GUILTY MN - Daunte Wright, 20, fatally shot by police during traffic stop, Brooklyn Center, Apr 2021 #2

  • #241
Kim Potter knew there was a warrant for DW. Did she know if he was a violent or non-violent man? She did know he was committing a criminal offense by attempting to flee. What if DW had recklessly fled in the car, crashed it and his passenger was killed (and others)? What if DW had a knife and stabbed officer Luckey? Tazing DW would have prevented both of these. I do not think Kim Potter consciously wanted to kill DW. I do not think officers can be clairvoyant.

There are criminals within police departments (no doubt!) but I don't happen to think Kim Potter is a criminal.

jmo
 
  • #242
I sure do not think KP is a "criminal" in the strict sense of the law but she sure needs to be held accountable and in some way I think she may just agree. I have to think if this hangs and another trial happens they may charge in such a way she can plead to something...and everyone moves on. It may not be that simple but another trial is in no one's best interest. Gray will get very lucky with a hung jury.
 
  • #243
It is so clearly obvious that NONE of these circumstances apply to Kim Potter, and her prosecution was done for political reasons. You would think that they would have learned from Other Recent Events (i.e. K.R.) that doesn't fly, and is a waste of precious resources that could be used to go after ACTUAL CRIMINALS. Moo.
One might also have hoped the defence might have done a better job of pointing out how exactly these charges did or did not apply to his client, and explain them, rather than intimating that even if she had meant to use her firearm, she would've been within her rights to do so. It does seem obvious that the chosen charges don't fit, when one reads the actual wording from the actual statutes. imo.
 
  • #244
One might also have hoped the defence might have done a better job of pointing out how exactly these charges did or did not apply to his client, and explain them, rather than intimating that even if she had meant to use her firearm, she would've been within her rights to do so. It does seem obvious that the chosen charges don't fit, when one reads the actual wording from the actual statutes. imo.
I remember during the Mohammed Noor case regarding the shooting of Justine Damond, thinking that the Minnesota statutes on Manslaughter/murder were oddly worded and needed to be rewritten. They don't fit for police shootings very well.
 
Last edited:
  • #245
Well it seems like no verdict today? Clearly that are trying...anyone expect anything at this point other than hung?
 
  • #246
  • #247
Well it seems like no verdict today? Clearly that are trying...anyone expect anything at this point other than hung?
I would say I’m leaning slightly towards hung, with acquittal next, and I’ll be shocked if it’s guilty on either count.
 
  • #248
Leaning hung jury now. I thought there would be a guilty verdict...yesterday.
 
  • #249
I bet Gray is celebrating already. He really did a poor job. This will never be tried with a jury again if hung...and I don't see any consensus or they would be home tonight. I think they are sleeping on it one more night and will give the news tomorrow morning. As I heard it no more questions.right?
 
  • #250
Jury at Kim Potter trial deliberates 3rd day without verdict – Twin Cities

A jury pushed through its third day of deliberations with no verdict Wednesday at the trial of a suburban Minneapolis police officer who shot and killed Black motorist Daunte Wright.

The court reported no questions from the jury at Kim Potter’s trial, a day after jurors asked Judge Regina Chu what to do if they couldn’t agree and she told them to continue deliberating. They got the case about midday Monday.
 
  • #251
I bet Gray is celebrating already. He really did a poor job. This will never be tried with a jury again if hung...and I don't see any consensus or they would be home tonight. I think they are sleeping on it one more night and will give the news tomorrow morning. As I heard it no more questions.right?
Just curious why you think this won't be tried with a jury again. What other options are there? I don't think she would take any kind of a deal , if offered, that would involve prison time. I remember a case from a few years ago where an officer was charged for shooting and killing someone and went to trial. The jury hung and he was tried again with the same result---hung jury. The prosecutor decided not to try the case a 3rd time so that was the end of that.
 
  • #252
The prosecution overcharged in my opinion, and that is the problem here.
 
