting of Akira S. Lewis.
https://youtu.be/0ctCi3H7WaE?t=426
-
Early days yet I know, how do you see it going, also interesting two types of defence.
-
Early days yet I know, how do you see it going, also interesting two types of defence.
The weapon confusion & right to use a taser in the situation make this a strange & interesting case.
I think she's going to be found guilty of something, but...
The use of the taser in the situation, whilst unwise according to the coming force expert testimony, it may not have actually been against department policy.
One of the other officers testified that he would have tasered Wright if he had the opportunity.
Department policy did not permit an officer to use force on a driver of a vehicle.
But, Mr Wright was not driving the vehicle when she intended to Taser him.
It can very reasonably be presumed he was attempting to drive, & then she may have been justified in using the Taser if she felt other officers were at risk had he started driving......and if that is the case then she could in theory also have used lethal force, according to the law?!
It really is a bizarre scenario imo
Kim Potter's witness statement & how that fits with her trial testimony is going to be significant.
If she didn't claim in her initial statement that she pulled the taser in fear for the other officers safety then the prosecution will easily win.
-
The trial hasn't even tested the question with regard to her weapon handling being reckless.
If you have no idea you're holding a gun, are you reckless in firing it believing it wasn't a gun?
In all these weapon confusion cases the officer performs a swift reaction procedure in a tense situation.
An officer isn't trained to be looking at their holster before they pull their weapon, then look & check they have the right weapon. If they had to do that every time they pull a weapon they could be killed. They are focused on the detainee.
The prosecution make mention of Potter being trained in use of Tasers every year, but I've not seen how many hours training that actually included, & how much of that is physical & deploying tasers in pressure situations as oppose to sitting in a classroom.
-
On the subject of weapon confusion.
In this case I find it interesting to note that during the incident Potter had Wright's expired insurance card (that wasn't in his name) in her left, taser hand.
It probably isn't usual for an officers left hand to already be occupied with something when they react to a situation & intend to pull a taser.
So perhaps, unconsciously, her brain detected her left hand can't be used to respond as it's doing something else, & so, her dominant more routinely used right hand takes over in response to the threat.
-
Two former officers have been convicted for having mistakenly shot dead detainees:
Johannes Mehserle was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter & sentenced to two years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Oscar_Grant#Sentencing
Robert Charles Bates was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter (unintentional homicide resulting from criminal negligence) and sentenced to four years in prison, and was released after serving 18 months.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Eric_Harris
......
Potter is charged with...
First-degree manslaughter, predicated on reckless use/handling of a firearm, a more serious charge than second-degree manslaughter, carrying a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $30,000 fine.
Second-degree manslaughter, "culpable negligence creating unreasonable risk" that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years incarceration and/or a $20,000 fine.
-
Trial of Kim Potter, shooting of Daunte Wright — Day 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_DPR_1Cvug
-
Law of Self Defense: Another Day of Largely Pointless State Evidence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU0sz0p4WmI&t=28s
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 4: Prosecution Strategy Of Showing Jury As Many Bloody Photos As Possible Continues
Today was the fourth day of the trial proper, and although today the State worked through seven more of its witnesses in its case in chief it nevertheless appeared to once again to do little but provide evidence on factual matters not in dispute and to which I’m confident the defense would have been happy to stipulate.
The State did not, however, appear to substantively advance a theory of manslaughter based on today’s testimony. Indeed, most of the day appeared to be an excuse to show the jury numerous and various bloody photos of Duante Wright, his vehicle, his clothing, and so forth.
DR. LORREN JACKSON, MEDICAL EXAMINER
The State’s first witness was Medical Examiner Dr. Lorren Jackson, with the direct examination by ADA Erin Eldridge. Cross-examination would be by Attorney Earl Gray.
Dr. Jackson testified that Duante Wright’s cause of death was a 9mm round to the heart, and the manner of death was homicide—that he was shot by Kim Potter. I know—utterly shocking.
These undisputed facts took nearly an hour of direct and re-direct testimony. In contrast, the defense spent merely about 5 minutes on cross-examination and re-cross.
There was some discussion on direct and cross about how long someone shot through the heart as Wright had been would remain conscious, with the State arguing for zero or only a few seconds and the defense arguing for as long as perhaps a minute.
This would presumptively be arguing on the question of whether shooting (or Tasing) someone in control of a vehicle is per se reckless because the impaired driver operating the vehicle presents as a foreseeable deadly force threat to others.
SPECIAL AGENT MELISSA LOREN, BCA FORENSIC INVESTIGATOR
Loren was one of the half-dozen BCA investigators called today as witnesses for the prosecution.
Loren’s job was as an on-scene investigator, doing a walk-through of the crash and traffic stop scenes, collecting bits of evidence, finding Potter’s fired cartridge case inside Wright’s vehicle, having Wright’s vehicle towed to the BCA vehicle inspection garage, where BCA conducted a comprehensive examination of the vehicle.
This testimony took about 45 minutes of direct examination, and only about 3 ½ minutes of cross-examination—that brief cross-examination was interrupted by a 5-minute sidebar during which Judge Chu refused to allow the defense to ask about a digital scale discovered in the center console of Wright’s Buick.
The evidence she found was consistent with Potter having shot Duante Wright once in the chest at the site of the traffic stop, then Wright’s car traveling about a block until it crossed into oncoming traffic and smashed into the Lundgren’s vehicle, where it stopped. From there, Wright’s body would be removed from the vehicle by first responders and after some unsuccessful aid be declared deceased.
Again, shocking.
SA BRENT PETERSEN, BCA FORCE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT
Next up was Special Agent Brent Petersen, who works for the BCA’s Force Investigative Unit—this is the special unit that focuses on use-of-force events involving Minnesota police officers. The direct examination was conducted by ADA Joshua Larson, and cross-examination by Earl Gray.
The purpose for the State calling Petersen as a witness appeared to be so that they could have him explain to the jury what he personally saw on various body cameras and dash-camera videos. In particular, the State had prepared a composite video including the body camera of Potter, the body camera of Sergeant Johnson, and the dash camera from Officer Luckey’s squad car.
The major point of Petersen’s testimony was apparently to argue that the bodies of Johnson and Luckey were already outside of the vehicle when Potter fired her fatal shot, such that her use of force was not necessary in order to prevent the two other officers from being dragged in the vehicle.
Of course, the officers had pulled back from the vehicle only in response to Potter’s cry of “Taser! Taser! Taser!,” and by that point, she had definitively committed to firing what she believed to be her Taser—a use of force that would have been reasonable to prevent Wright from fleeing the arrest scene at speed in the Buick and endangering bystanders in his path, even if Johnson and Luckey were no longer in danger. In any case, had Wright chosen to reverse, the open car doors would have swept up all three officers.
The defense made strenuous objections to this use of Petersen’s testimony, basically narrating what was visible in the videos, on the grounds that the videos spoke for themselves, and the jury could make their own assessments of what they saw.
Apparently, ADA Larson had first proposed to make these arguments using still photographs, which the Judge had ruled against because the stills failed to capture the dynamic nature of the event. As an alternative, Larson then chose to freeze-frame the actual video—which is not, of course, substantively different than using the still photos. This led to repeated objections, allowances, more objections, and that brought us right up to lunch.
Separately, it was also notable that the State’s presentation of this composite video appeared to have been slowed down to 50% speed—without informing the court that this was being done—which suggested far more time for decision-making than was actually the case. Also, Potter’s body camera footage was offset a full second from the other two videos that made up the composite.
Separately, Larson had also used Petersen to attest to the particularly injurious nature of hollow-point bullets.
After lunch, Judge Chu informed the prosecution that she would not allow them to continue on this composite video path, and immediately thereafter the State was done with direct of Petersen.
On cross-examination, Gray drew out that hollow-point bullets were routinely used by law enforcement because they were safer for bystanders, and that Petersen himself carried hollow-point bullets in his duty weapon. Gray also drew out that a body camera could only capture a small fraction of the visual information available to the wider field of vision of a police officer’s eyes, as well as the officer’s ability to direct their vision independent of the body camera’s perspective.
SA MICHELLE FRASCONE, BCA FORCE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT
Next up was Special Agent Michelle Frascone, also from the BCA’s Force Investigative Unit. Frascone was involved in evidence collection at the traffic and crash sites, as well as the collection of the Glock 17 pistols from Sergeant Johnson and Officer Potter.
The direct examination was by ADA Joshua Larson, and all we learned from Frascone was that Office Potter had used her own Glock to fire a 9mm round into Duante Wright.
So pointless was Frascone’s direct testimony that the defense did not bother to cross-examine her at all.
SA SAM MCGINNIS, BCA FORCE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT
Next up was Special Agent Sam McGinnis, again from the BCA’s Force Investigative Unit. Here we finally discovered some interesting information, although little of it seemed helpful to the State. Direct was again by ADA Joshua Larsen, and cross-examination would be by Attorney Paul Engh.
For example, we learned that Kim Potter had received her Taser 7, a brand new model to the Brooklyn Center Police Department, on March 26, 2021, only about two weeks prior to her attempt to use it on Duante Wright on April 11, 2021. Indeed, it was suggested that at the time Potter was the only officer in the entire department equipped with this new model Taser. Indeed, it was unclear if Potter had ever received substantive training on the new model Taser.
ADA Larson also sought to make a big deal out of the apparent fact that Kim Potter had function tested her Taser only 6 of the 10 times she was on duty between when she was first issued the new-model Taser and when she sought to use it against Duante Wright, when policy called for her to test the Taser before every shift.
None of this meant the Taser was in any way dysfunctional because of her failure to test it—when it was later tested about a month later by SA McGinnis, it tested fine, with 78% batter, plenty to work as intended, even without any tests in the intervening period.
ADA Larson also made a big point out of the fact that the Glock weighed about 2 pounds whereas the Taser weighed about 1 pound. Larson also had McGinnis point out the various other ways the two weapons differed, including in color, grip size, lights on the Taser but not on the Glock 17, and so forth.
The implication of all this, of course, was that Potter should have known that she was holding a Glock 17 and not a Taser. I’d note, however, that “should have known” is the standard for a finding of civil negligence, not criminal culpability.
Criminal culpability requires recklessness,, an intentional disregard of a known deadly force risk, and by all appearances Potter believed she had a Taser in her hands. That mistake certainly appears negligent, but not reckless, and thus not criminal.
Then Larson proposed to have the jury actually hold a deactivated Taser in their hands, and apparently also hold a Glock 17 frame, I guess so they could feel the difference between the two, but Judge Chu did not permit this.
On cross-examination, Paul Engh emphasized that this was a new Taser–he actually twice called it a “gun,” and corrected himself, a clever ploy–and that any failure to test every shift had no substantive consequence, that McGinnis might know how often officers were supposed to test but did not know how often officers actually tested, and so forth. Engh also noted that when McGinnis had accompanied a consenting Potter to the hospital for a blood test for drugs, nothing was found in her system.
Notably, Engh also asked McGinnis if the Special Agent had ever asked the Taser company why they designed their Taser to be shaped in essentially a pistol-like configuration, instead of some distinct shape designed to avoid confusing Taser and pistol, and McGinnis responded that he did not know why.
FORENSIC SCIENTIST ERIC KOPPEN, BCA DNA TECHNICIAN
Next up was BCA DNA Technician Eric Koppen.
All we learned from him was that the DNA in the blood found in the white Buick was that of Duante Wright, except for a small portion of blood in the passenger area of the car that was unmatched by DNA but almost certainly that of passenger/girlfriend Albrecht-Payton.
Shocking
Direct was conducted by ADA Joshua Larson, and so pointless was this testimony that the defense declined to cross-examine Koppen at all.
BALLISTIC SCIENTIST TRAVIS MELLAND, BCA FIREARMS TECHNICIAN
The final witness of the day was BCA Firearms Technician Travis Melland. He testified that a test bullet fired from the Glock 17 of Kim Potter matched the bullet recovered from the body of Duante Wright.
Shocking.
Curiously, although ADA Larson had Melland testify that the trigger weight of Kim Potter’s Glock 17 pistol was 5.5 pounds (perfectly normal for an OEM Glock 17), larson never obtained any testimony on the trigger weight of Potter’s Taser 7.
Again, so pointless was this testimony that the defense declined to cross-examine Melland at all.
END-OF-DAY
With that, Judge Chu decided to recess court a bit early for the day. She did note that she had two written motions from the State to review tonight, and the defense indicated that they would respond orally in the morning.
ADA Joshua Larson also made a request for an in chambers meeting to discuss “an issue” before everyone went home for the night, but that was obviously done outside of the broadcast window for the day.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/daunte-wright-shooting-trial-day-4-prosecution-strategy-of-showing-jury-as-many-bloody-photos-as-possible-continues/
-
Are prosecutors doing enough to prove what Kim Potter did is actually a crime?
COURT TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djtN5zfX77w
-
Kim Potter Trial Live Day 5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6sOQRqYOEU
-
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 5: Commander: Potter Good Person, Good Cop
Day 5 Summary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQyqvpmwpJA
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 5: State’s Police Use-of-Force Witness Helps Defense – “She’s a good cop”
“She’s a good cop, a good person, and I had no concerns about going on calls with her.”
Today was the fifth day of the Potter trial and was most notable for being one of the single most boring days of court proceedings of my 30-year career. The State managed to move completely through only a single witness and barely finished direct examination on their second witness of the day before Judge Chu had blessed mercy on the jury and observers and recessed the court for the day.
STATE MOTION TO IMPEACH THEIR OWN POLICE WITNESSES, RETROACTIVELY
Indeed, the only portion of the day of even modest import was the court hearing a pair of motions from the State.
In the State’s first motion, prosecutors sought to be permitted to impeach police witnesses—their own witnesses!—on the grounds that some of them belonged to the police union in which Kim Potter had briefly served as president some years prior.
Remarkably, the State even sought to impeach police testimony that had already been given last week, particularly the testimony of Sergeant Johnson, who had fought to arrest Duante Wright alongside Officer Luckey and Potter on April 11, 2021.
Judge Chu denied this motion, on the grounds that Potter’s leadership on the union was sufficiently transient and sufficiently in the past that it was not relevant to show bias among police witnesses.
In the State’s second motion, they sought to object to “lay witnesses” providing testimony more appropriate to that of an expert witness. They were particularly upset with the testimony of Sergeant Johnson the prior week because he essentially expressed the conclusion that the circumstances of the struggle with Wright were sufficient to justify Potter’s use of deadly force, much less a mere Taser.
In particular, the State asked the court to order the jury to disregard Sergeant Johnson’s testimony entirely, and to prohibit any other officer witnesses from providing similarly conclusory testimony.
The defense responded that they were merely doing normal cross-examination of the State’s witnesses, and if the State had inadequately prepared their witnesses, that was on the State. The defense also noted that the State made no objection to any of this at the time, but rather had apparently decided over the weekend that they didn’t like the way their own witnesses had testified the week prior.
Judge Chu also denied this second motion, declining to either instruct the jury to retroactively disregard Sergeant Johnson’s testimony or to prohibit other police witnesses from providing testimony with a basis in their training and experience as police officers.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: DIRECT EXAMINATION
The first witness of the day was Commander Garrett Flesland, who is currently the BCPD Commander for both training and patrol (the previous Commander of Patrol had been made acting Chief when Chief Gannon left the department the same day as Potter, two days after the shooting death of Duante Wright).
