Police Reform in America

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 2:57 pm

I get why the family would be upset, but this was pretty clearly someone that totally f'd up and didn't intend to do it. It's amazing how many cops did much much much worse things and totally get off.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:06 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 2:57 pm I get why the family would be upset, but this was pretty clearly someone that totally f'd up and didn't intend to do it. It's amazing how many cops did much much much worse things and totally get off.

What is messed up though is once she made her mistake her and her fellow officers did everything possible to protect her and not help the man who was dying. That has little to do with this sentence to be honest but she is not someone I am too sympathetic of.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:08 pm

Oh I didn't follow it very closely to hear that part. Not shocking though. The shit they got away with before cameras must be legendary.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:35 pm

Spoiler:

I guess judges have the ability to order sentences outside of state guidelines? And apparently the judge cried after announcing the sentence. Seems like a lot of sympathy directed at the wrong party.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:36 pm

Potter "does not present a danger of future crimes."

I mean, she's not going to be a cop ever again.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 4:22 pm

Whiny Karen is clearly remorseful.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 5:29 pm

The judge justified it by claiming the killing was "significantly less serious" than typical manslaughter

Oh I suppose the man is less dead than he appears.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:16 pm

I'm having trouble finding the hatred in this one. I haven't followed it closely, and the shooter herself - what did she do before or after the mistake? From what I've seen of the trial, she admitted from day one that she'd made the mistake and that the death was her fault. Is there something that I don't know about that she did to make her something other than someone who made a really, really bad mistake?

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:39 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:16 pm I'm having trouble finding the hatred in this one. I haven't followed it closely, and the shooter herself - what did she do before or after the mistake? From what I've seen of the trial, she admitted from day one that she'd made the mistake and that the death was her fault. Is there something that I don't know about that she did to make her something other than someone who made a really, really bad mistake?

No way to know for sure, but it seems to me that the taser story was made up after she killed him.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:27 am

Jaymann wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:39 pm
Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:16 pm I'm having trouble finding the hatred in this one. I haven't followed it closely, and the shooter herself - what did she do before or after the mistake? From what I've seen of the trial, she admitted from day one that she'd made the mistake and that the death was her fault. Is there something that I don't know about that she did to make her something other than someone who made a really, really bad mistake?
No way to know for sure, but it seems to me that the taser story was made up after she killed him.

My understanding is that the event was captured on video (body camera?) and she did say all the stuff you'd expect if she was going to use a taser, except that she drew her pistol and shot him instead.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:56 am

Video of the incident shows Potter, a 26-year police veteran, repeatedly yell "Taser" before she shot Wright with her handgun.

"Holy sh*t! I just shot him," she said, per the video, adding, "I grabbed the wrong f**king gun, and I shot him."

Potter resigned from the police department days later.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 9:52 am

Jaymann wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:39 pm
Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 6:16 pm I'm having trouble finding the hatred in this one. I haven't followed it closely, and the shooter herself - what did she do before or after the mistake? From what I've seen of the trial, she admitted from day one that she'd made the mistake and that the death was her fault. Is there something that I don't know about that she did to make her something other than someone who made a really, really bad mistake?
No way to know for sure, but it seems to me that the taser story was made up after she killed him.

Lol !
I mean. A video may be a way to know….
Sounds like you haven’t a lot of exposure to this case.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 11:34 am

I didn't know about the video. Does it show aggressive behavior that would warrant a taser, or was she just trigger happy?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:10 pm

To me, it shows someone who was poorly trained and made a tragic mistake. As I stated elsewhere in a discussion about tragic accidents, I don't see any villains. However, I'm sure many disagree with me.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:30 pm

Yeah I wouldn't cast her as a villain. She made a mistake and likely would believe she is truly remorseful. However I also weigh that she kept vital details to herself when she made her mistake and it contributed to his death.

She might have exclaimed about shooting but that set off a chaotic chain reaction about what happened. Thr utterance was captured by her bodycam. Another officer claimed they heard shots fored. However the scene hot out of control and she didn't volunteer that information while folks were decoding what happened. At least that was what they argued in court. That led to a protracted delay where he didn't get aid that might have saved his life.

It's not simple but the judges comments really indicated a lack of consideration for his family. They rightfully feel that another white cop got leniency and another black life is lost. And a lot of black voices I follow point out this is what they expect everytime.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:30 pm

That is where I am finding myself. A mistake that made everyone into victims, including the cop's two children. She screwed up, and she has to answer for that, but I don't see it as something to cheer about.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:46 am

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:30 pm Yeah I wouldn't cast her as a villain. She made a mistake and likely would believe she is truly remorseful. However I also weigh that she kept vital details to herself when she made her mistake and it contributed to his death.

I would have a lot of sympathy for her if she and the other cops hadn't immediately gone into coverup mode. I think that in and of itself warrants jail time.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 1:11 pm

hepcat wrote: ↑Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:10 pm To me, it shows someone who was poorly trained and made a tragic mistake. As I stated elsewhere in a discussion about tragic accidents, I don't see any villains. However, I'm sure many disagree with me.