  • #253
The prosecution overcharged in my opinion, and that is the problem here.
Absolutely. I don’t understand why involuntary manslaughter wasn’t an option. That said, I haven’t read the wording for involuntary either, so maybe it doesn’t fit anymore than man 1 or 2. But reading these two statutes, I don’t see how a group of 12 citizens will ever agree that what happened here fits man 1 or 2 as written.
 
  • #254
Absolutely. I don’t understand why involuntary manslaughter wasn’t an option. That said, I haven’t read the wording for involuntary either, so maybe it doesn’t fit anymore than man 1 or 2. But reading these two statutes, I don’t see how a group of 12 citizens will ever agree that what happened here fits man 1 or 2 as written.
It seems that Man2 is the charge for involuntary manslaughter in MN.
BBM

Some states, such as Minnesota, use the term second-degree manslaughter instead of involuntary manslaughter. The term first-degree manslaughter is equivalent to voluntary manslaughter.
....
Minnesota

The Minnesota Statutes cover deaths caused by negligence with the felony crime of manslaughter in the second degree instead of the term involuntary manslaughter. A second-degree manslaughter conviction in Minnesota has a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment along with up to $20,000 in fines. A person may be found guilty of second-degree manslaughter under circumstances such as:

  • Their negligent conduct creates an unreasonable risk, knowing it may cause great bodily harm or death
Archives
 
  • #255
This is what the female prosecutor showed while discussing the elements for 'first degree' manslaughter charges:
View attachment 327274

Add link: approx 23:14:

This is the up-to-date Minnesota law regarding Reckless Use of a Firearm (which is mentioned in the text shown by the prosecutor above). Perhaps the charge should've been something different?:

Red and some bolding by me, and I have snipped what I believe to be irrelevant parts, such as 'furnishing to minors', etc.:

609.66 DANGEROUS WEAPONS.

Subdivision 1.Misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor crimes.

(a) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a crime and may be sentenced as provided in paragraph (b):


(1) recklessly handles or uses a gun or other dangerous weapon or explosive so as to endanger the safety of another; or

(2) intentionally points a gun of any kind, capable of injuring or killing a human being and whether loaded or unloaded, at or toward another; or

(3) manufactures or sells for any unlawful purpose any weapon known as a slungshot or sand club; or

(4) manufactures, transfers, or possesses metal knuckles or a switch blade knife opening automatically; or

(5) possesses any other dangerous article or substance for the purpose of being used unlawfully as a weapon against another; or

(6) outside of a municipality and without the parent's or guardian's consent, furnishes a child under 14 years of age, or as a parent or guardian permits the child to handle or use, outside of the parent's or guardian's presence, a firearm or airgun of any kind, or any ammunition or explosive.

Possession of written evidence of prior consent signed by the minor's parent or guardian is a complete defense to a charge under clause (6).

(b) A person convicted under paragraph (a) may be sentenced as follows:


(1) if the act was committed in a public housing zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 19, a school zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 14a, or a park zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 12a, to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both; or

(2) otherwise, including where the act was committed on residential premises within a zone described in clause (1) if the offender was at the time an owner, tenant, or invitee for a lawful purpose with respect to those residential premises, to imprisonment for not more than 90 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $1,000, or both.

Subd. 1a.Felony crimes; suppressors; reckless discharge.

(a) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced as provided in paragraph (b):

(1) sells or has in possession a suppressor that is not lawfully possessed under federal law;

(2) intentionally discharges a firearm under circumstances that endanger the safety of another; or

(3) recklessly discharges a firearm within a municipality.

(b) A person convicted under paragraph (a) may be sentenced as follows:

(1) if the act was a violation of paragraph (a), clause (2), or if the act was a violation of paragraph (a), clause (1) or (3), and was committed in a public housing zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 19, a school zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 14a, or a park zone, as defined in section 152.01, subdivision 12a, to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both; or

(2) otherwise, to imprisonment for not more than two years or to payment of a fine of not more than $5,000, or both.

(c) As used in this subdivision, "suppressor" means any device for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearm, including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, and any part intended only for use in such assembly or fabrication.
....