Commander Flesland’s testimony would prove powerfully favorable to Potter, although not until his cross-examination by Attorney Earl Gray, which we’ll come to in a moment.
The direct questioning of Flesland was conducted by ADA Matthew Frank, and it was a snoozefest of about two hours duration, not counting the morning break mid-way through in which a lengthy discussion among the parties and Judge Chu about Blakely evidence being provided in great volume during the trial.
Frank’s direct examination of Flesland was largely a long and slow plodding through much of the BCPD’s 700-page policy manual—to the point that once Judge Chu paused proceedings to ask Frank if he intended to go through the entire manual line by line.
The pointlessness of all this was the utter lack of any evidence that Potter had violated any of the policies discussed.
BLAKELY FACTORS DISCUSSION
Indeed, the testimony appeared mostly suited to matters of Blakely factors rather than matters of guilt, which led to the mid-morning break discussion already mentioned.
During the discussion among the parties and Judge Chu, while the jury was out of the courtroom, it was revealed that there was a disagreement as to whether Potter had waived her right to a bifurcated hearing on Blakely factors. These are factors that allow for an enhanced prison sentence if the underlying crime was committed by a police officer in uniform, or endangered a large number of people, etc. (Both of those specific Blakely factors are arguably at play in this case.)
A defendant can either have their guilt and Blakely factors decided in a single, unitary proceeding, or can have guilt and Blakely factors decided in two bifurcated proceedings—also, the defendant can choose to argue Blakely factors either to a jury or directly to the court (as in a bench trial).
The State argued that they believed Potter had waived her right to a bifurcated proceeding and that therefore it was the State’s position that the Blakely evidence was being properly offered in this single, unitary proceeding.
The defense countered that they’d made no such waiver—and Judge Chu also noted that she herself had no recollection of any such waiver, despite the State’s rather frantic protestations to the contrary. Certainly, there was no such waiver in the record.
This discussion ultimately concluded with Judge Chu having the defense create an explicit record that Potter wished a bifurcated proceeding, with the Blakely factors to be argued directly to the court in the event of a conviction on the underlying criminal charges.
Nevertheless, Judge Chu also concluded that she found no prejudice to the defense from the arguably Blakely factor evidence already admitted, which focused largely on the purported risk to the general public that Potter created when she Tasered Wright as he was behind the wheel of his Buick. Judge Chu reasoned that such evidence could both serve Blakely purposes and also be grounds for finding recklessness, and she would allow it in this stage of the proceedings for that second purpose.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED)
After the morning break, Frank focused his ongoing direct of Flesland on the BCPD’s Taser policies, including how a Taser was to be worn on the duty belt. This was extremely unnecessarily slow and plodding, particularly given that Potter’s method of carrying her Taser was entirely consistent with BCPD policy.
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 5: State’s Police Use-of-Force Witness Helps Defense – “She’s a good cop”
“She’s a good cop, a good person, and I had no concerns about going on calls with her.”
Posted by Andrew Branca Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 08:30pm 4 Comments
Share This StoryFacebookTwitterTelegramGabMeWeRedditEmail
Welcome to our coverage of the Kim Potter manslaughter trial over the April 11, 2021, shooting death of Duante Wright in a suburb of Minneapolis, when then-police officer Potter accidentally used her Glock 17 pistol in place of her intended Taser.
Today was the fifth day of the Potter trial and was most notable for being one of the single most boring days of court proceedings of my 30-year career. The State managed to move completely through only a single witness and barely finished direct examination on their second witness of the day before Judge Chu had blessed mercy on the jury and observers and recessed the court for the day.
STATE MOTION TO IMPEACH THEIR OWN POLICE WITNESSES, RETROACTIVELY
Indeed, the only portion of the day of even modest import was the court hearing a pair of motions from the State.
In the State’s first motion, prosecutors sought to be permitted to impeach police witnesses—their own witnesses!—on the grounds that some of them belonged to the police union in which Kim Potter had briefly served as president some years prior.
Remarkably, the State even sought to impeach police testimony that had already been given last week, particularly the testimony of Sergeant Johnson, who had fought to arrest Duante Wright alongside Officer Luckey and Potter on April 11, 2021.
Judge Chu denied this motion, on the grounds that Potter’s leadership on the union was sufficiently transient and sufficiently in the past that it was not relevant to show bias among police witnesses.
In the State’s second motion, they sought to object to “lay witnesses” providing testimony more appropriate to that of an expert witness. They were particularly upset with the testimony of Sergeant Johnson the prior week because he essentially expressed the conclusion that the circumstances of the struggle with Wright were sufficient to justify Potter’s use of deadly force, much less a mere Taser.
In particular, the State asked the court to order the jury to disregard Sergeant Johnson’s testimony entirely, and to prohibit any other officer witnesses from providing similarly conclusory testimony.
The defense responded that they were merely doing normal cross-examination of the State’s witnesses, and if the State had inadequately prepared their witnesses, that was on the State. The defense also noted that the State made no objection to any of this at the time, but rather had apparently decided over the weekend that they didn’t like the way their own witnesses had testified the week prior.
Judge Chu also denied this second motion, declining to either instruct the jury to retroactively disregard Sergeant Johnson’s testimony or to prohibit other police witnesses from providing testimony with a basis in their training and experience as police officers.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: DIRECT EXAMINATION
The first witness of the day was Commander Garrett Flesland, who is currently the BCPD Commander for both training and patrol (the previous Commander of Patrol had been made acting Chief when Chief Gannon left the department the same day as Potter, two days after the shooting death of Duante Wright).
Commander Flesland’s testimony would prove powerfully favorable to Potter, although not until his cross-examination by Attorney Earl Gray, which we’ll come to in a moment.
The direct questioning of Flesland was conducted by ADA Matthew Frank, and it was a snoozefest of about two hours duration, not counting the morning break mid-way through in which a lengthy discussion among the parties and Judge Chu about Blakely evidence being provided in great volume during the trial.
Frank’s direct examination of Flesland was largely a long and slow plodding through much of the BCPD’s 700-page policy manual—to the point that once Judge Chu paused proceedings to ask Frank if he intended to go through the entire manual line by line.
The pointlessness of all this was the utter lack of any evidence that Potter had violated any of the policies discussed.
BLAKELY FACTORS DISCUSSION
Indeed, the testimony appeared mostly suited to matters of Blakely factors rather than matters of guilt, which led to the mid-morning break discussion already mentioned.
During the discussion among the parties and Judge Chu, while the jury was out of the courtroom, it was revealed that there was a disagreement as to whether Potter had waived her right to a bifurcated hearing on Blakely factors. These are factors that allow for an enhanced prison sentence if the underlying crime was committed by a police officer in uniform, or endangered a large number of people, etc. (Both of those specific Blakely factors are arguably at play in this case.)
A defendant can either have their guilt and Blakely factors decided in a single, unitary proceeding, or can have guilt and Blakely factors decided in two bifurcated proceedings—also, the defendant can choose to argue Blakely factors either to a jury or directly to the court (as in a bench trial).
The State argued that they believed Potter had waived her right to a bifurcated proceeding and that therefore it was the State’s position that the Blakely evidence was being properly offered in this single, unitary proceeding.
The defense countered that they’d made no such waiver—and Judge Chu also noted that she herself had no recollection of any such waiver, despite the State’s rather frantic protestations to the contrary. Certainly, there was no such waiver in the record.
This discussion ultimately concluded with Judge Chu having the defense create an explicit record that Potter wished a bifurcated proceeding, with the Blakely factors to be argued directly to the court in the event of a conviction on the underlying criminal charges.
Nevertheless, Judge Chu also concluded that she found no prejudice to the defense from the arguably Blakely factor evidence already admitted, which focused largely on the purported risk to the general public that Potter created when she Tasered Wright as he was behind the wheel of his Buick. Judge Chu reasoned that such evidence could both serve Blakely purposes and also be grounds for finding recklessness, and she would allow it in this stage of the proceedings for that second purpose.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED)
After the morning break, Frank focused his ongoing direct of Flesland on the BCPD’s Taser policies, including how a Taser was to be worn on the duty belt. This was extremely unnecessarily slow and plodding, particularly given that Potter’s method of carrying her Taser was entirely consistent with BCPD policy.
-
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: CROSS-EXAMINATION
As has become the pattern of this trial, the defense cross-examination of this State’s witness was both much quicker than that of the State’s direct—less than 30 minutes for cross, in contrast to about two hours for direct—but also far more productive for the defense than direct had been for the State.
Had Potter ever missed any training sessions? Not that Flesland knew of.
Did she take her training seriously? Yes.
Can training ever fully replicate real-world conditions? No.
Was potter a trained hostage negotiator? Yes. Did she volunteer for DART, the domestic abuse response team? Yes. Had she been a casket carrier for LEMA, the law enforcement memorial association? Yes. Had she been voted union president by her fellow officers? yes.
Had Potter ever violated any policy of BCPD? Yes—24 or so years prior she had two separate vehicle accidents.
Would it be right for an officer to stop a person from fleeing, once they were stopped and outside their vehicle, without a license, without identification, with a woman in the car who might be the subject of a restraining order against that person? Yes.
Was Officer Lucky reprimanded in any way for his conduct with respect to Wright on April 11, 2021? No. What about Sergeant Johnson? No.
Can it be reasonable to use deadly force if a fellow officer is partly inside a vehicle that’s trying to take off, where the officer would be dragged down the road? Yes.
Are traffic stops very dangerous? Yes. Even more so if you learn the person stopped has an arrest warrant for a gun possession offense? Commander Flesland answered that he would be extremely concerned if I was arresting someone with a weapons violation.
Can you use force to effect a suspect on an arrest on a warrant, and use force to stop that person from fleeing? Yes. And if he keeps fighting after warning him he’d be Tased, and a fellow officer was laying over a passenger fighting to prevent the flight of the suspect in his vehicle, be right to use deadly force to save that officer? Yes.
And then the kill shot:
Gray asked Commander Flesland how he would describe Potter as a police officer, based on the 20 years he had worked with her? The response: She’s a good cop, a good person, and I had no concerns about going on calls with her.
As I live-commented in real-time: BOOM.
All of that in less than 30 minutes of cross-examination.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: RE-DIRECT
ADA Frank asked the court for 5 minutes to do a brief re-direct of Flesland, which re-direct took more like 10 minutes (albeit, including a brief sidebar). The direct came across as largely flailing and ineffective.
Have you seen all the evidence from this event? No. You were answering Gray’s hypotheticals based on his proposed facts? Yes. Training tries to be as realistic as possible? Yes. And finally: You expect officers to make good decisions? Yes.
That last question, however, would turn out to have merely opened the door for Gray to deliver yet another kill shot to the State’s direct testimony.
COMMANDER GARRETT FLESLAND: RE-CROSS
In a two-sentence re-cross-examination of Flesland, Gray simply asked the Commander:
Did you say you expect good officers to make good decisions? Yes.
And you describe Kim Potter as a good officer? Yes.
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON BCPD USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER
The next State’s witness was Sergeant Mike Peterson, the BCPD’s Use-of-Force Trainer, in effect the State’s use-of-force expert witness. ADA Matthew Frank began his direct examination of Peterson right after the lunch break and would wrap up direct only at about 4:20 pm local time.
Worse, the questioning was again plodding and disjointed, and without apparent purpose given the testimony produced.
Most of this testimony was on the training Potter had received on the use of various models of Tasers she had been assigned over the years. She was apparently compliant with all training sessions.
Perhaps the most notable part of this testimony was that the “policy requirements” of Taser usage were almost entirely conditional and contingent on the totality of the circumstances, such that there was nothing about Potter’s conduct that could be said to clearly violate any of these policies.
The State had previously evinced testimony that Potter had failed to “spark test” her Taser at the start of each duty shift, doing so on only 6 of the 10 duty shifts that preceded her April 11 shooting of Wright.
The actual policy on “spark testing,” however, merely suggests the test be performed with that frequency, it does not mandate such frequent testing.
Similarly, the State had previously suggested that BCPD had a policy against using a Taser on someone operating a vehicle, on the grounds that doing so can lead to the vehicle becoming an uncontrolled missile that endangers innocent bystanders. Of course, the defense argues that Wright’s vehicle was not in motion when Potter sought to use her Taser on him (mistakenly using her Glock, instead), but the State clearly wishes to characterize this decision as precisely creating such a danger to bystanders and thus qualifying as recklessness needed for manslaughter.
The actual policy, however, does not absolutely prohibit the use of a Taser on a suspect operating a motor vehicle, and in fact, permits such use where other means to control the suspect have proven ineffective—precisely as had happened with Duante Wright in this case.
Similarly, the State had made much of the notion that the Taser was properly targeted at the back of a suspect, or below the waist if at the front of the suspect. The actual policy, however, merely characterizes these as preferred target areas that should be prioritized if circumstances allow.
As this interminable testimony of Peterson continued it became increasingly clear that Peterson was hostile to the State and favorably disposed to Potter.
The court day ended with Frank’s conclusion of his direct examination of Peterson, but I expect cross-examination of the Sergeant to be extremely productive for the defense when the court comes back into session tomorrow morning.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/daunte-wright-shooting-trial-day-5-states-police-use-of-force-witness-helps-defense-shes-a-good-cop/
-
Kim Potter Trial- Day 6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK8hrAw74Bo
Use of Force Expert was on today.
First really bad day for Potter's defence, prosecution is expected to rest very soon.
She's going to be shredded when she takes the stand, but the defence have no choice but to put her up.
They have little other than character witnesses to call.
-
Day 6 Summary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIlbiKqNgG4
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 6: State’s Expert Say No Force Should Have Been Used
Defense scores points with police department use of force trainer, but prosecution’s hired expert claimed police should have just let Daunte Wright drive away his car and found him later.
Today was the sixth day of the trial proper and was most notable for a powerful cross-examination of use-of-force trainer Sergeant Mike Peterson by Attorney Paul Engh, and for the full testimony of the State’s use-of-force expert witness Prof. Seth Stoughton (who some of you will recall testified for these same prosecutors in the Derek Chauvin trial)—unfortunately, Attorney Earl Gray did a poorer than expected job of cross-examination of this State’s witness.
It also seems likely that the State will rest its case in chief tomorrow, and that the defense will begin to call their own witnesses and present their narrative to the jury for the first time in this trial.
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON, USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER: CROSS-EXAMINATION
The cross-examination of Sergeant Mike Peterson, the Brooklyn Center Police Department’s use-of-force trainer, was conducted by Attorney Paul Engh. Peterson had provided his direct testimony in a lengthy—perhaps a couple of hours—questioning by ADA Matthew Frank yesterday afternoon. That direct questioning had been a bit like pulling teeth, with Frank asking explicitly leading question and Peterson largely limited to answering yes or no.
I expected the defense to do great work on their cross-examination of Peterson, who was clearly favorably disposed towards defendant Potter, and I was not mistaken in this expectation.
Engh had Peterson affirm that police officers have dangerous jobs, deal with dangerous and unpredictable people, and have to make life-and-death decisions in split seconds.
Officers have to respond to rapidly changing events and make decisions quickly, and they are provided with the discretion to do so.
Peterson affirmed that Potter was an attentive student, who attended all her training, and that as an FTO she had many more duties than would an officer just working alone.
The jury was reminded that Potter’s Taser 7 was new to her, received only a couple of weeks prior to her encounter with Wright, and differed in certain characteristics from her prior model Taser—most particularly in having far more black surfaces and fewer yellow surfaces than her prior Taser.