Wasn't she a trainer herself?

She was training the day of the incident.

She also recently recertified her taser training.

I mean I suppose she still could have been poorly trained but if a 26 year vet who is relied on to train new cops is poorly trained, is there any hope?

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 2:23 pm

Everything I've seen suggests that it's the crisis version of decision paralysis. A duty belt like that has numerous tools - options to choose from. Several of those (potentially) were applicable to a dangerous situation (firearm, taser, pepper spray.) In that split second of adrenaline, your brain can sometimes hiccup and activate the wrong muscle memory. Your body does entirely the wrong thing, and you mind doesn't realize it during the tunnel vision of a crisis. The brain is convinced it took a different action. The firearm and taser look different, and are kept in different places, but they operate on the same basic principle (point and pull trigger.) She's focused on the target, she has a moment of 'oh shit', her hand reaches via muscle memory (including flipping the safety off - it's part of the same hardwired reaction), and she squeezes the trigger.

The training hole isn't taser vs firearm. The training hole is reaction in a crisis, and it is, hands down, the most difficult thing to train for. It requires an uncontrolled situation to fully replicated, and you can't have a fully uncontrolled training situation. Adrenaline, time dilation, tunnel vision, slip-and-capture, decision paralysis - those are really hard to replicate training. It's why a huge percentage of casualties in any shooting war are due to friendly fire (way more than most people realize.)

It's why this isn't the first time this exact scenario has played out (shooting a subject while trying to tase them.) FWIW, in every case I've read about (including this one), the victim was shot once. Police officers are not trained to fire their firearms once. They're trained to fire twice (sometimes three times.) Tasers, on the other hand, are fired with a single trigger pull. That backs up the idea that these are exactly what they're claimed to be.

That's not to say that every element of the event was legitimate. Some has been misrepresented (like the focus on the air freshener - he was pulled over mainly because he was signaling a right turn while driving in a left turn lane with expired plates, then arrested because he had outstanding warrants.) Some we'll never know. And the last few years has deeply sapped my trust in the police. There are a lot of incidents of wrongdoing, and looking for them is justified, but sometimes and accident really is an accident.

As to her covering it up - I don't know. I've been looking, and I'm not seeing anything on it. If so, that certainly has an impact, too.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 3:16 pm

Again I ask if there was any indication force was required? Lethal or non-lethal.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 4:04 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Sun Feb 20, 2022 2:23 pmThat's not to say that every element of the event was legitimate. Some has been misrepresented (like the focus on the air freshener - he was pulled over mainly because he was signaling a right turn while driving in a left turn lane with expired plates, then arrested because he had outstanding warrants.) Some we'll never know. And the last few years has deeply sapped my trust in the police. There are a lot of incidents of wrongdoing, and looking for them is justified, but sometimes and accident really is an accident.

This is missing a little. She testified that she wouldn't ordinarily have pulled him over *if she wasn't training* but it doesn't change much.

As to her covering it up - I don't know. I've been looking, and I'm not seeing anything on it. If so, that certainly has an impact, too.

Most if the detail on that was covered live. I saw accounts of her testimony and if you looked back at contemporary coverage when she took he stand...it was uniformly panned. Meaning she sank herself and she froze and stumbled badly when the prosecutors crossed her on her actions.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:52 pm

It's not the first high-profile case of mistaking a gun for a Taser.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_ ... _confusion

The officer in this case was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:55 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sun Feb 20, 2022 3:16 pm Again I ask if there was any indication force was required? Lethal or non-lethal.

I haven't watched the bodycam footage so no idea on the details but much of the defense at trial was trying to establish that use of force was justified. They were attempting to arrest him on outstanding warrants and he pulled away from the officer attempting to handcuff him and tried to re-enter the car.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:55 pm

Alefroth wrote: ↑Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:52 pm It's not the first high-profile case of mistaking a gun for a Taser.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_ ... _confusion

The officer in this case was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:55 pm

FWIW, trying to reenter the car does create a real danger that needs to be countered. A panicked, fleeing person in a car often means people dying, even without a chase.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:00 pm

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:01 pm

Sometimes, you let someone go. And pick them up later.

Tasering someone engaging their vehicle has to be very unadvised.
Accidentally shooting them too.

And we understand the original charges here. minor traffic infraction and a misdemeanor warrant.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:03 pm

I think she felt horrible for this. Certainly enough for her conscious to be ok with this short sentence.
I would think.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:16 pm

You don't let panicked people drive off. You're giving them a weapon that they are likely to lose control of. If they are already moving, yes, sometimes you let them go and get them later, but you don't allow that situation if you have an option. And tasering is a reasonable measure to prevent it.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:22 pm

I'd say one should stop trying to taser them the moment the engine has been started or put in gear, etc... otherwise, you are tasering a live car. And clearly, this was done after that moment, I would imagine, as he just pressed the gas after he was shot.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:30 pm

Many departments don't allow firing of any weapon imto moving vehicles to avoid the driver losing control and injuring themselves or others. it is prohibited by the state of NJ for any officer.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 8:50 am

Well BH will need to reply to that.
That makes perfect sense to me and it’s logic is literally on display in this arrest’s example. Yet he tells me you never let a panicked person drive off. Never. It’s a rule. Cause then you are just giving them a weapon they are likely to lose control of. So better to electrocute or shoot them before that moment to be sure they don’t lose control of that weapon.

