I suppose this deserves its own thread for the time its topical
Today was the start with end of pretrial motions and opening arguments:



https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/daunte-wright/kim-potter-trial-daunte-wright-brooklyn-center-opening-statements/89-7520f682-6c72-49a3-8df7-1d589474918f

Kim Potter was charged with both first and second degree manslaughter in the death of Daunte Wright.
Potter and her partner attempted to arrest Wright on outstanding warrants on violent crimes and firearm offenses, when Wright attempted to escape in his vehicle. Officer Potter said she'd tase him if he kept resisting, then said "Taser Taser Taser" and drew her firearm and shot him once, immediately realizing her mistake and exclaiming. The prosecutors allege that her conduct was not a mistake, but instead that she made the conscience decision to commit an act inherently dangerous to life, without regard to the risks. Notably, it requires a conscious/intentional act, not a mistake. They also are attempting to argue that the use of a taser at all was unjustified. Potter's defense has started by arguing that she was justified in using a taser, and that her partner was inside the vehicle and would have been dragged and injured or killed if Wright had managed to drive away.

A BLM activist has already been charged with a felony while trying to intimidate the judge in this case.


I guess this is the criminal justice reform they wanted? Idk. I am glad that somebody was finally charged while doing scumbag tactics to intimidate people involved in a case.

One of the notable developments is that the defense has elected to bring character evidence of the defendant, and the prosecution attempted to exclude it. Normally, the prosecutors would want this, since it opens the door to impugning the defendant by presenting negative character evidence. And she's been a cop for 26 years, which gives all kinds of history to draw from. And the fact they are taking these lines indicates that in 26 years she didn't have anything they could use to impugn her.

Why not the Jussie Smollett trial? Definitely more lulz

The defense is just begging for a mistrial at this point and the judge won’t do it.

If I unintentionally kill someone here by running them over I'm getting an involuntary manslaughter charge as a normal civilian. She should at minimum receive the same.

Probably should have let him kill the cop and then kill him. Nobody would have cared.

You guys still cherry picking the uninteresting trials.

She will probably be found guilty. She fucked up. That being said this would have been local news if it weren’t for all the race baiting scumbags out there.

If you can't keep your taser and gun straight then at minimum you should get some form of involuntary manslaughter out of sheer incompetence.

Maybe up it depending on the standards since taser is still a potentially deadly weapon, but that'll be for the jury to decide.

Its an interesting trial because she's obviously 100% innocent under the normal, reasonable and consistent reading of the law: Accidents and mistakes are not crimes if they did not involve reckless disregard or intentional conduct creating the circumstances. She is only on trial because of the political animus towards police after George Floyd, and this serves as the third in a series of high profile prosecutions of people who are at risk of spending years in prison for murders that weren't murders, born out of this animus.