On a couple of occasions, Engh asked about Potter’s “gun” when he clearly actually meant “Taser,” quickly correcting himself, but the subtle “mistake” emphasized the mental possibility for confusing the two weapons.
Also emphasized was that even scenario-based training couldn’t really replicate an actual confrontation in the street, as you knew role players were not armed with real weapons and were not really trying to kill or maim you. Further, the scenario-based training around the period Potter had received her new Taser 7 had been substantially limited because of COVID constraints.
Engh also had Peterson agree that the “spark test” that Potter had conducted on six of her 10 duty shifts prior to her encounter with Wright were merely recommended to be done on an every-shift basis, and not required—nobody monitored if they were done, and no officer was reprimanded for failing to perform them on an every-shift basis.
Engh similarly made clear that pretty much all the other policies around Taser use were conditional on the totality of the circumstances, and were subject to officer discretion and competing interests. They were generally all of the “don’t do THIS … UNLESS you have a GOOD reason” guidelines.
It was also pointed out that Taser had everyone undergoing or providing training to sign releases that freed the company of liability for any accidental injuries that might occur—and that this was because accidents with Tasers can and do occur, despite best efforts to avoid them.
Peterson agreed that a suspect fleeing lawful arrest in a vehicle is a dangerous act, and puts the drive, the officer, and the public at risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Peterson also agreed that officers were trained to make decisions because failure to make a decision could also result in death or serious bodily injury—and that it was important to make a decision, even if that decision later turned out to be wrong.
Making a traffic stop is one of the most dangerous things an officer does, Peterson agreed, especially of someone with a warrant for a gun charge. Officers can’t simply let that person go.
Further, there’s a community interest in securing public safety by ensuring that unlicensed people aren’t driving, that uninsured people aren’t driving, that unregistered vehicles aren’t being driven around. Similarly for someone on whom there is an open arrest warrant for a gun charge being arrested, and for enforcing orders of protection.
Tasers were frequently used as tools for de-escalation, to convince suspects to comply with lawful orders, for the greater safety of everyone involved—and compliance was always what officers desired, rather than having to use escalating force.
You may recall that Judge Chu had early in the trial ordered that Graham factors not be explicitly referenced during the trial, but here Engh managed to sneak them into his questions in the context of asking about Minnesota’s statutes on use of force and use of deadly force.
Peterson agreed that police officers, no matter how well trained, were human beings, imperfect, and made mistakes.
Finally, Peterson agreed that Potter had a reputation for being both peaceful and law-abiding.
In total, cross-examination of Peterson took less than 40 minutes, in contrast with the prior day’s direct questioning of him, which took more than two full interminable hours.
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON, USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER: RE-DIRECT
ADA Matthew Frank followed cross with about 25 minutes of re-direct.
As so often has been the case with the State in general, and Frank in particular, re-direct came across as flailing and disjointed, and a rather emotive response to the damage inflicted on the State’s witness by defense cross-examination. Also, Frank improperly asked almost nothing but leading questions, apparently fearful of what open-ended responses would yield to the jury.
Frank mocked the notion that someone driving without a license or insurance was somehow inherently dangerous, but Peterson affirmed that in his experience people without a license and insurance also don’t tend to follow the rules of the road all that well generally. [fixed]
Frank tried to get Peterson to agree that it was inherently improper to Taser someone inside a vehicle, but Peterson corrected him to say this applied only in the context of a vehicle in motion, and that he himself had Tasered people inside a vehicle. Then Frank tied to suggest that someone who might shortly put a vehicle in motion was the same degree of risk as someone who already had a vehicle in motion, and Peterson responded that he supposed it depends on the nature of the force used.
Frank suggested that Potter, Luckey, and Frank Johnson didn’t actually have to arrest Wright, they could simply have let him go, that if a reasonable officer decides he can’t safely make an arrest he can use his discretion to not to so, and Peterson responded that was one of many factors for an arresting officer to consider.
These, and pretty much every other answer the State got out of Peterson on re-direct was of the “well, it depends” variety—and that’s not really all that helpful when the State ultimately has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Indeed, “it depends” is pretty much a synonym for “reasonable doubt.”
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON, USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER: RE-CROSS
Engh then got Peterson back on a brief, roughly 5-minute, re-cross examination.
Engh mentioned that Peterson had been asked by Frank if a good officer was expected to do a spark test each duty day, and Peterson had responded yes—but isn’t it also true that good officers also sometimes miss spark tests, and Peterson agreed that was also the case.
In evaluating whether someone is a good officer, Engh asked, you don’t merely look at their spark test record, you look at the entire body of their police career? Peterson again agreed.
Engh also had Peterson agree that the reason officers distinguish their use-of-force analysis between a car in motion and a car not in motion is that a car in motion is unambiguously so, but a car not in motion is much more subject to the officer’s discretion.
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON, USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER: RE-RE-DIRECT
ADA Frank then came back for a brief, less than four-minute, re-re-direct of Peterson.
Aren’t officers trained that it’s dangerous for them to insert their bodies into a suspect’s car as Officer Johnson had, he asked, precisely because they could be dragged? Well, no, answered Peterson, we don’t train on that explicitly, it again “depends.”
Frank as apparently attempting to argue that somehow Johnson’s purportedly poor judgment in putting his body inside Wright’s vehicle somehow made Potter’s use of force unlawful, which is an interesting theory of the case.
SERGEANT MIKE PETERSON, USE-OF-FORCE TRAINER: RE-RE-CROSS
Finally, Engh then got Peterson back on a 30-second re-re-cross examination.
During any traffic stop or other law enforcement incident, officers are trained and expected to assist and help each other.
Correct, answered Peterson.
And that was it for Sergeant Peterson.
-
PROFESSOR SETH STOUGHTON, USE-OF-FORCE EXPERT: DIRECT
The State’s next witness was Professor Seth Stoughton, a law professor who has become something of an anti-police use-of-force expert witness “gun for hire.” You may recall Prof. Stoughton from his retention as an expert witness by these same prosecutors in the Derek Chauvin trial. His direct questioning was conducted again by ADA Matthew Frank.
I won’t detail Stoughton’s more than two hours of direct testimony for the State, except to note that the State appears to have gotten what it paid for (about $10,000, in total)—in Stoughton’s expert opinion there was absolutely no manner of use of force, either deadly force or non-deadly force, that was or could have been lawfully or appropriately used upon Duante Wright by Kimberly Potter, regardless of whether her fellow officers were inside or outside of Wright’s vehicle when she fired her unintended gunshot, or whether Wright’s car was stopped in park or in motion at the time she fired.
I will note that there were several objections and at least one sidebar objecting to Stoughton attempting to definitively determine what Kim Potter’s subjective state of mind was during the encounter with Wright. This is impermissible as Stoughton can’t read Potter’s mind. It is permissible to note what facts a reasonable officer might consider in dealing with Wright, and point out the presence or absence of such facts, but that’s it.
To my eye and ear Stoughton once again came across as smarmy and fake but, of course, it’s unlikely the jurors have my prior experience with Stoughton in particular or gun-for-hire expert witnesses in general.
Stoughton did ultimately suggest that a reasonable officer in Potter’s position could have simply allowed Wright to flee the scene in his vehicle, along with his passenger—that would have been the conduct of a reasonable officer. After all, Wright could simply be picked up at a later date, given that the officers already knew his identity.
STOUGHTON SIDEBAR
This opinion would lead to a lengthy sidebar at the end of direct questioning, out of the hearing of the jury, in which the defense argued that it had opened the door to Wright’s many prior instances of fleeing from arrest and failing to appear at court dates—indeed, the warrant issued on the gun charge was a bench warrant for a failure to appear in court.
The defense now wanted to admit into evidence what they described as an inch-thick record of Wright previously fleeing arrest and failing to make court dates. Normally such would be excluded as character evidence. But the defense argued that the State’s expert had given the jury the false impression that it would be a small matter to simply let Wright flee and just arrest him later—when the actual facts were that Wright would simply flee every time officers sought to arrest him.
Indeed, Attorney Paul Engh promised to file a motion for a mistrial if Judge Chu refused to allow him to submit this record into evidence, pounding on the table as he did so.
Ultimately, the court decided this record of flight and failed appearances continued to be character evidence and declined the defense the ability to introduce it as evidence. We’ll have to see, I suppose, if Engh follows through with his motion for mistrial—a mistrial that would obviously be denied by the judge who had just declined to admit the evidence in question.
PROFESSOR STOUGHTON, USE-OF-FORCE EXPERT: CROSS-EXAMINATION
The roughly one-hour cross-examination of Prof. Stoughton by Attorney Earl Gray was substantially weaker and more meandering than I had expected it would be—Gray has consistently delivered a very strong performance on cross-examination for the defense.
Gray started off by asking Stoughton to confirm that he’d suggested that what a reasonable officer should have done was simply allow Wright to flee—and Stoughton flatly denied having said anything of the sort.
Frankly, Gray dropped the ball here. Stoughton is the kind of expert witness who, if you paraphrase his statement with one single word differing from the actual statement, will flatly deny having made the statement—meaning, the paraphrased statement, even if it is substantively identical to the actual statement. Gray’s paraphrase was not a precise quote, so Stoughton denied the statement. For some reason, Gray seemed unable to trap him in this slippery conduct.
That said, certainly the jury heard Stoughton’s original statement that allowing Wright to simply flee would have been the decision of a reasonable officer, while no amount of force by Potter under any of the disputed circumstances here could be lawful or appropriate, and hopefully, they took note of Stoughton’s less than honest denial.
Gray also reasonably mocked Stoughton’s claim to being a former law enforcement officer. While technically true, it appears that Stoughton’s less-than five-year career was mostly spent as either a trainee or doing paperwork, without serious street time or experiences. Even that minimal experience was 15 years in the past. Gray also exposed that even during his brief police career Stoughton had failed to attend assigned use-of-force training, and had never himself been a use-of-force trainer.
Throughout all of this Stoughton again came across to my eyes and ears as less than honest, refusing to answer direct questions with a simple yes or no answer—as should be done on cross-examination—and instead providing lengthy replies that appeared intended to deceive and mislead rather than inform.
For example, when Gray asked if Stoughton had ever been a use-of-force trainer, Stoughton did not honestly answer that he had not—he answered, instead, that he had use-of-force certifications. All this meant is that he’d been as a student in some classes. When Gray asked again, Stoughton now replied that he’d once written some use-of-force policies. When Gray asked a third time, Stoughton replied that he’d written some reports on use-of-force events.
This kind of shady evasiveness was constant throughout Stoughton’s testimony. How much of it the jury recognized is unknown to me.
Cleverly, Gray asked Stoughton about his retainer contract on this case and asked if it was correct that Stoughton stood to make up to a maximum of $50,000 on this case. Stoughton once again answered evasively—so Gray whipped out the contract, and had Stoughton read that portion aloud. In fact, Stoughton stood to make up to a maximum of $95,000 consulting on this case.
Now, in fact, Stoughton will probably make about $10,000 on this case, but that extravagant $95,000 figure is sure to stick in the juries heard.
There was, however, a lot of value that I felt Gray left on the table during this cross-examination. For example, Stoughton had spent about 30 hours arriving at conclusions on a use-of-force event in which Kim Potter had mere seconds to make a life-or-death decision. Also, Stoughton was not fighting a violently resisting suspect while doing his analysis.
Further, Stoughton had the benefit of multiple synchronized videos, and some kind of laser-mediate model of the events and, obviously, Potter had none of that on the scene.
Further, what Potter’s body camera would show under these circumstances was substantially different than what Potter’s eyes, with their wider field of view and ability to rapidly scan around, were likely to have seen.
Further, the screen captures used by Stoughton in his direct testimony at precise time points did not accurately represent the rapidly evolving, dynamic, violent, and dangerous environment in which Potter was making her human decisions.
Some were just half-missed opportunities—for example, Gray pointed out that the new Taser model Potter had received just a few days before her encounter with Wright had far more black and far less yellow than had her previous model of Taser. And that’s true—but Gray failed to use the actual models of Taser as demonstrative exhibits to show convincingly how much this was the case.
Around the end of cross-examination, Gray did compel Stoughton to concede that of the roughly 30 use-of-force cases on which he had consulted, more than 25 of them were cases in which he’d served a plaintiff suing a police officer in state or Federal court—the clear implication being that Stoughton is an anti-police expert witness gun-for-hire, rather than a genuinely impartial expert.
ARBERY WRIGHT, FATHER OF DUANTE WRIGHT: DIRECT
The final witness of the day was Arbery Wright, father of Duante Wright. He essentially testified that his son was a good boy. The defense did not object during this direct testimony, but only because they had a standing objection before the court at the start. There was no cross-examination of this witness.
END-OF-DAY MOTIONS
As court wrapped up for the day it became clear that the State would be resting its case in chief tomorrow, either immediately upon court coming into session in the morning or perhaps after one or two more brief witnesses.
In preparing to hand the proceedings over to the defense, however, the State had several motions and matters they wanted the court to resolve, two of which are particularly notable.
First, they noted that the defense witness list had perhaps as many as a dozen character witnesses for Kim Potter, and they objected to that number as unnecessarily cumulative—which is quite a laugh considering how much cumulative evidence the State itself had presented in its case in chief. Nevertheless, the defense agreed to call no more than three character witnesses.
Second, the State noted that it appeared that the defense was planning to have its own use-of-force expert speak to matters of deadly force, which the State found objectionable because there was nothing about deadly force in that expert’s report shared with the State. The State thus claimed inadequate notice and wanted the defense use-of-force expert prohibited from discussing matters of deadly force entirely.
The defense response was that their expert was privileged to respond to the testimony of the State’s own experts and other witnesses made during the course of the trial, of which the defense could not be fully aware until that testimony was heard. Given that this testimony had covered deadly force matters, the defense expert was therefore privileged to respond to that testimony on deadly force matters.
Judge Chu was in the moment undecided on the issue and took it under advisement.
Frankly, if it’s true that the defense expert had failed to address deadly force in his own earlier analysis, that seems a rather grave shortcoming that should not have been permitted by the defense—a serious own-goal by the defense team.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/daunte-wright-shooting-trial-day-6-states-expert-say-no-force-should-have-been-used/
-
Kim Potter Trial- Day 7 Live
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIcNd7bYbnY
-
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 7: Defense Use-of-Force Expert Impresses
Summary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYAJTLTJlqs
Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 7: Defense Experts Testify Use Of Gun, Not Just Taser, Justified – Potter to Testify Friday
Late twist in the case, defense asserts that even if Kim Potter intentionally used her gun, rather than by mistake, it would have been justified to save a fellow police officer partially leaning into the car who would have been seriously injured or killed had Daunte Wright driven off.
Today was the seventh day of the trial proper, and a very good day for the defense, indeed, with the arguable exception that the defense’s predictable motion for acquittal was as predictably denied by the court.
Next, we had testimony from the defense’s excellent use-of-force expert, also from Potter’s former police chief, and finally from four character witnesses.
With testimony completed for the day, the defense created a record outside the hearing of the jury of many of Duante Wright’s bad acts, evidence that the judge had declined to admit into evidence on character grounds.
Finally, the judge noted she’d be finalizing jury instruction this evening—and, importantly, these would include an instruction on the authorized use of non-deadly force.