If that car had gone on to run over a group of children, I’d have a hard time blaming the dead guy at the wheel of the car, or the guy who’s limbs are locked by electric current.

Honestly , ‘shooting the driver’, or even tasing them is obviously amazingly dangerous to anyone down field of the car.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:05 am

Unagi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 21, 2022 8:50 am Well BH will need to reply to that.
That makes perfect sense to me and it’s logic is literally on display in this arrest’s example. Yet he tells me you never let a panicked person drive off. Never. It’s a rule. Cause then you are just giving them a weapon they are likely to lose control of. So better to electrocute or shoot them before that moment to be sure they don’t lose control of that weapon.

If that car had gone on to run over a group of children, I’d have a hard time blaming the dead guy at the wheel of the car, or the guy who’s limbs are locked by electric current.

Honestly , ‘shooting the driver’ is obviously amazingly dangerous to anyone down field of the car.

There are exceptions to any rule. Even NJ's prohibition has exceptions. From the state's Use of Force policy:

While any discharge of a firearm entails some risk, discharging a
firearm at or from a moving vehicle entails an even greater risk of
death or serious injury to innocent persons. The safety of innocent
people is jeopardized when a fleeing suspect is disabled and loses
control of his or her vehicle. There is also a substantial risk of
harm to occupants of the suspect vehicle who may not be involved,
or involved to a lesser extent, in the actions which necessitated the
use of deadly force.

a. Due to this greater risk, and considering that firearms are
not generally effective in bringing moving vehicles to a rapid
halt, officers shall not fire from a moving vehicle, or at the
driver or occupant of a moving vehicle unless the officer
reasonably believes:

(1) there exists an imminent danger of death or serious
bodily harm to the officer or another person; and

(2) no other means are available at that time to avert or
eliminate the danger.

b. A law enforcement officer shall not fire a weapon solely to
disable moving vehicles.

Exception 1 is pretty much in every Use of Force policy in the US because SCOTUS pretty much made it the law of the land. Her defense alleged it because what officer wouldn't given it is often a get out of jail free card? In any case, it's usually reasonably complicated and many state and local municipalities have their own policies to navigate and understand.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:13 am

People will need to make their own call if this young man was an immediate threat to the community or not.

To me, this was a perfect example of, “so, arrest him later”

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:44 am

I don’t mean to put words in BH’s mouth here either. I recognize he mentioned that a moving vehicle was different.

I think this is about specifics and details. Things people normal get bored of discussing.

For example if a person has keys in the ignition and is moving to turn the keys, so as to start the vehicle… Or (equivalent) the car is already on, and the person is making a move to put it into gear…. I think at those moments the officer has lost his opportunity to stop the vehicle safely. It’s on the verge of being engaged and you are too late. Treat it as a moving vehicle.

If stopping the perpetrator is critical enough to start shooting wildly at the departing vehicle, regardless of endangering others, then perhaps tasing or shooting them while they even try to put the car in gear is also reasonable. But If you were not planning on unloading your gun into the fleeing vehicle , I think you should also re-think shooting or tasing the driver as they engage the vehicle.

If you can pull it off as they get in the car, or search for their keys, then you are still in time.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 11:07 am

No, you don't shoot into a moving vehicle. It's why you have the car turned off and (depending on the circumstances) remove the keys (although that wouldn't always be relevant in modern cars.) Note that the car was 'locked down' when the shot was fired. The cop in the front was holding the wheel, the cop coming in the passenger door had control of the shifter to prevent it from being put into gear. It was only after after the shot was fired that they jumped out. Had she pulled her taser instead of the gun, he'd have been removed from the vehicle without it ever having been put into gear, which would have been the outcome with the least risk.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 1:02 pm

The video I saw did not show the shifter being controlled at all by the third cop. And clearly that all happens so quickly I can’t see how you can say the car wasn’t already running. And the cop controlling the wheel was seemingly wrestling for it.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 2:37 pm

The cop on the driver's side had his hands clamped on the shifter. And I didn't say it wasn't running.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Feb 21, 2022 8:01 pm

There I go putting words in your mouth.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Thu Jun 02, 2022 4:30 pm

I guess this should go here? Maybe the answer was in front of us all along - police should just partner with local motorcycle clubs to run security.

I’m here in Uvalde, trying to be respectful with everyone’s fresh grief. Standing outside while a funeral is going on. Police still thought it was necessary to coordinate with bikers to order reporters to “stay on the sidewalk” and physically obstruct cameras. Really?

It's just a shot away , indeed.