Running racism in America thread

In 2016, Philando Castile was shot to death (hit with five of seven rounds, iirc) during a traffic stop in a Twin Cities suburb while his girlfriend and her young daughter were sitting in the car. That officer was acquitted of manslaughter. The difference? That incident occurred befor the death of George Floyd. Look at the circumstances of each death; there's no question which officer was more culpable -- it's the cop who walked.

Kim Potter killed a man. She did so in the heat of a confrontation with a person who was resisting arrest. She made a tragic mistake, and should have been fired but wasn't (resignation may allow her to collect pension benefits). She also should be held financially liable for a wrongful death in civil court, along with the police force that employed her. Manslaughter for performing her duty in good faith, and I've seen nothing to suggest she acted with malice or even with reckless regard for safety, is excessive -- IMO.

Racism is humanity's original sin. We can't start to get past it before we admit we're all sinners. Nelson Mandela's greatest achievement was to found a truth and reconciliation court where the ugly truths could be acknowledged. Without that acknowledgement, reconciliation is impossible. Instead, we'll have "payback," and payback on top of payback. That's a spiral downward.

 

Take race out of it. Or bad faith or good intentions. Her training failed her and she killed a man.

They prosecuted and convicted the cop who accidentally shot Oscar Grant, too.

It's a hard job, and sometimes terrible things happen.

https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BG...icers-Charged-with-Murder-or-Manslaughter.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/04/11/thousands-dead-few-prosecuted/

 

Here's Minnesota's first-degree manslaughter statute. I do not see where it applies in Potter's case.

 

These questions are for the jury to answer , not us. They have decided for us, that’s our system. Don’t like it? Change the laws.

 

Jury answered the questions, they did so rationally, apparently and within the rules of evidence and law. They did a good job. Had they acquited I would hope that people wold give the same deference.

On a certain level, maybe not this case, but as a society we have certainly criminalized too much behavior to appease certain demographic voting blocks.

 

The rest of what you said makes sense, but I’m not sure I follow the “we’d be living under a police state” if police were required to protect us from threats. I follow that it isn’t a requirement of the police to protect us from threats, but they already do. Guy driving 100 on the freeway weaving through traffic is a threat police will address. Guy waving a pipe at people in Time Square is a threat. Are you making the distinction between “a threat we already consider criminal” and “those threats that aren’t illegal just someone being dumb”?

 

Community Caretaking is a constitutional function of the police.

 

Yes it’s a hard job when action happens.

But these incidents are where it’s not a “heat of the battle” split decision. If that’s the case no one will find that’s criminal intent.

Where Potter is guilty is where it’s so far removed from a basic judgement call, it’s an individual simply ignoring her basic responsibilities.

This isn’t about pandering to some special interest groups. It’s about finally holding people who happen to be entrusted with a gun accountable for criminal behavior.

 

A duty to protect is not what "community caretaking" refers to.

Ragu was referring to Castle Rock.

 

I have a great deal of sympathy for Potter and her family, but I don't have a problem with the manslaughter 2 charge. Even though there's no indication it was anything but an honest mistake, she did negligently use lethal force.

I do, though, have a problem with the prosecution's assertion of sentencing enhancements under the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines. Potter has no record and poses no risk to anyone, and has shown remorse and is obviously crushed. The manslaughter charge seems punishment enough; trying to enhance the sentence is piling on.

 

Appealing to the blood thirsty lowest common denominator is a successful plan for both the right and left.