It is noteworthy that the defense has only two more witnesses it intends to call—its “slip and capture” expert Dr. Laurence Miller, and the defendant Kim Potter herself. As a result, testimony in this trial should be completed relatively early in the day tomorrow. After that all that is left are the instruction of the jury, closing arguments, and finally jury deliberations and the delivery of a verdict.
OVERVIEW
The day began with the defense beginning with a motion of acquittal on the grounds that no reasonable jury could return a verdict of guilt based on the State’s rather incoherent case in chief. This motion for acquittal was, unsurprisingly, rather summarily denied by Judge Chu—such motions are routinely made at this stage of a trial, and as routinely denied.
Then the State promptly rested, and the defense finally began its case in chief.
The defense led off with its first witness, the extremely capable and impressive defense use-of-force expert Stephen Ijames, who provided powerfully favorable opinion testimony for the defense.
Next up was more very favorable testimony from former Police Chief Gannon, who had been forced to resign along with Potter following the Wright shooting and the nights of riots that followed.
The day wrapped up with four relatively quick witnesses who were largely or entirely character witnesses for the defense: former fellow officer Colleen Friecke, neighborhood friend Hall, former Potter supervising sergeant Roth, and former fellow officer Smith.
It shouldn’t matter—this is just the world we live in today—but both Hall and Smith appear to be men of color, which shows good judgment by the defense in terms of possible perception by the jury. That said, although this case was presented as “white cop shoots young black man” in the media, not a word about race was said in the course of the trial itself.
With testimony completed for the day, the defense created a record outside the hearing of the jury of many of Duante Wright’s bad acts, evidence that the judge had declined to admit into evidence on character grounds.
Finally, the judge noted she’d be finalizing jury instruction this evening—importantly, Judge Chu also informed the parties that she planned to add an instruction on the authorized use of non-deadly force to supplement to already agreed to parallel instruction on authorized use of deadly force.
DEFENSE MOTION FOR A MISTRIAL DENIED, & MORE
The day’s proceedings began with the defense motion for a judgment of acquittal on the grounds that no reasonable jury could return a verdict of guilt based on the State’s rather incoherent theory of the case.
At times the State has argued through its witness testimony that a Taser would have been appropriate (Officer Luckey), other times that it would have been inappropriate (expert witness Stoughton), sometimes that deadly force would have been appropriate (Sergeant Johnson), other times that it would have been in appropriate (Stoughton).
ADA Matthew Frank naturally argued against the motion, although in a rather disingenuous way. Frank essentially argued the concept of recklessness as that term is used in plain English—that Potter’s unintentional use of a gun instead of a Taser was simply reckless conduct.
But that’s not what recklessness means as a legal term of art. What Frank describes is properly understood as a mere mistake. Recklessness requires intentionally creating a deadly force risk and ignoring that risk—there’s no evidence here that Potter intended to create a deadly force risk.
Remarkably, Judge Chu herself observed that there aren’t really any meaningful factual disputes in this case—and I would largely agree. Of course, in that case, there would be seem to be no need of a jury at all, as the jury’s role is to settle factual disputes. If there are no facts in dispute, then this is purely a legal matter, and Judge Chu is supposed to be the finder of law.
In any case, Judge Chu denied the motion for acquittal, so the show was to go on.
More favorably for the defense, Judge Chu informed the parties that she would allow the defense use-of-force expert to testify to deadly force issues, a matter that was still uncertain at the end of court yesterday. This despite ADA Frank insisting on spending a chunk of the morning attempting to re-argue the issue.
Less favorably for the defense, Judge Chu declined the defense to put into evidence additional details about the recent felony drug conviction of Duante Wright’s mother, who had testified on the first day of the trial.
STEPHEN BRADFORD IJAMES, DEFENSE USE-OF-FORCE EXPERT: DIRECT EXAMINATION
The first defense witness of the trial was Stephen Ijames, a use-of-force expert, and recently retired law enforcement officer of 44 years experience. As is typically done with expert witnesses, the defense first had Ijames recite his qualifications as an expert. Direct examination of Ijames was conducted by Attorney Paul Engh.
To say that Ijames had an impressive resume would perhaps be the understatement of the year—except that it would be an even greater understatement to say that the qualifications of Ijames completely eclipsed those of the State’s expert, Professor Seth Stoughton, who testified yesterday.
Besides being an LEO for some 44 years, working his way from patrolman to Chief of his department, Ijames was also a graduate of the FBI National Academy, and the equivalent DEA academy, and had been commissioned as a US Marshal in various task forces over his career.
Ijames spent many years as a full-time SWAT officer kicking in doors and serving felony warrants. He was awarded a law enforcement “silver star” award for successfully saving a hostage being held in a liquor store robbery gone bad—a rescue that required him to shoot and kill the hostage-taker.
As recently as two months ago, Ijames had still been driving a marked police car for a park service and was now testifying in court after driving from Missouri to Minnesota in his own car, through storms and fire, at his own expense, without any payment by the defense—and only a week after having had open-heart surgery.
I kid you not.
Unlike State expert Stoughton, whose own law enforcement career was brief and mostly serving at a desk, some 15 years in the past, and had never involved a critical incident, Ijames had personally engaged in literally hundreds upon hundreds of critical incidents.
But it doesn’t stop there. Ijames had also travelled not just around the United States training other police departments, but also to dozens of countries around the world to train their police departments, often under the mandate of the US Department of Justice. He’d literally trained thousands of other officers in use-of-force.
Further, in the 1990s Ijames was also among the earliest classes of instructors for the then-new Taser device, and he literally wrote the national policies on the use of the Taser.
Ijames also had impressive academic credentials, including not only his own BA and MA degrees, but full-time and adjunct teaching positions at the university level. He indicated he’d published hundreds of scholarly papers.
And if that wasn’t enough, when the State sought to impeach his credentials early in their cross-examination of Ijames, it turns out that he spends his free time saving orphans in Haiti.
Orphans. In Haiti.
The contrast of this straightforward and impressive man with the smarmy and effete Stoughton could not have been more stark.
The bottom line of Ijames’ testimony was, as one would expect, the opposite of the conclusions of Stoughton. Where Stoughton had essentially testified that neither deadly nor non-deadly force by Potter could be considered appropriate, Ijames testified that either deadly or non-deadly force would have been legally justified and within reasonable police conduct in this case.
To understand how powerfully this exchange favors the defense, however, one would really need to observe and contrast the actual testimony of Stoughton yesterday and Ijames today.
STEPHEN BRADFORD IJAMES, DEFENSE USE-OF-FORCE EXPERT: RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION
The defense did come back with a very brief, less than five minute, re-direct of Ijames. One matter the State had focused on in cross is that Ijames had made relatively little use of the “magic words” of “objective reasonable officer,” mentioning it only once or so before moving on to speaking in plain English. Here the defense had him use the magic words explicitly, so the jury would know for certain he knew them and had testified to them.
Here Engh also snuck in a question about the danger to the officers if Wright had put the car in reverse—the objection was sustained, and Ijames had not answered the question, but the jury had certainly heard it. (Engh would circle back to this question with the next witness, former Chief Gannon.)
-
TIMOTHY PATRICK GANNON, FORMER CHIEF, BCPD: DIRECT EXAMINATION
Next up for the defense was former Police Chief of the Brooklyn Center Police Department, Timothy Gannon. Gannon was compelled to resign along with Potter two days after the shooting of Duante Wright. Direct of Gannon was conducted by Attorney Earl Gray.
He described that the political leadership of the city informed him that he could either resign and keep his retirement or be fired and lose them, both because of his failure to immediately fire Potter without administrative review of her conduct as well as his handling of the first two days of riots that followed the Wright shooting.
Gannons’ career was mostly a life in law enforcement, from patrolman to apparently every level of the BCPD, including multiple rounds at each Commander station, before becoming Chief in 2015. He had also served in combat areas as a military policeman in the Marine Corps. prior to first becoming a patrolman in 1994.
Gannon described Potter as a fine officer, in all aspects of the job, and one who went above and beyond with her volunteer activity for the DART domestic abuse task force, the LEMA assistance to family of fallen officers, the hostage negotiation team, and more.
With respect to his review of her use of force on April 11 against Wright, he described it as within department policy, and as a simple mistake. Either a Taser or a gun would have been an appropriate use of force under the circumstances presented to the officers by Wright.
Gannon also recounted that he himself had once been dragged by a car driven by a suspect fleeing from his efforts to arrest him, and the terror of the experience.
Gannon delivered direct testimony very favorable to the defense, and did so in a concise 20 minutes.
TIMOTHY PATRICK GANNON, FORMER CHIEF, BCPD: CROSS-EXAMINATION
Cross-examination of Gannon was again conducted by ADA Matthew Frank, who as usual took more time to question the witness than had the defense, and got a great deal less out of the effort.
Frank’s only substantive criticism of Gannon appeared to be that his opinion on Potter’s use of force was not well-informed because it was based on only her own body camera video, which he had viewed the day of the event, and the dash camera video of Officer Luckey’s squad car, which Gannon had seen only the week prior to his testimony.
Gannon’s response was essentially that the very reason he’d not immediately fired Potter after the event was precisely because not all the evidence had yet come in.
When asked, Gannon affirmed that he liked and respected Potter, which Frank naturally used to suggest his testimony was biased.
Bottom line, the cross of Gannon was 28 minutes of not much to write home about:
TIMOTHY PATRICK GANNON, FORMER CHIEF, BCPD: RE-DIRECT/RE-CROSS
Re-direct of Gannon by Earl consisted of only a single question: Would you lie under oath to help a friend?
Gannon’s reply: There’s a reason I’m an ex-Chief—nobody can make me do anything.
Boom.
Then Frank had a single-question re-cross, asking Gannon if he was merely offering his opinion, and Gannon confirmed he was.
FOUR CHARACTER WITNESSES
The defense then offered four character witnesses, although one, Officer Friecke, had some modest first-hand knowledge of the events following the Wright shooting. All said that Potter had a well-established reputation for being law-abiding and for peacefulness. Notably, two of these witnesses—Hall and Smith—were black men.
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the testimony of these four witnesses was that the State chose the off-putting ADA Joshua Larson to conduct their cross-examination. Larson was thoroughly hostile, especially to the nearly weeping Office Friecke, a woman, and took entirely the wrong tone. Why the State did not have ADA Erin Eldridge at least cross-examine Friecke is beyond me.
In any case, not much substantive to write about the testimony of these witnesses, so I’ll simply present it in summary fashion.
DEFENSE CREATES RECORD OF DUANTE WRIGHT MISCONDUCT
With testimony completed for the day the defense created a record, outside the hearing of the jury of many of Duante Wright’s bad acts, evidence that the judge had declined to admit into evidence on character grounds.
JUDGE CHU TO INCLUDE NON-DEADLY INSTRUCTION
Finally, the judge noted she’d be finalizing jury instruction this evening—importantly, Judge Chu also informed the parties that she planned to add an instruction on the authorized use of non-deadly force to supplement to already agreed to parallel instruction on authorized use of deadly force.
Although the State reserved the right to object to this new instruction until they’d see a draft, the addition of the non-deadly instruction would be very favorable to the defense. In effect, it would provide a path for the jury to an acquittal if they believed that non-deadly force was authorized and that unintentional use of deadly force was simply a mistake or mere negligence.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/daunte-wright-shooting-trial-day-7-defense-expert-forcefully-backs-potter/
-
Psychologist Dr. Laurence Miller will be testifying in defense today on the phenomenon of Weapon Confusion/Slip & Capture Errors.
Judge Regina Chu has permitted Dr Miller to explain the theory to the jury, but not make comment on whether Kim Potter had experienced this during the incident.
Since 2001, there have been 16* incidents in the United States of police weapons confusion between a conducted energy weapon, such as a Taser, and a firearm. Four people, including Daunte Wright in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, were killed *(another study suggests as many as 18)
..................
List of some known instances
2001 Steven Yount
2002 Everado Torres*
2002 Christopher Atak
2003 Frederick Henry
2004 Theodore Wright
2006 Unknown (Bremerton, WA)
2008 Michael McCarty
2009 Oscar Grant*
2014 Eric Butts
2015 Eric Harris*
2017 Jamel Jackson
2018 Ryan Smith
2018 Akira Lewis
2019 Brian Riling
2019 Ashley Hall
2021 Daunte Wright*
*(Fatal)
.....................
Of the four fatal instances of taser confusion, two were accidently shot by men, two by women.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2021/04/13/taser-confusion-errors-like-daunte-wright-shooting-rare-but-avoidable/7210538002/
-
Patient Safety Tip of the Week, Taser “Slip and Capture Error” Again!
April 20, 2021
In the midst of a trial of a police officer in the death of an unarmed African-American man in Minneapolis, 10 miles away there was another incident in which a young African-American man was fatally shot by a police officer during a traffic stop. In the latter incident, the police officer apparently intended to use a taser on the man but instead fired her gun, killing the man. “How could that happen?” you ask. It’s not the first time this has happened. In fact, it has happened multiple times. Our April 21, 2015 Patient Safety Tip of the Week “Slip and Capture Errors” noted at least 8 prior instances where police intending to use tasers, instead pulled out their guns and shot someone. It is the classic example of what is known as a “slip and capture” error.
The police stopped the man for a suspected traffic violation but found there was an outstanding arrest warrant on him. When he got back into his vehicle against the commands of the police officers, one officer aimed a weapon at him and shouted “Taser! Taser! Taser!” (Bogel-Burroughs 2021, Broaddus 2021, Navratil 2021). She fired one round, and the man groaned in pain. “Holy shit, I just shot him,” the officer can be heard shouting. The man drove off in the car but crashed a couple blocks away and was pronounced dead at the scene.
A nearly identical incident occurred in 2018 in Kansas (Robertson 2019). A police officer thought she had her Taser in her hand as she watched an unarmed man beating a fellow officer. What she fired, however, was her gun — by mistake. “Oh s---, I shot him,” she shouted. During legal proceedings, she explained her brain immediately went ‘you need to tase this guy, you got to tase, you got to tase him” and she shouted “Taser! Taser! Taser!” She fired what was in her hand, and the assaulter shouted in pain — which would have been normal when hit with a Taser. But the officer said she was stunned that she didn’t see the wires of a Taser gun strike. At this point she realized she had pulled her gun and shot the assaulter by mistake, instead of pulling her Taser. She exclaimed aloud, “Oh s---, I shot him.”
We wrote our April 21, 2015 Patient Safety Tip of the Week “Slip and Capture Errors” after a volunteer police deputy fatally shot a man, thinking he was firing his taser, not his gun (Yan 2015). In 2009 a very similar shooting occurred on the Oakland BART system when the officer fired his gun rather than the intended taser (Force Science Institute 2010). At that time, retired Capt. Greg Meyer noted there were at least 6 similar incidents prior to that 2009 shooting (Meyer 2010). So, when we did our 2015 column, there were at least 8 similar incidents where a police officer inadvertently shot someone, mistakenly thinking they were using a taser and not their gun. After the recent Minnesota shooting, media reports put the number of similar incidents as high as 18 (Elinson 2021). One article actually lists 16 of the prior incidents (Ciavaglia 2021).
Sure sounds like a system problem to us! It’s reminiscent of concentrated potassium chloride issues in healthcare in the past. Multiple incidents occurred disseminated both in time and location, so it took years for us to see a pattern and look for root causes and, ultimately, solutions.