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.66
-----------------------------------------------------------
I was wondering where the prosecution during her closing arguments, was getting her snippets from regarding 'reckless handling and use of a firearm', and relating it to the 'first degree manslaughter' charge. Turns out it came straight from the judge's instructions to the jury.

But meanwhile, the MN website wherein it lists the statues, the statute for that charge says nothing about the reckless use of a firearm, but yet there is a completely separate charge specifically just FOR that (shown in quoted text in this post). But yet KP was not charged with that.

Does anyone know how this reckless use of a firearm info made its way into the jury instructions on a first degree manslaughter charge? Did they merge those two statues at some point and forget to update their official website? Am I reading it wrong?

From the jury instructions: (link is in my post upthread)

Elements

The elements of Manslaughter in the First Degree while committing a misdemeanor are:

-First, the death of Daunte Wright must be proven.
-Second, the Defendant caused the death of Daunte Wright.
-Third, the death of Daunte Wright was caused by the Defendant’s committing the crime of Reckless Handling or Use of a Firearm.

  • There are two elements of Reckless Handling or Use of a Firearm:
    • (1)First, the Defendant recklessly handled or used a firearm. A person acts “recklessly” if, under the totality of the circumstances, she commits a conscious or intentional act in connection with the handling or use of a firearm that creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk that she is aware of and disregards.
    • (2)Second, the Defendant handled or used the firearm so as to endanger the safety of another person. It is not necessary for the State to prove any intent on the part of the Defendant to kill anyone.
-Fourth, the Defendant committed the crime of Reckless Use or Handling of a Firearm with such force or violence that the death of another person or great bodily harm to another person was reasonably foreseeable.
-Fifth, the Defendant’s act took place on or about April 11, 2021 in Hennepin County.

If you find that each of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the Defendant is guilty. If you find that any element has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the Defendant is not guilty.
 
  • #256
Final day of deliberations in Potter trial before jurors are sent home for Christmas

Thursday will be the final day of deliberations in the trial of a former Brooklyn Center police officer before jurors are sent home for the Christmas holiday.

Court records show jurors began deliberations at 8:40 a.m. The day before, jurors began deliberations shortly before 8:30, and on Tuesday, began deliberating at 9 a.m.
....
The judge said for first-degree manslaughter, prosecutors must prove that Potter caused Wright's death while committing the crime of reckless handling of a firearm. This means they must prove that she committed a conscious or intentional act while handling or using a firearm that creates a substantial or unjustifiable risk that she was aware of and disregarded, and that she endangered safety.

For second-degree manslaughter, prosecutors must prove she acted with culpable negligence, meaning she consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm.

Final day of deliberations in Potter trial before jurors are sent home for Christmas
 
  • #257
In case anyone else is wondering, as I was, if KP can be convicted of BOTH charges:

The two counts are separate and not mutually exclusive; Ms. Potter can be convicted or acquitted of either charge, or of both.

Minnesota law also allows juries to consider convicting a defendant of an “included offense” — a lesser degree of the same crime, or another lesser crime that was proved in the course of the trial — in place of a charge listed in the complaint.


Jury Weighs Charges in Trial Over Daunte Wright’s Death - Stimulus Check Up
 
  • #258
Well clearly there is one or more hold outs and they will come back this afternoon stating they cannot agree. I don't think it could be any other conclusion. I think universal not guilty was impossible so best outcome for KP and her attorney. She will be on a plane back to Florida for the holidays.....at this point probably has the air ticket for tomorrow morning. Many here saying state may not even try this again....they must have their reasons as they are in the legal business. I would think Wright family will press for another trial. At this point I am not sure what is right anymore.
 
  • #259
  • #260
@LouRaguse

“A trial outcome has been reached and will be read on the record today between 1:30 p.m. and 2 p.m. CST.”

@OmarJimenez

The trial outcome will be read in court between 2:30 and 3pm ET.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
1,416
Total visitors
1,517

Forum statistics

Threads
632,375
Messages
18,625,423
Members
243,116
Latest member
jaysmith
Back
Top