The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[grumbler]

I don't think that the issue here is whether or not Potter committed manslaughter.  She pretty clearly did.  The question is whether or not she committed first-degree manslaughter, which is the reckless killing of someone while engaged in another crime that isn't a felony (if the other crime is a felony, then the crime is felony murder).  In previous cases in the US (this has occurred about every two years since 2001), the charge has always been second-degree manslaughter - that is, the killing of someone through negligence - when it has been charged at all. 

This is the first case in which an officer in this position has been charged with first-degree manslaughter, though there seems no difference in this case that would make it different (other than the political atmosphere).   The difference in sentencing guidelines is two years for second-degree manslaughter with no previous convictions, versus eight for first-degree with no previous convictions.

[DGuller]

I personally don't even think that a second degree manslaughter is warranted.  I've been reading up in the last hour, and what I came across seems to confirm my existing understanding that killing someone by mistake on its own does not make a case for manslaughter of any degree.  There had to be some bad judgment leading to a mistake before it's manslaughter, and it's first degree manslaughter if it's not merely bad judgment, but an actual crime separate from the killing.  Judgment has to be a conscious decision, not a split-second instinctive decision in a situation where making no decision is not an option. 

I really strongly suspect that this case was a case of a referee awarding a make-up call because so many awful calls went in the other direction earlier.  If the charge of first degree manslaughter is indeed unsupportable, is it something that is reversible on appeal, or does this fall under the category of the jury's decision being final?

[Razgovory]

If only we had someone who's profession was reading and understanding laws.  They might be able to clear this up.

[Berkut]

I don't think that the issue here is whether or not Potter committed manslaughter.  She pretty clearly did.  The question is whether or not she committed first-degree manslaughter, which is the reckless killing of someone while engaged in another crime that isn't a felony (if the other crime is a felony, then the crime is felony murder).  In previous cases in the US (this has occurred about every two years since 2001), the charge has always been second-degree manslaughter - that is, the killing of someone through negligence - when it has been charged at all. 

This is the first case in which an officer in this position has been charged with first-degree manslaughter, though there seems no difference in this case that would make it different (other than the political atmosphere).   The difference in sentencing guidelines is two years for second-degree manslaughter with no previous convictions, versus eight for first-degree with no previous convictions.

My original response was without the knowledge that she had been convicted of first degree manslaughter.

Second degree seems pretty cut and dried - having read the Minnesota statute on first degree, I do not at all see how it fits into the fact pattern.

[Berkut]

If only we had someone who's profession was reading and understanding laws.  They might be able to clear this up.

I want to see the Youtube lawyers take on this.

[Berkut]

I personally don't even think that a second degree manslaughter is warranted.  I've been reading up in the last hour, and what I came across seems to confirm my existing understanding that killing someone by mistake on its own does not make a case for manslaughter of any degree.  There had to be some bad judgment leading to a mistake before it's manslaughter, and it's first degree manslaughter if it's not merely bad judgment, but an actual crime separate from the killing.  Judgment has to be a conscious decision, not a split-second instinctive decision in a situation where making no decision is not an option. 

I really strongly suspect that this case was a case of a referee awarding a make-up call because so many awful calls went in the other direction earlier.  If the charge of first degree manslaughter is indeed unsupportable, is it something that is reversible on appeal, or does this fall under the category of the jury's decision being final?

This would appear to be the relevant charge (2-5 clearly do not apply)"

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another

I think her actions check the boxes. There was culpable negligence:

(law) recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something with the same consequences)

She consciously drew and fired her weapon. It may have been a split second decision, but it was certainly a conscious decision. It was certainly a mistake in that she doesn't seem to have know what weapon she was drawing, but the decision to draw *a* weapon and not ensure that it was the weapon she thought she was drawing seems pretty negligent to me.

At the end of the day, putting aside the strictly legal definition, it seems to me that there is a clear difference between an actual accident, where something actually beyond your control happens and someone dies, and a case where you take clear action that directly leads to someone's death, and that action was in fact clearly likely to do so.

I just cannot square the idea that a police officer can pull out their weapon, point it as someone, and pull the trigger, and not be responsible at all for what happens after that.

[DGuller]

There is probably no universal definition for what is and isn't conscious.  You can always go reductionist and say that nothing is a conscious act, you're after all just a slave to brain synapses firing in a certain way. 

To me, you can't do something consciously when you had no idea you were doing it, that sounds contradictory to me.  You can't consciously take a chance of causing death if you haven't consciously drawn the only weapon that causes death.  I get that different people may have different reasonable takes on it, but I personally just can't get there.  Maybe I'm just too deferential to the concept of confirmation bias, and put too much weight on how devastating it can be to an innocent person with innocent intentions.

Whether some actions for police officers should be on a strict liability basis as a matter of policy, so the state of mind is beside the point, is probably a separate discussion.  I personally don't think that any crimes should be strict liability, even the ones that currently are.

[Admiral Yi]

Her actions don't sound reckless to me.

But I'm wondering if holstering the taser and side arm on the same side is a good idea.

[11B4V]

She mistakenly shot someone with lethal force, while her intention was to use a less than lethal option. A costly mistake, killing someone and endangering her fellow officers on scene. She deserves what she gets.

[mongers]

Her actions don't sound reckless to me.

But I'm wondering if holstering the taser and side arm on the same side is a good idea.

I was thinking about this also, wouldn't it make sense to have the taser mounted on the persons front body armour, so drawing it for use is an entirely different muscle memory action compared to drawing a sidearm?

[grumbler]

Her actions don't sound reckless to me.

But I'm wondering if holstering the taser and side arm on the same side is a good idea.

Her taser was on the left side, and she would have had to draw it with her left hand and then transfer it to her right hand.  That was police policy precisely to prevent these sorts of accidents.

[Berkut]

Maybe I'm just too deferential to the concept of confirmation bias, and put too much weight on how devastating it can be to an innocent person with innocent intentions.

I think maybe I am too deferential to the innocent dead person and how devastating this was to them and their family.

And again, I don't think of someone pulling out a gun and shooting someone else all that "innocent".

[Sheilbh]

I think maybe I am too deferential to the innocent dead person and how devastating this was to them and their family.

And again, I don't think of someone pulling out a gun and shooting someone else all that "innocent".

Yeah and I think that is implicit in any crime that involves negligence - there's never an intent to do harm, or it would be straight up murder. I could be wrong, but I'd guess that's why (from my understanding) criminal negligence is relatively limited and it's basically when the consequences for the other person are extreme (manslaughter, death by dangerous driving, negligence of a child). Even though the intent may be innocent the consequence is so severe that it requires a criminal punishment.

[Admiral Yi]

Reckless driving and child negligence are examples of innocent intent? 

[Sheilbh]

Reckless driving and child negligence are examples of innocent intent? 

Yeah - I think so.

If the alternative is intent then that's what the prosecution would have to prove. So the person set out to drive dangerously or to harm a child. If it's negligence it's just that, say, you're driving in a way that's below the level of a reasonable driver and that a reasonable driver would know is dangerous. Similar with child neglect and a reasonable parent.