So, this is a patient safety column, not a crime column. Why are we discussing this at all? We discuss it because these are instances of a human factors concept, the “slip and capture error”, and we need to understand why they occur because similar errors can occur in healthcare. We gave many examples in our April 21, 2015 Patient Safety Tip of the Week “Slip and Capture Errors” and such are well worth reiterating.
Basically, a capture error occurs when two potential actions share the same or similar initial sequences, but one action is relatively unfamiliar and the other is a well-known and well-practiced action (the latter often carried out almost automatically or subconsciously). In effect, under certain circumstances the well-practiced action sequence will “capture” the action.
But the capture error is not a new concept. In fact, for years when we are teaching patient safety to medical students, residents, or other healthcare workers and tell them mistakes are inevitable we give them a classic example: “It’s Sunday morning. You intend to go to the grocery store. But you find yourself in your car on the route to your usual workplace/school, instead of the route to the grocery store.” (Usually about two thirds of the audience raises their hands when we ask if that has happened to any of them!) That happens to be a classic capture error. The more practiced activity “captured” the intended but less familiar activity.
Usually there are “enabling” factors that contribute to the occurrence of “capture” errors. These include stressful situations, emergencies, distractions or interruptions and others.
So, what are some healthcare examples of “capture” errors? A nurse or physician, confronted with a new version of a device (eg. ventilator, infusion pump, dialysis machine, etc.), programs in the sequence of keystrokes or dial manipulations he/she used on the old device even though he/she has been inserviced on the new device.
Another example might occur during CPOE. You almost always choose the first option from a drop-down list listing regimens for a certain anticonvulsant. Your software vendor updates the software and the drop-down list is now reordered. Still, you choose the first option and this time your patient gets the wrong drug or wrong dose.
A somewhat similar error may have occurred in the fatal NMBA incident we described in our Patient Safety Tips of the Week for December 11, 2018 “Another NMBA Accident” and February 12, 2019 “From Tragedy to Travesty of Justice”. In that case, a nurse was attempting to retrieve Versed from an automated dispensing cabinet (ADC). She recalled talking to an orientee about something unrelated while entering the first two letters “VE” into the ADC. The first medication on the list was chosen. The nurse did not recognize that the medication chosen was vecuronium, not Versed. The nurse looked at the back of the vial to see how to reconstitute the medication but did not recheck the name of the medication on the vial. Ultimately the fatal dose of the paralyzing agent vecuronium was administered to a patient.
In our April 21, 2015 Patient Safety Tip of the Week “Slip and Capture Errors” we also noted an example where we might incorrectly choose an order set for order set for DKA (diabetic ketoacidosis), which gets used very often, rather than the intended order set for nonketotic hyperosmotic state, which is used much less frequently.
There is probably also some relationship or at least overlap of “capture” errors with another human factors concept: inattentional blindness (ISMP 2009). In the latter, which is really a sort of confirmation bias, we tend to see what we expect to see rather than what we actually see. This is often a contributing factor in incidents where medications are drawn up from the wrong vials.
Another interesting thought: technology may cause some “capture” errors. Autotext or automatic completion of phrases by a word processor or smart phone may lead to such errors. We’ve noted several times that every time we type “EHR” (for electronic health record), our word processor converts it to “HER” and we might miss that on proof-reading. Or our smart phone automatically inserts one email address when we really intended a different one. These examples really meet the definition of a “capture” error in that two actions start with the same sequence of steps and one that is far more familiar than the other (at least far more familiar to the computer!) takes over for the intended action. You can bet that there will be analogies with healthcare technologies.
Capture errors have long been described by human factors pioneers like James Reason and Don Norman. How about some everyday examples of “capture” errors?
James Reason, widely known as the father of human factors research, provides numerous examples (Reason 1990):
After a decision to reduce sugar consumption, someone finds himself sprinkling sugar on cornflakes the very next morning.
After food is moved to new refrigerator, someone finds himself opening the old refrigerator to look for food.
After moving to a new home, some starts a letter with previous home address.
Someone intends to stop at a store on the way home but drove past the store without stopping.
Someone wants to put milk in a cup but puts it back in the refrigerator before putting any in the cup.
Someone takes off their socks when they only meant to take off their shoes.
Don Norman (see our November 6, 2007 Patient Safety Tip of the Week “Don Norman Does It Again!”) in his two great books on human factors and design of things (Norman 1988, Norman 2009) has some great examples:
A person who frequently plays cards is counting pages at a copy machine and counts 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-J-Q-K-A!
A person playing a song on an instrument finds himself switching to a more familiar song.
A person goes to the bedroom to change for dinner and finds himself going to bed.
Someone finishes typing his thoughts on the word processor and turns it off without saving.
Did you ever rent a car on a trip and turn on the windshield wipers instead of the lights because the control knobs were reversed from the car you usually drive?
In fact, the classic predictable error of using the previous year when you write a check in January of a new year is often referred to a “slip” but is probably also really a “capture” error.
In the taser/gun incidents, use of the taser is the relatively unfamiliar action and use of the gun is the more familiar and well-practiced action. Even if the officer has never fired his/her gun on duty, they all spend considerable time on the shooting range so have practiced use of the gun frequently. But we suspect most have practiced using the taser much less frequently and probably never practiced under stressful conditions.
As Don Norman would tell us, design of systems significantly impacts on how humans use those systems. Design of the taser and its holster likely contributed to each of the incidents. In many of the previous taser/gun mistakes the taser had apparently been drawn by the “strong” (dominant) hand, though the location of the taser holster was variable (Meyer 2010). One of the recommendations made by the Forensic Science Institute after the BART case was use “weak-side, weak-hand-draw” taser holsters to minimize the chance of unintentionally drawing one’s gun rather than the taser. It’s not known how the officer in the current Minnesota incident was wearing her weapons and holsters at the time of the shooting. Apparently, the policy was that the tasers were to be holstered on the nondominant side. But, even then, there is a problem. The video of the incident shows another officer wearing the taser holster on the nondominant side but the butt of the taser was positioned such that the officer could easily “cross-draw” the taser with his dominant hand (Hubler 2021). An article in USA Today (Loehrke 2021) has a good graphic showing not only holstering but also all the other equipment police officers typically carry on their belts.
And it’s clear it is not enough to just receive some education/training on use of the taser. Taser use must be practiced just as often (perhaps even more often) than practicing gun use and done under conditions closely simulating those in which a taser is likely to be needed.
But, let’s go back to the concentrated potassium issue in hospitals. You’ll recall that nurses withdrew fluid from what they thought were vials of heparin or insulin but were really vials of concentrated potassium. When injected, that would cause the heart to stop beating. One problem was the similarity of the vials of the various substances. The other problem was that there really was no need for vials of concentrated potassium salts to be on nursing units at all. Many years ago, nurses did have to add potassium to IV fluids but now IV fluids are typically prepared in hospital pharmacies, so nurses don’t have the need for vials of potassium any longer. The solution was to remove vials of potassium from floor stock on nursing units all together.
The taser dilemma needs a similar solution. Not removal of the tasers, of course. But rather redesign of the tasers. We’ve heard all the media pundits say “how could anyone mistake their gun for a taser? The gun and the taser have different weights and the officers are supposed to wear the taser on the side of their nondominant hand. The taser is a different color (usually a bright, often neon, color) to distinguish it from the gun. And officers are supposed to be trained on use of both guns and tasers. But, obviously, all those features have not prevented incidents where guns are mistaken for tasers.
Our take – the taser looks like a gun and has a trigger like a gun! So, it’s no surprise that, in the heat of an emergent situation, someone will pull that trigger. If nothing is done, it is inevitable there will be another inadvertent shooting after mistaking a gun for a taser. The solution should be to redesign tasers so they have a different shape and have an activation mechanism that is different than a gun-style trigger. Maybe add some sort of audible signal that appears when the taser is unholstered. Is that too much to ask? Just be careful the redesign does not have its own unintended consequences (like tasing oneself!).
We have no intention of getting into the discussion of whether tasers or any other forceful actions were appropriate in this incident and we’re focusing just on the taser issue. While there are clearly many other issues and factors contributing to the most recent taser/gun incident, the fact that so many such incidents have occurred tells us that there is a strong underlying system vulnerability that is a primary root cause of such incidents. Just as we had put our nurses in position to inadvertently administer lethal potassium doses years ago, the current design of tasers puts officers in position to inadvertently shoot someone. It’s time for thoughtful analysis and realistic solutions.
https://www.patientsafetysolutions.com/docs/April_20_2021_Taser_Slip_and_Capture_Error_Again.htm
-
Kim Potter Trial Live Day 8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3GtvjG7Rbc
-
Kim Potter is now testifying.
She will be up against a female prosecutor on cross examination.
She needs to try & prove she feared for Sgt Johnson's life.
Based on everything I've seen, I think she has absolutely no chance.
I don't think the narrative she has created after the fact is going to stand up to scrutiny.
The slip & capture professor has been subpoenaed by the state for potential recall after Kim Potters testimony, which could also be a problem as she had prior discussions with him regarding the incident, but hasn't to my knowledge ever given an official statement.
-
She claims to have seen fear in Johnson's face like she's never seen & her recollection of events seems conveniently hazy.
She claims not to remember anything much that happened during the incident or immediately after.
She does not recall saying anything about going to prison either (which prompted Johnson to throw her a potential defense & claiming Mr Wright was trying to drive off with him in the car).
-
Closing arguments & Jury instruction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQxIepUgHrg
Frame by frame, she's absolutely screwed.
The prosecution closing has destroyed her defence.
Kim Potter is represented by attorney Earl Gray, practicing criminal defence since 1970 he's one of the most experienced defence lawyers in the USA, & he's going to need every minute of that experience to make her look anything other than guilty imo.
-
After days of deliberation Kim Potter has been found guilty on both charges.
She has been taken into custody & will be sentenced February.
The prosecution have been pushing for aggravating factors to be considered, she could face a maximum sentence of 25 years.
-
Thanks for giving a running synopsis spammy.
-
Thanks for giving a running synopsis spammy.
@)(++(* yes we’ve all been silently agog with interest.
-
Well I found it interesting even if no one else did.
There's another trial beginning January, a father & son from Aberline, Texas, shot dead another man during an argument over a dumped mattress.
They are claiming self defence but the video taken by the dead mans wife shows something quite different.
Not sure if it's being televised but I hope so, as it will be interesting to see a defence attorney try to justify shooting someone in the face for dumping a mattress.
-
Video of the deadly mattress confrontation is available in the link.
A Texas Father And Son Were Recorded On Video Fatally Shooting Their Neighbor Over Trash.
(https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2018-09/21/13/asset/buzzfeed-prod-web-04/sub-buzz-27509-1537549201-1.png?downsize=800:*&output-format=auto&output-quality=auto)
John Miller and Michael Miller were charged with murder after they allegedly shot dead Aaron Howard during a confrontation over a mattress in a dumpster. Warning: Video contains graphic footage.
A father and son from Abilene, Texas, were charged with murder after they were caught on video fatally shooting their neighbor during a dispute over trash.
John Miller, 67, and his son, Michael Miller, 31, were charged with first-degree murder in the death of Aaron Howard, 37.
They were arrested Sept. 1, but were released a day later on a surety bond of $25,000, jail records showed.
However, the two men were taken into custody on Friday after a district court reviewed the initial bonds and raised them to $250,000 each, police said Friday.
The deadly encounter between the neighbors was recorded on video by Howard’s common-law wife Kara Box.
The video, published by the Star-Telegram, showed the Millers — armed with guns — arguing with Howard over a mattress that Howard had dumped in the shared alleyway behind their homes on Don Juan Street.
The video captured the Millers firing multiple rounds at Howard who was shot at least twice, police said. He died after being transported to the hospital, police said.
Both the Millers admitted to shooting Howard, police said.
Abilene Police Chief Stan Standridge said that the neighbors began arguing over trash in the alleyway a “couple of days” before the Sept. 1 shooting.
Box told the Star-Telegram that she and Howard had thrown out a twin mattress in a dumpster in the alley a few days before the shooting.
On the morning of Sept. 1, the couple saw that the mattress was on their property so they tossed it back in the dumpster, Box said. This prompted their next-door neighbor John Miller to throw the mattress back on their property, Box said.
An argument ensued between Howard and John Miller who refused to put the mattress back in the dumpster and then pulled a handgun out of his pocket, Box said.
This enraged Howard, who accused his neighbor of pulling a gun while his nieces and nephews were in the backyard with him, according to Box.
The fight escalated when John’s son, Michael Miller, retrieved a shotgun from his residence, police said.
There were a total of five people in the alley, including the Millers, Howard, Box, and an unidentified member of Howard’s family, police said.
In the video, both Box and Howard can be heard shouting at John Miller for pulling a gun in front of children.
“If you come closer to me, I’ll kill you,” John Miller is heard telling Howard.
Howard — who did not have a gun — is heard repeatedly telling John Miller that he was going to kill him.
“You’re in an alley with a shotgun, you piece of shit,” Howard is heard saying. “I’m going to kill you.”
“I doubt it,” the older Miller responds.
Michael Miller, who is seen standing behind his father holding a shotgun over his shoulder, then tells Howard, “First of all, if you’re going to show this video to the cops you might as well stop yelling that you’re going to kill us.”
Howard is then heard yelling, “I don't give a f..k. I will f..king kill you. You pulled a gun on my kids.”
John Miller is heard telling Howard to “back up” several times.
At some point during the confrontation, Howard’s family member reportedly retrieved a baseball bat from their residence, according to police.
John Miller is then heard egging Howard on to “take a swing” at him, while Howard repeatedly provokes him to point the gun at him.
Howard then tells the younger Miller, “You're a bitch, I’m going to kill you too,” to which the son responds, “f..k off, cocksucker.”
“If you come within three feet of me, I’m going to kill you,” the older Miller is heard telling Howard.
Box interjects, saying, “You're not going to shoot my husband.”
Howard repeatedly shouts, “shoot me” and “point it.”
At least two gunshots are then heard on the video, after which Michael Miller can be seen firing his shotgun.
At least another four shots can be heard in the video, and police said that callers reported as many as five shots being fired.
Box is then heard screaming, “Aaron, no, no,” as she rushed toward her husband.
Box told the Star-Telegram that John Miller then put the handgun to her head and yelled at her to get on the ground, while his son went to Howard’s brother and placed the shotgun to his head. Police responded to the scene shortly after.
A detective who reviewed the footage believed that it was apparent from the video and interviews with the Millers that "they were tired of their neighbor, Aaron Howard, acting out and yelling and threatening them verbally," according to a statement released by Abilene police on Friday.
The statement said that Howard "got more and more upset" during the argument as the Millers stood in the alley with their firearms.
Police said that John Miller fired the first rounds as soon as Howard raised his baseball bat while standing approximately seven feet away from John. At the time when Michael Miller discharged his shotgun, and his father fired the final two rounds, Howard was unarmed, police said.
“I really don’t have a comment one way or the other,” John Miller told the Washington Post on Thursday. “This is something that I consider a private matter between me and the state of Texas.”
The Millers could not be reached for comment Friday.
“[The Millers] deserve to spend your lives in prison,” Box told KTXS.
She did not respond to BuzzFeed News’ request for comment.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tasneemnashrulla/father-son-texas-shooting-neighbor-trash-video
-
District attorney says no charges against Jacksonville police officer who shot & killed son
Jan. 20, 2022
JACKSONVILLE, N.C. (WITN) - A special prosecutor said there will be no charges brought against a Jacksonville police officer for shooting and killing his teenage son.
