Quote (SBD @ Dec 8 2021 02:04pm)
Yes but accidents are charged with involuntary manslaughter. If I run Betty over in the packing lot backing out its involuntary manslaughter. If I get into a scuff and push a guy and he hits his head off the curb and dies that's also involuntary man slaughter.
I don't understand how this would be different, or if you want to call it criminally negligent homicide we can call it that.
It would be hard to argue she was not negligent , her actions were both unintentional and unlawful, therefore she should be charged.
I don't care about any BLM movements or racially motivated trials, just surface level facts seem to point to criminal negligence in my view. Person could be white, purple, green or black.
Quote (duffman316 @ Dec 8 2021 02:42pm)
Involuntary manslaughter it is
Accidents are not charged as involuntary manslaughter. Accidents made through conscious recklessness are.
If you run over Betty in the parking lot because you were looking at your cell phone while sipping on a beer and not even looking behind you as you backed up, you're guilty of manslaughter because you had the intent to disregard the risks of your reckless actions.
If you are paying attention to your mirrors and craning your neck around and backing up slowly when Betty suddenly trips and falls behind you, out of your sight, and you thud over her head with your tires- that's not your fault.
If you get into a scuff and push a guy and he hits his head off the curb and dies, that's not manslaughter, that's murder. You possessed the intent to commit a violent felony with an inherent risk of death.
Not all accidents resulting in deaths are crimes. That's particularly common in vehicular deaths. Just because someone dies in a car accident doesn't make the other person guilty of manslaughter, even if they were at fault by way of mistake. Its only a crime when there is an element of mens rea- the guilty intent by either consciously disregarding the reckless dangers of your actions, or acting with a gross negligence that created the danger that any reasonable person could have foreseen. Merely making a momentary mistake, a slip of the foot, a misjudged turn, failing to see a fleeting danger- that's not criminal. Because even if it was a mistake and you could have avoided it if you were more skilled or acting more perfectly, you didn't engage in any conduct utterly reckless and dangerous without justification.
The way the law should be applied in this case is rather blatantly obvious. The officer wasn't acting recklessly, she was responding by the book and justified in deploying a taser to stop a fleeing felon who was endangering her partner, and even followed the safe procedures for deploying a taser in every way except for grabbing the wrong gun. Which was very clearly a
mistake- a momentary lapse in using the wrong holster in the middle of the chaos. Evidenced by how she said warned him he would get tasered, then how she said taser taser taser before firing once, and then immediately in the aftermath expressing her shock and remorse. There was no moment in which Kim Potter consciously made a decision that was reckless, nor did she create the circumstances, nor did she disregard the dangers of her actions.
This post was edited by Goomshill on Dec 8 2021 03:00pm