DAUNTE WRIGHT: Minnesota vs. former officer Kim Potter for manslaughter in Minneapolis shooting *GUILTY*

1618802053231.png
In response to this article. 1. I have been pulled over for it. 2. There is information that he was pulled over for expired tabs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boy, I don't know. I haven't read it yet but does anyone really think she deserves a harsher than usual sentence?

I know judges in our state have a lot of discretion and it wouldn't surprise me if they do in MN as well but I'm not sure if I knew they can go above guidelines but I guess the key word is they are just "guidelines" for sentencing. Sometimes I think they have too much discretion and usually that's about sentencing too leniently though, not above. Rarely hear of that if ever.

I also don't know that doing so wouldn't make that very thing an appealable issue? No idea. But going above guidelines, making an example of her or coming down harder on her than others seems like it might be appealable...

Finally, let's just say in a case where someone turned down a deal (not this one) and the deal was an 8 year sentence but the most the defendant was facing per sentencing guidelines if convicted was max 10 years. So the defendant decides to roll the dice and go to trial as that's not really much time off what they might face, plus the judge might give less and the max is 10. They are then convicted and the judge goes past that ten so it isn't really fair as how could the defendant know that might happen... For this reason, is it fair a judge can sentence over a maximum recommended sentence? (Hypothetical numbers, deal and example, just saying the problems that could exist with judges doing this or being able to do this...) This paragraph is a general remark on the topic, not specifically Potter.
 
I'm not sure what I think about her getting a harsher sentence. I don't think she meant to kill him, that's for sure! I just hope politics aren't going to make the final determination.
Same here. If politics, making an example of her as she was a cop or for publicity/media (meaning a politician or elected DA or prosecutor gets big headlines for votes by doing this) is the reason, then it is wrong imo.

If it is the cop thing, well then the same hasn't happened to all others has it...

She definitely made a mistake but My Lord she is not the worst of the worst nor do I believe it was intentional.
 
This is and was sad all of the way around. No one deserves to die of course. There were events and circumstances though that put him where he was and she isn't to blame for that part. He bears some responsibility and the fact he was even driving a vehicle and how that came to be put him there as well.

That doesn't for one minute mean my heart does not ache for his family or a young man's life cut short. It also does for her and her family. She didn't go to work intending to kill anyone. No winners here, there never are. Imo.
 
That is the exact sentence I would have given as a judge in the case. Right now on Court TV the family is very upset about the sentence.
Opinions will differ but for me I find it appropriate. I just don't see her as a criminal and she had no criminal intent imo. I may have given her two to three actually at most.

I'm sorry but this was not a perfectly behaved young man complying in this traffic stop. However, she is a trained cop and did apparently mix her weapons up which should never have happened either but we shall never know how that stop would have turned out either. And in no way do I not realize a life was lost and that is huge. I even understand the family wanting her head, totally understand.

The other thing is this woman is not going to ever make this mistake again and I think we can count on that. She is not a danger to society. That can't be said for some criminals, drunk drivers, drug addicts and more. She made a very costly mistake and someone paid with their life. I don't see her as a criminal per se.
 
Huh?! She looks a bit different now.

 
Huh?! She looks a bit different now.


Good, I don't think she meant to do it.
 
Good. This case, I don't care what color anyone was and I don't in any. s, I saw no reason for her to be tried at all. Mistake in a weapon would be the only question, cause or need for one was obvious. What ya doing drugging and driving without a license and previous trouble??? What are yo doing trying to flee and harm officers and your girl? YOU caused it! I'm sorry he's dead but otherwise officers or someone in the public likely would be.

And his mom is full of sh*t.
 
Huh?! She looks a bit different now.


Yeah. I saw this. Very different in a short time.
 
Good. This case, I don't care what color anyone was and I don't in any. s, I saw no reason for her to be tried at all. Mistake in a weapon would be the only question, cause or need for one was obvious. What ya doing drugging and driving without a license and previous trouble??? What are yo doing trying to flee and harm officers and your girl? YOU caused it! I'm sorry he's dead but otherwise officers or someone in the public likely would be.
And his mom is full of sh*t.

And making something racial when it is NOT! They said another BLACK man. But he's half white. So what about that?. The white side is just as dead.
 
Yep. The orgs come in and the others and immediately make a case racial. Just like that new one before facts are even known. I haven't even looked at that one since first seeing it and likely won't again.

The "victim" in this one was doing about all wrong that could be and car not in his name, insurance, etc. all by family enabling, ust so he could fly under the radar yet what does he do, just the opposite and ask for trouble. Imo.
 
And his mom is full of sh*t.

And making something racial when it is NOT! They said another BLACK man. But he's half white. So what about that?. The white side is just as dead.

I didn't see the guy before I'd heard about it. When I finally saw it, I thought the guy was white.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,487
Members
965
Latest member
tanya
Back
Top Bottom