Wilmington District Attorney Ben David announced that determination in a morning press conference at the Onslow County Courthouse.
Officials say Detective John Clukey fatally shot his son, Alexander Clukey, outside the family home on Haw Branch Road on Dec. 27th. At the time, deputies said the child’s father accidentally shot his son in the head.
Prosecutors say the officer left his home to retrieve his police vehicle and had his service revolver on his side. They say when he returned home, he was met by his son, and the two engaged in an Airsoft gun battle in the front yard. The three Airsoft guns were Christmas gifts; Clukey had two pistol-style Airsoft guns, and his son had an AR-15-style Airsoft gun.
When Clukey’s first pistol-style Airsoft gun was empty, he threw that to the ground and mistakenly grabbed his service weapon instead of the second Airsoft gun.
David’s summary of events said once the officer realized he had shot his service weapon, he ran to his son and called 911. The dispatcher asked for the address of the emergency, which Clukey gave, adding, “my son was playing fake guns and someone shot with a real gun.”
While waiting for over 11 minutes for emergency personnel, Clukey said “I deserve everything I have coming to me,” “take me instead,” “stay with me,” and “I’m so sorry,” according to David’s report. David says at one point during the call, another child of Clukey left the house, and he told them to go back inside.
David said the investigation showed that Clukey mistakenly believed he was pointing a toy gun at his son. He said the officer should have been more careful than to play an Airsoft game with his son while having a real gun in his holster.
The special prosecutor said there was not a real likelihood that they would receive a conviction if charges were brought. Detectives were unable to find any eyewitness to the shooting and it was outside the view of any cameras.
“There is no evidence that John Clukey intended the death or injury of Alexander Clukey,” David said. “No substantiated evidence of any domestic abuse or threats of abuse, or of any homicidal ideation or planning have been discovered. Everything about this incident shows a father who did not intend for this to happen.”
David added that a killing not meant to have happened is not the end of an investigation, but there is no evidence that this killing occurred during the course of unlawful conduct. According to David, it is not against the law to have a consensual Airsoft game with a child, but it is a crime to knowingly point a firearm at anyone “either in fun or otherwise, whether such a gun or pistol be loaded or not loaded.”
Onslow County District Attorney Ernie Lee removed himself from the investigation earlier this month. Lee says that he made the decision to avoid the appearance of any partiality or potential conflict. Clukey is a lead detective in an upcoming murder trial, according to Lee.
The North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts officially assigned Attorney Ben David and his office to the case.
Clukey has been a police officer since 2010 and his current rank is listed as corporal. He was placed on administrative leave after the shooting, according to Jacksonville police.
https://www.witn.com/2022/01/20/district-attorney-provide-update-da-investigation-officer-shooting-son/
-
Didn't have to wait long for another Slip & Capture Error.
Luckily for this officer the detainee survived, this is going to happen again unless they redesign Tasers into a different shape to guns, with a push button instead of pull trigger action system & they are carried in an entirely different area from the duty belt.
Officers train roughly 80% of the time on guns & only 20% on Tasers.
But, if training was split 50/50, I'm not sure that would decrease the risk of weapon confusion.
Another cop who couldn't tell the difference between a gun and a Taser: Police force says Florida officer who shot and paralyzed a naked man thought he pulled out his taser - six weeks after Kim Potter was convicted of manslaughter for killing teen
9 February 2022
The police statement was released late Tuesday after civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump announced a lawsuit to force the release of surveillance video
The Ortiz lawsuit comes as Minneapolis police officer Kim Potter awaits sentencing for manslaughter after killing Daunte Wright during a traffic stop
She too said she thought she was firing her stun gun, not her handgun
The officer who shot Ortiz was put on desk duty pending a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation
Police say the Florida officer who shot and paralyzed a naked man thought he pulled out his Taser, mirroring former Minneapolis officer Kim Potter who was convicted of manslaughter for killing a teen last December.
On Monday civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump announced a lawsuit to force the release of surveillance video of the July 3 shooting that paralyzed 42-year-old Michael Ortiz.
The Ortiz lawsuit comes as former Minneapolis police officer Kim Potter awaits sentencing after she was found guilty of first-degree and second-degree manslaughter in late December.
Hollywood, Florida police released a statement late Tuesday saying that the unidentified officer thought he was deploying his stun gun when he shot and seriously wounded Ortiz.
'While the investigation is still active and ongoing, an initial review suggests the officer intended to deploy his taser, but instead discharged his firearm,' the statement said.
According to police, Ortiz called 911 saying he had taken drugs and was suffering from chest pains. Paramedics responded first. Ortiz, naked and agitated, emerged from a sixth floor apartment and threatened to jump from a balcony.
Officers were sent to the scene to assist Hollywood Fire Rescue after Ortiz refused to open the door and began making 'delusional and suicidal statements,' the police statement said.
One officer deployed a Taser and put Ortiz in restraints, but he used his legs to resist as they tried to move him into an elevator to a waiting rescue vehicle, the statement said.
'As he continued to resist, an officer discharged his firearm, striking Mr. Ortiz once,' the police statement said.
The officer who shot Ortiz was put on desk duty pending a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation, police said.
But Crump offered a different account what what took place.
He said last summer Ortiz called 911 to report his dog missing, then took a shower and was wearing a towel when police showed up at his door.
Crump also said that video taken from a nearby apartment building recorded some of what happened and police need to release it.
'You must release the video that shows us why you shot a naked man, face down and paralyzed him,' Crump told CBS-4.
'He was having a crisis; he needed a helping hand. He didn't need a bullet in his spine,' Crump said on Monday.
'Eight months of Michael every day trying to figure out why did the police officer shoot him in the back?' Crump added. 'Why is he paralyzed for life? Why does he have over $1.4 million in medical bills that continue to rise every day? Why would the Hollywood Police Department continue to deny them the answers that they deserve? The truth that they deserve?'
Sitting in a wheelchair next to Crump at Monday's press conference, Ortiz had a message for the police officer, simply asking: 'Why? Why did you have the need to shoot me?'
Police said the FDLE's findings will be submitted to the state attorney's office for review, and then the Hollywood Police internal affairs unit will investigate.
'We empathize with Mr. Ortiz and his family and know they have many questions about that evening,' police said. 'Our hope is that once the investigation is complete, we will be able to meet with them and provide any additional information they are seeking.'
The police statement confirmed that the department preserved all evidence and records of the case in response to a July 12 request by the law firm Morgan and Morgan on behalf of Ortiz's family. The law firm also indicated they mailed a public records request to the general police headquarters address, bypassing a records request on the agency's online web portal.
Hollywood police said there is no record of the letter being received by the records division, and the law firm told police they are no longer representing Ortiz. The police statement said the department received no other public records requests about the shooting until Monday, the day Crump announced the lawsuit.
Potter, who is white, 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.
Potter claimed that she confused her handgun for her Taser when she shot and killed Wright in April 2020. During her trial, she tearfully testified that she 'didn't want to hurt anybody.'
Wright's shooting happened at a time of high tension in the area, with Chauvin standing trial in nearby Minneapolis for Floyd’s murder.
Jurors saw video of the shooting from police body cameras and dashcams. As Wright pulled away while another officer attempted to handcuff him, Potter repeatedly said she would tase him, but instead shot him once in his chest with her gun, which was in her hand.
'(Expletive)! I just shot him. ... I grabbed the wrong [expletive] gun,' Potter said on video shown to the jury. Moments later, she said: 'I’m going to go to prison.'
During her sometimes tearful testimony, Potter told jurors that she was 'sorry it happened.' She said the traffic stop “just went chaotic.'
The maximum prison sentence for first-degree manslaughter is 15 years. Minnesota law sentences defendants only on their most serious conviction when multiple counts involve the same act and the same victim, and state guidelines call for about seven years on that charge.
Prosecutors have 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.
Potter’s attorneys argued that she made a tragic mistake, but that she also would have been justified in using deadly force because of the possibility that Potter’s fellow officer, then-Sgt. Mychal Johnson, was at risk of being dragged if Wright had driven away from the traffic stop.
Potter testified that she decided to act after seeing a look of fear on Johnson’s face. But Eldridge pointed out to jurors that for much of the interaction, Potter was behind a third officer she was training and that Johnson didn’t come into her camera’s view until after the shot was fired — and then it showed the top of his head as he backed away.
“Sgt. Johnson was clearly not afraid of being dragged,” Eldridge said. “He never said he was scared. He didn’t say it then, and he didn’t testify to it in court.”
Eldridge also noted an inconsistency in Potter’s testimony, saying that when she gave an interview to a psychologist working for the defense team, she told him she didn’t know why she used her Taser. Potter told the jury she didn’t recall saying that.
First-degree manslaughter required prosecutors to prove that Potter caused Wright’s death while committing a misdemeanor — in her case, the reckless handling of a firearm. The second-degree charge required them to prove that she caused Wright’s death by “culpable negligence.”
Crump, who also represented Wright's family, likened Potter's conviction to those of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who murdered black man George Floyd in May 2020, and the three white men from Georgia who were found guilty this month of gunning down Ahmaud Arbery as he was running away.
Crump said Potter's verdict was as 'profound' as the others, arguing that '2021 [is] a historical year in our quest for racial justice in America.... it really is about not just a victory for accountability for Daunte Wright's family, but it is a victory for America in our quest for equal justice under the law.'
Potter, 49, faces about seven years in prison under the state’s sentencing guidelines, but prosecutors said they would seek a longer term.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10494395/Police-Officer-thought-handgun-stun-gun-shooting.html
-
Kim Potter sentencing this Friday 18th Feb.
State changes course in seeking guideline sentence for Kim Potter
State prosecutors have changed their position on seeking an upward sentencing departure for Kimberly Potter, the ex-Brooklyn Center police officer who was convicted of manslaughter for fatally shooting Daunte Wright during an April 11, 2021 traffic stop.
In a filing submitted Tuesday, Attorney General Keith Ellison’s prosecution team requested Judge Regina Chu issue a presumptive sentence under Minnesota sentencing guidelines for Potter’s first-degree manslaughter conviction. The state had previously announced its intent to seek an upward sentencing departure based on aggravating factors.
Namely, the prosecution previously argued Potter’s actions posed a “greater-than-normal danger” to the passenger in the car with Wright, the other officers near Wright’s car and the people in the car Wright crashed into after Potter shot him. They also argued Potter abused her position of authority as a police officer.
Now, with Potter’s sentencing hearing days away, the state’s sentencing memorandum defers to Minnesota sentencing guidelines, which would set her sentence between 74 and 103 months, with a presumptive sentence of 86 months, or just over seven years. Potter’s defense attorneys had previously challenged an upward departure, and have asked the judge for probation and a downward durational departure.
The memo points out that “a court may only depart from a presumptive sentence when they can articulate ‘substantial and compelling’ circumstances,” but this is only in reference to the defense’s request for a downward sentencing departure. The state’s previous rhetoric about a greater sentence is never mentioned.
Potter’s sentencing hearing is set for Friday at 9 a.m.
https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/state-changes-course-in-seeking-guideline-sentence-for-kim-potter/
-
In a 12-page sentencing memo filed Tuesday, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison asked Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu to impose the presumptive sentence of 86 months, or seven years and two months for Potter's conviction.
"Daunte Wright, and his life must be held in the highest regard as well. The presumptive sentence reflects that seriousness of the loss of his life," Ellison wrote.
"In addition, the presumptive sentence reflects the culpability of the Defendant's recklessness in causing Daunte Wright's death," he continued.
The maximum penalty for first-degree manslaughter predicated on reckless use/ handling of a firearm is 15 years in prison and/or a $30,000 fine.
However, Minnesota sentencing guidelines give a judge discretion to sentence convicted offenders with no criminal history, such as Potter, to roughly between six and eight and a half years in prison, with a presumptive sentence of 86 months.
In arguing against defense attorneys' request for a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines or a probationary disposition, Ellison acknowledged Potter is in a "unique position" to help prevent another case of "weapons confusion," saying she could speak to law enforcement groups, trainers or legislators about her experience.
While steps like this could help the community heal, Potter "made a colossal, lethal error, an error she was trained to avoid," Eillison wrote.
"By acknowledging her failure, she is subject to the law like all others," he wrote.
According to Minnesota law, Potter will be required to serve two-thirds of her sentence in prison. With good behavior, she will be eligible for supervised release for the remaining third.
Since her conviction, Potter has been incarcerated at the state correctional facility in Shakopee, according to records from the Minnesota Department of Corrections.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/15/us/kim-potter-prosecutor-daunte-wright-sentencing/index.html
-
What to Watch at Kim Potter's Sentencing Hearing
The maximum sentence for that count is 15 years in prison, but state sentencing guidelines call for much less. For someone with no criminal history, such as Potter, the guidelines for first-degree manslaughter call for a sentence ranging from slightly more than six years to about 8 1/2 years, with the presumptive sentence being just over seven years.
The guidelines are advisory, but judges can't go above or below the advised range unless they find a compelling reason to do so. Prosecutors initially argued that aggravating factors should warrant a sentence above the guidelines. But this week, they filed another document saying the presumptive sentence is proper.
The defense is seeking a lighter sentence than the guidelines suggest, including one of probation only. In order for Judge Regina Chu to do that, she would have to find mitigating factors that show this case is significantly less serious than the typical first-degree manslaughter case. She has not yet ruled on whether there are aggravating or mitigating factors.
WHAT DO PROSECUTORS SAY?
Prosecutors initially asked Chu to find aggravating factors. Specifically, they argued that Potter abused her authority as an officer and that her actions caused a greater-than-normal danger to others. There is nothing in the court record to suggest they have withdrawn that request.
But in a court filing Tuesday, prosecutor Matt Frank said the presumptive sentence would be proper because it “takes into account the main elements of the conviction: the death of Daunte Wright and Defendant’s recklessness.”
WHAT IS THE DEFENSE'S POSITION?
In asking for a lighter sentence than the guidelines suggest, Potter's attorneys argued that Wright was the aggressor.
“All Mr. Wright had to do was stop, obey lawful commands, and he’d be alive," they wrote.
They cite the federal case stemming from the 1991 beating of Rodney King as a comparison. They said in that case, a judge sentenced former Los Angeles police Sgt. Stacey Koon below federal guidelines for violating King's civil rights and found “the victim’s wrongful conduct contributed significantly to provoking the offensive behavior.”
Prosecutors had sought about 10 years in prison, but Koon got 2 1/2 years. Potter's attorneys wrote that the decision to depart from the guidelines in Koon's case was ultimately upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. But one legal expert said they did not include other context: that the decision was fraught with controversy and led Congress to change the standard that the Supreme Court used to affirm Koon's sentence.
“It was a big downward departure, and at the time the sentencing guidelines were mandatory,” said Mark Osler, a former federal prosecutor who is now a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law. He said the defense's decision to mention that case “shows a certain blindness to the larger scope of history — they're citing to a downward departure that was rebuked by the Congress of the United States.”
Prosecutors said it was “incredulous” that the defense would use the case arising from King's beating to support their request for a shorter sentence.
In arguing for only probation, Potter’s attorneys said she has no prior record, is remorseful, has had an exemplary career and has the support of family and friends. They also said her risk of committing the same crime again is low because she is no longer a police officer, and that she would do well on probation.
IS ONLY PROBATION POSSIBLE?
Yes, if the judge finds that there are mitigating factors.
