Kimberly Potter found guilty

I searched all over ATS for this topic, but it has yet to be posted. I chose this forum because of my theory as to why this miscarriage of justice occurred.

Link: Foxnews Article

My theory is that she was found guilty because of the threat of further violence in the MPLS/St. Paul area. Ms. Potter's grief is clear, her remorse is unmistakable. Yet she was found guilty of 1st degree manslaughter. Wow. Obviously she screwed up and clearly I am not privy to all the information/evidence presented at the trial, but DAYUMMM! C'mon man! She was *serving* and made a mistake. And yes, some human lives are worth more than others - the deceased was a criminal POS.

We should be giving her a medal, not 10+ years. Unbelievable. Who wants to be a cop now? All because the jury was afraid of repercussions. We live in an insane country.

Deuces.

She killed a black crimi...... I mean folk hero who was going to be a doctor, engineer, human rights lawyer, and would have found a cure for Covid. If she was found guilty due to fear of the reaction to another verdict, that is the definition of mob rule. Might as well start having ourselves good ol fashion lynchings.

"(1) intentionally causes the death of another person in the heat of passion provoked by such words or acts of another as would provoke a person of ordinary self-control under like circumstances, provided that the crying of a child does not constitute provocation;"

"(3) intentionally causes the death of another person because the actor is coerced by threats made by someone other than the actor's coconspirator and which cause the actor reasonably to believe that the act performed by the actor is the only means of preventing imminent death to the actor or another;"

This isn't the jury's fault.
This is the Minnesota legislature's fault for drafting up such garbage statutes for their first degree manslaughter charge.

The state of Minnesota just doesn't give a **** why someone died, if they can find someone to blame, they do.

The only other statute that could maybe apply is this one:

" (2) violates section 609.224 and causes the death of another or causes the death of another in committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offense with such force and violence that death of or great bodily harm to any person was reasonably foreseeable, and murder in the first or second degree was not committed thereby;"

Where if Kim Potter wasn't actually justified in using her taser at the time, then her actions would have been considered assault, and not part of her regular police duties. Someone died as a result, thus by statute 2, this applies.

Minnesota had a very confused Yoda draft these manslaughter statutes, that's all I can say.

So, here we go again. Those who agree she got what she deserved believe it's a fair verdict. And those who think she should have gone free are crying, "Oh the injustice".

I'll say it again, the jury has the final word, unless, of course, for appeals. Live with it.

Frankly, I think the juries are getting it just right lately. Rittenhouse should have been let go. This woman should serve time. And those three in the Aubrey case got what they deserved.

Not having a problem with these verdicts. And besides, it makes no difference. They jurists hear more evidence than we do, they make their decision, and that's that.

a reply to: Avardan


She was convicted of manslaughter.

Which generally means accidental and/or negligent in some way, depending on the state.

That charge appears to fit the known facts in this case.

Unless additional evidence comes to light, I think the prosecution and jury did their jobs properly.

Unlike certain other recent high profile cases in Minnesota.

a reply to: Avardan

I wonder what the fallout will be from fellow officers.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Avardan

I wonder what the fallout will be from fellow officers.

Sadness over the entire horrible event.

And relieved that she received a fair trial with reasonable verdict.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
So, here we go again. Those who agree she got what she deserved believe it's a fair verdict. And those who think she should have gone free are crying, "Oh the injustice".

I'll say it again, the jury has the final word, unless, of course, for appeals. Live with it.

Frankly, I think the juries are getting it just right lately. Rittenhouse should have been let go. This woman should serve time. And those three in the Aubrey case got what they deserved.

Not having a problem with these verdicts. And besides, it makes no difference. They jurists hear more evidence than we do, they make their decision, and that's that.

Agree 100%

This is our justice system it isn't perfect, but yes, her actions were excessive besides didn't she fire 2 shots?

It was sickening to see the prosecution portraying this as an intentional killing. Why the need to make things up? Yeah, she made a very big mistake and should pay for that in some way. However when you have a known violent criminal actively resisting arrest things can go bad in a hurry.

Montreal lawyer Viva Frei's commentary.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2
Wow, a Canadian that I agree with completely.

So....... when are all the right wingers and non POCs going to 'mostly peacefully' riot, loot and burn buildings down?

a reply to: Avardan

I was listening to this case on the radio where it's asserted that she pulled her firearm by mistake instead of her taser. I immediately thought, how many times did she pull the trigger? Did she pull it more than once? How many rounds did she pump into him. More than one shot tends to make me believe she knew fully well that she had pulled her firearm with intent to shoot him.

Regardless, for me, it's just one less criminal society has to continually deal with.

Back up here. I thought this was the case where a female cop shot a home intruder as she walked into her apartment.

a reply to: nugget1


Silly Nugget, BLMing is for democrats.

Bottom line...she killed someone...she had been on the police force for many years...she knew better...perhaps she'll eventually get out of prison...but again she killed someone when it was not necessary...I think the woman is mentally ill.

What happened that day is no different than a doctor guilty of malpractice, but a doctor would only be sued in that situation. They even carry insurance for it. Medical errors/mistakes account for a third of the deaths in the US annually. Given this case, I would suggest that doctors should be brought up on criminal charges for mistakes resulting in a death.

She will get out early but regardless good luck recruiting police. A mistake with 1/8th of a second to think is not a strong recruiting tool. Gonna find this out the hard way.

originally posted by: notquiteright
What happened that day is no different than a doctor guilty of malpractice, but a doctor would only be sued in that situation. They even carry insurance for it. Medical errors/mistakes account for a third of the deaths in the US annually. Given this case, I would suggest that doctors should be brought up on criminal charges for mistakes resulting in a death.

You mean like this. it happens all the time, 10 times more doctors but there are still loads of them

Medical negligence: Criminal prosecution of medical professionals, the importance of medical evidence: Some guidelines for medical practitioners

www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov...

www.hg.org...

a reply to: Avardan

Riots averted?

Manslaughter is manslaughter and Alec Baldwin should also go to prison.

But you watch....he will not even be charged!!

It's all about who you are and who you know....

a reply to: Ghostsdogood