Prosecutors have argued against a lesser sentence, including one of probation only. But they also said in a court filing that "the State recognizes that this is a unique case given the context in which Defendant Potter recklessly handled her firearm.”
Frank wrote that if the judge decides prison time isn't warranted, probation should be for 10 years and Potter should have to spend a year in jail. He also said she should be required to speak to law enforcement groups about the dangers of confusing a handgun for a Taser, and required to speak to Wright's family if they choose.
Frank said if Chu finds that Potter’s case is less serious than the typical first-degree manslaughter case, she should sentence Potter to between four and slightly more than seven years in prison, which would be the presumptive sentences for second-degree and first-degree manslaughter.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN AT THE HEARING?
One of Potter's attorneys, Paul Engh, said she intends to make a statement. Engh said the defense has also submitted a “heavy volume” of letters in support of Potter, and the attorneys plan to read some of them in court.
Prosecutors also plan to present victim impact statements, in which victims or family members can share how they have been affected by the crime.
If Chu finds there are no aggravating or mitigating factors, she’ll sentence Potter within the range of slightly more than six years to about 8 1/2 years.
Marsh Halberg, a Minneapolis defense attorney who isn't connected to the case, predicted Chu would stay within the guidelines because such a sentence would likely hold up on appeal.
“It’s kind of bulletproof,” he said. “Before anybody opens their mouth, the judge is in that guideline range box.”
HOW LONG WILL POTTER SERVE?
In Minnesota, it’s presumed that an inmate who behaves well will serve two-thirds of their penalty in prison and the rest on supervised release, commonly known as parole.
That means if Potter gets the roughly seven-year presumptive sentence, she would serve about four years and nine months in custody before being paroled.
If sentenced to probation, she would be placed under conditions — violations of which could get her sent to prison.
Potter has been at the women’s prison in Shakopee since the guilty verdict. Nicholas Kimball, a spokesman for the state Department of Corrections, said she has been kept separate from the rest of the prison population.
https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2022-02-17/explainer-what-to-watch-at-kim-potters-sentencing-hearing
-
Kim Potter Trial - Full Sentencing Hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4HWcAfAj_g
Ex-police officer Kim Potter sentenced to two years for fatally shooting Daunte Wright
A Minnesota judge on Friday sentenced former police officer Kim Potter to two years in prison, far less than what was sought by prosecutors in the fatal shooting of Black motorist Daunte Wright.
Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu handed down the punishment for the former Brooklyn Center police officer after emotional courtroom statements from the victim's loved ones and the defendant herself.
Chu ordered Potter to spend two-thirds of her sentence behind bars and one-third of it on supervised release. She's already served 58 days behind bars, which will go to her credit.
A Minnesota judge on Friday sentenced former police officer Kim Potter to two years in prison, far less than what was sought by prosecutors in the fatal shooting of Black motorist Daunte Wright.
Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu handed down the punishment for the former Brooklyn Center police officer after emotional courtroom statements from the victim's loved ones and the defendant herself.
Chu ordered Potter to spend two-thirds of her sentence behind bars and one-third of it on supervised release. She's already served 58 days behind bars, which will go to her credit.
Potter's online Department of Corrections records were quickly updated after Friday morning's sentencing, showing she will likely walk free on April 24 next year.
Chu said Potter deserved less than the 86-month sentence sought by prosecutors because the officer was trying to use her Taser and not her gun.
The judge said she knows her ruling will be unpopular.
“I recognize there will be those who disagree with the sentence; that I granted a significant downward departure, does not in any way diminish Daunte Wright’s life,” Chu said.
The judge said she's never seen a case like this before.
"This is one of the saddest cases that I’ve had in my 20 years on the bench," Chu said.
Outside court, the victim’s mother, Katie Wright, said "the justice system murdered him all over again."
The grieving mom appeared to discount the tears Potter shed in court as the former police officer apologized for her deadly actions.
“This isn’t OK,” she said. “This is the problem with our justice system today. White women’s tears trumps, trumps justice. And I thought my white woman tears would be good enough because they’re true and genuine.”
Ben Crump, an attorney for the family, was particularly angered by Potter's sentence, compared to the 57-month punishment against former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor.
Noor, a Somali immigrant, was convicted of shooting a 911 caller, mistaking her as a threat to his partner.
"He was remorseful but they didn’t make a downward departure for the Black police officer like they made for this white policewoman," Crump said. "And that’s problematic for many people of color in America. That we continue to see this intellectual justification."
Before sentence was issued, Wright’s mother asked a judge to send her son’s killer to prison, telling Potter that she’ll “never be able to forgive you for what you’ve stolen from us.”
“Daunte Wright is my son, my baby boy and I say ‘is’ and not ‘was’ because he will always be my son and I’m proud to say that,” Katie Wright told the court. “Daunte’s smile was genuine and big, just like his dreams. You took them. You took his future.”
Potter, 49, has been in custody since just before Christmas last year, when jurors convicted her of first-degree manslaughter for the April 11, 2021, slaying of 20-year-old Wright in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Center.
The victim’s father, Arbuey Wright, told the court he loved his son.
"I was so proud to be his father. He was handsome, he was my son, my prince,” he said. “He was my reason to do better. He was my reason to change in life.”
Wright was pulled over and police tried to arrest him on an outstanding weapons charge when he tried to get back into his car.
During a brief struggle, Potter — with a Glock holstered her right, dominant side, and her Taser on the left — pulled the firearm and fatally shot Wright.
She testified in her own defense, saying the shooting was an accident and that she had meant to pull her non-lethal Taser.
A sobbing Potter on Friday apologized to Wright's loved ones.
"To the family of Daunte Wright, I am so sorry that I brought the death of your son, brother, father, uncle, grandson, nephew and the rest of your family to your home," she said.
"Katie I understand a mother’s love and I am sorry I broke your heart."
Defense lawyer Paul Engh called Potter's act "an unintentional crime" and said his client is a suitable candidate for probation and not prison.
“This (case) is beyond tragic for everyone involved,” Engh told the court.
Potter sat at the defense table wearing a purple sweater and a blue paper medical mask.
Engh challenged claims by the prosecution and victim's family that Potter didn't show concern for Wright after she shot him.
"She was remorseful from the moment the gun was fired," he said. “We can’t have a Kafkaesque standard of what remorse is.”
Potter has been held in isolation for her own protection, the defense said. Engh showed the judge a box of "thousands" of sympathetic letters and cards mailed to Potter.
“People took the time to write her,” he said. “This is unheard of for a defendant. I dare say no one in this room has ever seen anything like this.”
But prosecutor Matthew Frank said the crime's impact cannot be understated, whether intentional or not.
“His name is Daunte Wright. We have to say his name. He’s not just the driver he was a living human being, a life," Frank said.
“The highest principle of law enforcement is the sanctity of life. His life counted. His life mattered. And that life was taken and the law recognized the severity of the loss of life when setting criminal penalties.”
Frank choked back emotion as he told Chu that this case demands significant prison time.
"This is a courtroom full of pain and anger," he said. "How do we fix that? What can we do? "
The slaying of Wright by a white officer sparked renewed protests and calls for justice in and around Minneapolis and other U.S. cities.
Wright was gunned down about 10 miles north of the courthouse where former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was tried for killing George Floyd.
Days later, Chauvin, who is white, was convicted of second- and third-degree murder, as well as second-degree manslaughter. The May 25, 2020 killing of Floyd, a Black man, touched off a summer of national protests against police brutality and institutional racism.
Potter’s trial was held in the same courtroom where Chauvin was tried.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/daunte-wrights-mother-says-never-able-forgive-kim-potter-gunning-son-rcna16478
-
Daunte Wright’s Sister Among Those Arrested Or Detained At Courthouse Following Kim Potter Sentencing
Tensions ran high following the sentencing of former officer Kim Potter Friday morning, with some arrests occurring at the courthouse.
WCCO’s David Schuman reports Daunte Wright’s sister, Diamond Wright, was handcuffed and taken away shortly before noon.
From video at the scene, it appeared at least one other person was also detained.
Schuman also caught footage of a confrontation between a Potter supporter and Wright supporters.
Earlier, Potter was given a downward departure sentence of 16 months in prison, with an additional eight months of supervised release.
Judge Regina Chu said that this was the case of a “cop who made a tragic mistake. She drew her firearm thinking it was a Taser and ended up killing a young man.” The court approved a downward departure from the typical sentence.
Daunte Wright’s family expressed disappointment in the judge’s decision and said the “justice system murdered him all over again.”
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2022/02/18/daunte-wrights-sister-among-those-arrested-at-courthouse-following-kim-potter-sentencing/
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2022/02/18/daunte-wrights-sister-among-those-arrested-at-courthouse-following-kim-potter-sentencing/
-
How Daunte Wright led a life of crime and violence before his death and shot his own friend in the head, broke into a neighbor's home, and robbed a woman at gunpoint
Daunte Wright had led a life of crime and violence in the years before his death, DailyMail.com can reveal
The 20-year-old was involved in the shooting of two of his school friends, a home burglary, and previously
assaulted and robbed a woman at gunpoint
Jennifer LeMay said Wright shot her son, Caleb Livingston, 18, in the head and at a gas station and left him to die in an incident in Minneapolis in May 2019
Another woman, identified only as CV, told DailyMail.com Wright assaulted her and pointed a gun at her in an attempted robbery in December 2019
And in 2017, Wright was arrested and charged with felony 1st degree burglary of an occupied dwelling after breaking into his friend's parent's home
Former Brooklyn Center officer Kim Potter was sentenced after being convicted of manslaughter for shooting dead 20-year-old Daunte Wright, who prior to his death led a life of crime and violence.
Potter, 49, was led away in handcuffs after being jailed for two years for killing Daunte Wright - of which she'll serve 14 months - after being found guilty on all counts at Hennepin County Court on Friday.
Potter was sentenced to 24 months behind bars - far less than the maximum of seven years - but she will serve only 14 months, thanks to an eight-month good behavior concession from Judge Regina Chu and two months time served.
In December she was convicted of first degree manslaughter for killing Wright, a 20-year-old black man while trying to arrest him. She and other cops had pulled him over in Brooklyn Center, near Minneapolis, for driving with expired license tags. There was a warrant out for his arrest at the time and he tried to drive away from them, which is why Potter reached for her Taser.
The shooting, which came in the midst of Derek Chauvin's trial on murder charges in George Floyd's killing, sparked several days of demonstrations outside the Brooklyn Center police station marked by tear gas and clashes between protesters and police.
Evidence at Potter's trial showed officers learned he had an outstanding warrant for a weapons possession charge and they tried to arrest him when he pulled away.
Video showed Potter shouted several times that she was going to tase Wright, but she had her gun in her hand and fired one shot into his chest.
Wright drove off again then his car stopped.
When Potter realized she had shot him, she buckled into cries on the sidewalk.
But through court records and interviews with the victims, DailyMail.com exclusively reported that Wright had led a life of crime and violence before his death, having been involved in the shooting of two of his school friends, a home burglary, and had previously assaulted and robbed a young woman at gunpoint.
'He's an evil human being. Worse than a monster, a waste of space on earth,' Jennifer LeMay told DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview.
She said her son Caleb, now 18, was left permanently disabled after Wright, his one-time friend, allegedly shot him in the head at a gas station and left him to die two years ago.
A lawsuit filed on behalf of her son in May this year describes the fateful events that took place outside a Full Stop convenience store and gas station on May 14, 2019.
The documents state Wright 'discharged a firearm toward Caleb striking him with a single shot bulled in the heard causing serious disabling, and permanent injuries.'
Doctors told his mom he had a slim chance of surviving the next 24-36 hours, but the teen miraculously survived after spending almost seven months in the hospital.
According to LeMay, Wright shot Caleb in the frontal part of his head, with a bullet ripping through to the other side of his skull, where it is still lodged.
'Daunte shot my son and left him to die,' she said. 'During his hospital stay Caleb almost died six times because of his injuries.'
LeMay said the two boys were good friends at one point and that Caleb had had his first sleepover at Wright's house when he was 13.
'The younger Daunte I knew, I thought was a pretty good kid. I never saw any red flags,' she said.
The pair eventually grew apart after Caleb and his mom moved to the Chicago area in 2018.
'Caleb was still in contact with his friend back up in Minneapolis. It was at this time I started hearing things from my son about Daunte,' LeMay said. 'He was running away from home and on one occasion he even spat on his father.'
Months later Caleb went back up to Minneapolis to visit some family members and was at the local gas station when Wright shot him point blank in his head.
LeMay said she heard from people in the area that Daunte admitted to some pals that he had and only wanted to scare Caleb, but the gun 'accidentally' fired.
'I don't believe you can just accidentally shoot someone. I don't buy it,' the mom said.
LeMay said she later learned that a few days prior, the two got into a physical fight and Caleb got the best of Daunte, leading her to believe that the shooting was motivated by revenge.
Her son now suffers from traumatic brain injury and respiratory arrest, and is bound to a wheelchair. He can't speak, or walk, and has limited movement in his limbs.
'Caleb requires 24/7/365 care, he can't eat, dress, or basically do anything on his own. He requires constant attention,' LeMay said.
'He needs to be lifted in and out of his bed into his wheelchair. He has a service dog, a 12-year-old pit bull terrier named Ciroc that stays by his side most of the time.
'He's going to be 19 years old in a few weeks, he should be out dating and having a good time, instead he's bound to his bed and wheelchair.
'He'll never date, he'll never be able to have children, drive a car or most likely tell us he loves us again,' she said tearfully.
'Daunte changed not only Caleb's life but everyone who is around him,' added LeMay.
Wright was never arrested or charged with shooting Caleb.
Before Wright was killed, she said the local police department had told her that they didn't have any witnesses to who shot her son.
'The local police really didn't work that hard on my son's case. To the best of my knowledge they haven't spoken with anyone on the case since May 15, 2019.'
'Technically the case is still open, but they're never going to solve it.'
Now with Wright dead, LeMay says her son will never get justice.
When she first heard the news that he had been killed, LeMay felt relief, then anger.
'I'm mad as hell that he died,' she said. 'I have mixed emotions about his death, part of me is content knowing he'll never be able to hurt someone again like he did to my son and others.
'But then the other part is furious. When Kim Potter killed him, she took away any possibly for him to be held criminal accountable for what he did.
'Now there will never be justice for my child, my son doesn't deserve this type of life.'
She believes Wright would still be alive today if he hadn't attempted to run from the police.
'Daunte lived a lifestyle that didn't have a long life span. He was either going to be imprisoned, kill someone, or be killed. His actions and behavior were inexcusable on every level.
'You live by the sword you die by the sword. How many more lives did he have to destroy? Karma's a b***h, ain't it?' she added.
LeMay, however, admitted she feels sorry for the young man's family because they lost their child.
'But at least Daunte was able to give them a son to carry on his generation, something I'll never experience from my mine,' she added.
Wright's death occurred just as another white officer, Derek Chauvin, was standing trial in nearby Minneapolis for the killing of George Floyd, fueling unrest.
But LeMay said she's disappointed when people call Wright a martyr, a hero, 'the prince of Brooklyn Center' or compare him to Floyd.
'He's no George Floyd. I knew him and interacted with him on occasion,' she said. 'George was a gentleman, he didn't assault anyone, he didn't shoot anyone.
'For all those people who want to believe that Daunte was this saint, I ask them to come walk in my or my son's shoes for 24 hours and experience the repercussions of his criminal behavior.
'I just thank God that Daunte didn't do to their child what he did to mine.'
Months after Wright's death, another a woman identified only as 'C.V.,' (crime victim) sued Wright's estate on November 29, for assault and battery, sexual assault, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
In an interview with DailyMail.com, she described how Wright and his friend allegedly robbed and assaulted her in 2019.
She did not mind showing her face in photos but asked for her name to be withheld fearing reprisal from Wright's associates.
CV said on November 30, 2019 she and her roommate were hanging out in their apartment in Osseo, Minnesota and invited a friend, Emajay Driver over via Snapchat.
'I knew Emajay and thought he was OK. At the time I had no idea he was capable of doing what he did,' she told DailyMail.com.
CV said Driver replied saying he would be bringing a friend named Daunte, who she didn't know.
According to a police report obtained by Dailymail.com, Driver and Wright were dropped off by an unknown driver around 10pm on Sunday to CV's one-bedroom apartment.
Driver and Wright went inside CV's apartment and they listened to music, played games, and smoked marijuana and drank alcohol. They were talking about relationships and at one point in the conversation, CV told Driver and Wright about an abusive ex-boyfriend.
Wright told CV that he was 'offended by any man who abuses a woman deserves to rot in prison.'
'After I heard Daunte tell me this, it made me feel a bit more comfortable around him,' added CV.
At around 2:30am, CV's roommate wanted to go to bed because she had to get up early for work. She slept on the sofa in the living room area, while CV slept in the bedroom.
'I asked Emajay and Daunte when were they planning on leaving, and they told me they were waiting for their ride.
'A short time later Daunte left to go outside of the apartment, I thought it was to check on their ride. But a few minutes later Daunte came back inside with food for him and Emajay.'
'They told me their ride wasn't going to be able to pick them up, it was snowing outside at the time and freezing cold. So, I let them stay over at our apartment for the night.'
CV said both Wright and Driver slept on the floor in her room, she slept in her bed by herself. Both were perfect gentleman all night, she said.
'I waited for them to fall asleep before I went to bed. At that time, I had no reason to believe what was going to happen next.'
The next morning CV's roommate told her that she was going to the ATM to go get her half of the rent. The night before CV reminded the roommate that they had to pay rent the next morning and she thinks that Driver and Wright overheard their conversation.
CV said Wright made a comment that he did not have to work that day, and he turned to Driver and said we should 'hit some stains', which is slang for robbing someone, but she thought it was a joke.
She asked the men again when they were going to be leaving as she noticed they were procrastinating at that point and claimed to be waiting for their ride.
'I was busy getting ready to leave so I wasn't paying too much attention to the situation,' CV said.
Before leaving, she took the $820 cash of rent money and stuffed it in the side of her bra: 'I have no idea why I decided to hide the money, I just had a bad feeling,' she said.
But just as they were all walking to the door to exit the apartment, Wright turned around and blocked the door and pulled out a black handgun and pointed it at victim and demanded the rent money.
According to CV, Wright pointed his gun at her and kept saying: 'I know you have the money, give me the f**king money, we know you have the money, that is what we are here for.'
'I then looked at Emajay and said to him, "are you kidding me?"'
She said Emajay then said to her: 'No, just listen to him. Do what he says, just do it.'
'He pointed the gun at my head, only a few feet away. I stared down the barrel of his gun. I looked him dead in his eyes and I saw nothing but darkness, pure evil,' CV said.
'I asked him if taking my life over $800 is worth going to prison for the rest of your life?
'After I said that, he put the gun down to his side and with his other hand began to choke me for about 10 seconds.
'I dropped to the floor on my knees to try to break free. I was screaming at him, stop, stop, hoping my neighbors would hear something.'
At that point, Emajay told Wright that the money was in her bra. CV ended up breaking free for a second but Wright 'then grabbed my shirt and started to pull it apart, in my bra area trying to rip it off me to get to the money. '
She then broke free again, at this time she didn't know if the money had fallen out or not.
'Daunte then grabbed me by the neck again and started to choke me, I yelled, "I don't have the money.'
Driver eventually opened the door and both men ran out, as CV chased them believing they had somehow stolen her money.
They both jumped into a waiting car, CV went back to her apartment and later discovered she still had the money tucked away in the side area of her bra.
Both Driver and Wright were arrested days later.
CV said she is still traumatized by that night more than two years later. 'I still have nightmares, even though he's dead. I attend therapy for PTSD.'
Driver plead guilty to the crime and served time in jail. At the time of his death Wright was awaiting trial for aggravated robbery.
According to the Osseo Police Department incident report, Daunte Wright was a documented Loud Pack gang member.
'When I first heard about Daunte's death my heart sunk, I relived the moment when he put his gun to my head,' CV said.
'I was also relieved because I knew he could never hurt me or anyone else again. But part of me was also mad, I wanted to face Daunte at a trial in a controlled environment where I could tell him what he did to me and how he traumatized me.
'I'll never get that chance now; he'll never be held accountable criminally for what he did to me.'
She added: 'He's an evil human being, a monster. He's the worst of the worst. He's not someone to look up to or celebrate.'
Speaking on Potter's trial ahead of the verdict, CV said she believed 'both sides are going to be unhappy no matter what the jury decides.'
DailyMail.com can also reveal Julian Manjo became another victim of Daunte Wright after the then-teenager broke into his house while he was at home.
In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Manjo said that his son previously played basketball with Wright, 'they weren't the best of friends, but they were teammates.'
'I treated Daunte like a son when he came over. There were occasions when Wright would come home with Manjo and spend time in their house.
'Daunte would come to our house after a basketball game or practice and wait until his parents would come get him.'
Court documents exclusively obtained by DailyMail.com say that the then 17-year-old Wright one day 'rang the doorbell of his house' but Manjo looking through the main floor window, saw it was an acquaintance of his son and didn't answer the door.
He then observed Wright walk to the back door of the house and he repeatedly knocked on the door, again Manjo didn't answer the door.
Manjo then said Wright walked over to a bathroom window, which was unlocked, and removed the screen window and placed it against a neighbor's garage.
Wright then returned to the rear door and again repeatedly knocked on the door. When he received no response, he returned to the bathroom, opened it, and crawled into the bathroom.
At this time Manjo says he grabbed a kitchen knife and confronted Wright. Manjo said that 'Daunte ran back into the bathroom slamming the door shut behind and crawled back out of the bathroom window.'
Manjo said he left the knife inside his house and ran outside to confront Wright. He caught up to Wright who by this time was casually walking away from the house, trying not to be too conspicuous.
'I caught up with him and told him, I know who you are and I'm reporting you to the police.'
'He didn't say a word he just ran down the alley after that.'
Wright was later charged with felony 1st degree burglary of an occupied dwelling.
A mental health assessment order exclusively obtained by DailyMail.com stated that he had exhibited anxiety symptoms, disruptive behavior disorder including lying, stealing aggression, academic issue and they recommended he get correctional placement considerations.
After several missed court dates and warrants, he spent time in a juvenile facility and was ordered to get family functional therapy after pleading guilty to a trespassing charge.
'I don't have any opinion on the Kim Potter trial, my case with Daunte is over, it's done,' said Manjo.
'But I will say I am extremely disappointed in him.'
Wright was involved in another incident just three weeks before he was shot dead.
According to a civil lawsuit, he and an accomplice shot former classmate Joshua Hodges on March 21, 2021.
The lawsuit says Hodges was sitting alone in his car near a residential address when Wright and an unnamed accomplice approached him in a premeditated attempt to steal his car.
The accomplices shot Hodges in the lower left leg hitting an artery that caused massive bleeding, fracturing his left fibula resulting in a lengthy hospitalization.
Wright then went over to Hodges who was bleeding from the gunshot and began to assault him, causing facial, mouth and teeth injuries. He then stole Hodges's wallet, cell phone and car.
The lawsuit states that Wright has a lengthy criminal record. He was never arrested nor charged in this case.
Attorney Michael Padden is now representing Hodges, CV, and Livingston.
'The purpose of these lawsuits is to hold Daunte Wright accountable for his criminal conduct,' he told DailyMail.com.
'We are confident that we will secure judgements and eventual financial compensation from the Wright estate.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10528747/How-Daunte-Wright-led-life-crime-violence-death.html
-
The Minnesota judge who handed down a 2-year sentence to former cop Kim Potter for killing Daunte Wright got emotional as she asked the public to empathize with the ex-officer — and said that Potter tried "to do the right thing."
"I recognize that there will be those who disagree with the sentence," Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu said in the courtroom after handing down the sentence to Potter. "That I granted a significant downward departure does not in any way diminish Daunte Wright's life."
"His life mattered," Chu said. "And to those who disagree and feel a longer prison sentence is appropriate, as difficult as it may be please try to empathize with Mrs. Potter's situation."
Potter, a 26-year veteran cop, fatally shot Wright during a traffic stop in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Center on April 11, 2021. Potter had claimed she meant to use her Taser on Wright and grabbed her gun by mistake; prosecutors noted that her Taser was holstered on the opposite side of her body.
Potter faced a total of up to 25 years in prison after her conviction in December 2021.
Prosecutors on Tuesday had asked the judge to sentence Potter to more than 7 years in prison, according to court documents, while Potter's defense argued in court that she should only serve probation due to her having no previous criminal record.
Under Judge Chu's sentencing, Potter will serve 16 months in prison with the possibility of 8 months of supervised release for the end of her sentence.
Chu appeared to tear up as she quoted former President Barack Obama, saying, "Empathy is a quality of character that can change the world."
The judge again got choked up as she defended Potter.
"Officer Kimberly Potter was trying to do the right thing," Chu said, adding, "Of all the jobs in public service, police officers have the most difficult one."
"They must make snap decisions under tense evolving and ever-changing circumstances," the judge said. "They risk their lives every single day.
An emotional Chu continued, "Officer Potter made a mistake that ended tragically."
"She never intended to hurt anyone. Her conduct cries out for a sentence significantly below the guidelines," Chu said.
The Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, the state's largest police union, released a statement on Friday thanking Chu for departing downward from the state's requested sentence of more than 7 years.
"We are thankful for Judge Chu's thoughtful approach in her stated reasoning, as she recognized Ms. Potter's law enforcement service and that she made a tragic mistake," the statement said.
Wright's father called the 2-year sentence a "slap in the face" at a press conference after the sentencing on Friday. Wright's mother, Katie Bryant, told reporters that it felt like the justice system "murdered" Daunte "all over again.
"To sit there and pouring my heart out in my victim impact statement that took so long to write, and I rewrote it over and over again, to not get a response out of the judge but then when it came down to sentencing Kim Potter, she broke out in tears," Bryant said at the press conference.
https://www.insider.com/judge-sentencing-kim-potter-daunte-wright-death-cries-2022-2
-
Court chaos after Kim Potter sentencing: Daunte Wright's sister is handcuffed after 'fight with his son's mother' while his brother screams at protesters and his mom slams judge who 'cried for the cop' and gave her 14 months in prison
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10526209/Ex-cop-killed-Daunte-Wright-learn-sentence.html
JUDGE REGINA CHU'S FULL SENTENCING REMARKS
'This is one of the saddest cases I've had on my 20 years on the bench.
'On the one hand, a young man was killed and on the other, a respected 26-year veteran police officer made a tragic error by pulling her handgun instead of her Taser. On one hand, there is a respected 26-year veteran officer who made a tragic error in pulling her handgun instead of her Taser.
'Thank you to everyone who spoke. I have been profoundly moved by the comments of the Wright family. Daunte was very loved. His son has lost a father, and Mr. and Mrs. Wright, I cannot begin to understand the grief of losing a child. I'm so sorry for your loss.
'Kimberly Potter honorably served her community for 26 years as a police officer. She was a respected officer and consistently went over and above the call of duty. She is a wife, a mother, an aunt, a granddaughter, a colleague and friend to many.
'In addition to the letters that were forwarded to me, I received hundreds and hundreds of letters in her support from colleagues, family, friends, acquaintances, community leaders and even strangers. I read them all. They paint a portrait of a woman who touched a lot of people in a good way.
'I want to talk briefly about the aggravating factors that were brought up in this case. The state initially took the position Ms Potter should receive a sentence above the guidelines and filed a brief in support of two aggravating factors. All parties agreed that I would determine whether aggravating factors existed. I feel compelled to address the grounds for that request because they were made public and I think it is important to note they were not proven in this case.
'The state did not meet its burden of proof on the first factor. It is based on the defendant causing a greater than normal danger to the passenger in the car, and two other officers when she fired.
'But the shot only hit Daunte Wright. The passengers and officer were not injured. This case does not involve a greater than normal danger to others.
'The case did not support its position. In fact, they illustrate why this case does not involve a greater than normal danger to others. In the Fleming case, he fired a gun six times in a park filled with children. In State vs Omaha, defendant fired numerous shots into two apartment buildings. There is no comparison here.
'The state also did not meets its burden of proof on the second factor. Contrary to the state's claims, Kimberly Potter did not abuse her position of authority. In fact, it is undisputed Ms. Potter or Office Potter was in the line of duty and doing her job in an attempting to lawfully arrest Daunte Wright on the run when she mistook her gun for her Taser.
'She drew her Taser legitimately to protect a fellow officer on the other side of the vehicle.
'Officer Potter conduct was not significantly more serious than that typically turning to defendant's request for a dispositional departure. There is no question that Ms. Potter is extremely remorseful. She showed that today, when it happened. It is beyond dispute she is amenable to probation. The court retains the discretion to make departure decisions independently.
'Sentencing guidelines are just that. They are guidelines that inform a judge regarding sentencing for various crimes. They are not set in stone. The court has the discretion.
'A downward durational departure is justified, if the conduct is significantly less serious than that typically involved in the commission of crime. I find the facts and circumstances here justify a downward departure. Office Potter's conduct was significantly less serious than your typical manslaughter case. The scene was chaotic, tense and rapidly evolving.
'She was required to make a split-second judgement. Unlike other manslaughter cases, officer Potter's actions were not driven by personal animosity toward Daunte Wright. She was acting in the line of duty in effectuating a lawful arrest.
'This case is highly unusual. The other cases tried in this case are distinguishable. This is not a cop found guilty of murder for using his knee to pin down a person for nine minutes as he gasped for air. This is not a cop found guilty of manslaughter for intentionally drawing his firearm and shooting across his partner and shooting an unarmed person.
'This is a cop who made a tragic mistake. She drew her firearm thinking it was a Taser and ended up killing a young man.'
'Ms Potter, will you please rise. It is the sentence and judgement of court you shall be committed to the custody of commissioner of 24 months - you shall serve 16 months in prison and a third unsupervised.
'This has been an extremely difficult decision. In making my decision, I look to the purposes of incarceration, retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation. Three of the four would not be served in this case.
'I recognize there will be those who disagree with this sentence. This does not in any way diminish Daunte Wright's life. His life mattered. To those who disagree and feel a longer prison sentence is appropriate, as difficult as it may be, please try to empathize with Ms. Potter's situation.
'As President Barack Obama once said, learning to stand in somebody else's shoes to see through their eyes, that is how peace begins. It's up to you to make that happen. Empathy is a quality of character that can change the world. Office Potter was trying to do the right thing.'
'Of all the jobs in public service, police officers have the most difficult one. They must make snap decisions under tense evolving and ever-changing circumstances. They risk their lives every single day in public service. Officer Potter made a mistake that ended tragically. She never intended to hurt anyone.
'Her conduct cries out for a sentence significantly below the guidelines.'