Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial LIVE: Day 8 – Officer Potter to Testify!

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial LIVE: Day 8 – Officer Potter to Testify!

Today the defense to present its last two witnesses: “slip & capture” expert, and Kim Potter herself

Welcome to our coverage of the Kim Potter manslaughter trial over the April 11, 2021, shooting death of Daunte Wright in a suburb of Minneapolis, when then-police officer Potter accidentally used her Glock 17 pistol in place of her intended Taser.

I expect that today we will see defense present its last two witnesses–“slip and capture” expert Dr. Laurence Miller, and the defendant Kim Potter herself.  As a result, testimony in this trial should be completed relatively early in the day today.   After that all that is left are the instruction of the jury, closing arguments, and finally jury deliberations and the delivery of a verdict.

In this LIVE post, we’ll provide real-time live streaming and commenting on the trial proceedings throughout the day, as the State continues to present its case in chief, and the defense continues to cross-examine the State’s witnesses.

Live Stream

Live Commenting

For some more detailed background on this event and court proceedings to date, see these earlier posts:

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 7: Defense Experts Testify Use Of Gun, Not Just Taser, Justified – Potter to Testify Friday

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 6: State’s Expert Say No Force Should Have Been Used

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 5: State’s Police Use-of-Force Witness Helps Defense – “She’s a good cop”

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 4: Prosecution Strategy Of Showing Jury As Many Bloody Photos As Possible Continues

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 3: Still No Apparent Evidence Of Manslaughter

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 2: Prosecution Spends Entire Day On Irrelevant Sympathy Evidence

Daunte Wright Shooting Trial Day 1: Defense Scores on State Witness

Kim Potter Trial: Manslaughter Charged in “Taser! Taser! Taser!” Shooting Death of Duante Wright

Until next time:

Remember

You carry a gun so you’re hard to kill.

Know the law so you’re hard to convict.

Stay safe!

–Andrew

Attorney Andrew F. Branca

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

My read of self-defense cases is that juries want to hear from the person charged. Notwithstanding the 5th Amendment, they hold it against the defendant if they don’t. That’s unfortunate, but in the current environment, it is what it is.

    In self defense cases the jury always HAS TO HEAR from the person charged. In some cases this requirement is met with introduction of sworn statements, but like you say, in most cases it is better for you to testify in defense of yourself. Kind of makes it look like you have something to hide from the jury if you don’t.

      Smooth23 in reply to bigo. | December 17, 2021 at 11:09 am

      Which is an enormous failure of our ‘justice’ system

      fast182 in reply to bigo. | December 17, 2021 at 1:43 pm

      Zimmerman didn’t testify at trial, although he talked extensively to the police, much of that without council, and that record was introduced at trial. So, yes and no.

        mbecker908 in reply to fast182. | December 17, 2021 at 2:56 pm

        Zimmerman also made a classic statement to the police when they were grilling him without an attorney present. After hours of questioning one of the cops said to Zimmerman, “George, we’ve got the whole incident on video. One of the neighbors recorded it. Anything you want to say?” Zimmerman said, “Thank God!”

Miller cross examination – Objection sustained.

“So State cannot ask about Potter statements to Dr. Miller.”

Is there some sort of privledge ?
Or is it because defense didnot open the door to this line of questioning?

At this point it is my opinion that every defendant be offered a bullet in the back of the head in lieu of the long drawn out court proceedings.

That’s it. I’ve had enough. I do not even understand the charges being laid against this police officer. IMO the process is cruel, but sadly not unusual. Someone make this stop!

“Bound by policy and requirements of job sets for you?”

Violation of police police not a criminal offense unless a statute makes the conduct that violates police policy a criminal offense. Police officers have the same rights to self defense and defense of others as any other citizen has notwithstanding the fact that they are police officers. Violation of police policy only a work place issue.

    TargaGTS in reply to bigo. | December 17, 2021 at 1:41 pm

    IANAL, but I think with respect to the conduct of certain kinds of professionals, policy violations can have direct, material impact in cases of manslaughter. This happens to physicians and nurses sometimes. For instance, if they perform a procedure on a patient that is so uncalled for and removed from the standard of care established by the hospital, and the patient dies, it’s potential evidence of manslaughter.

    Michael Jackson’s doctor, Conrad Murray, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for this very reason. While in the abstract, a licensed physician administering Propofol to a patient isn’t a crime even if the patient dies, it becomes a crime if the drug was administered in a way that wasn’t in keeping with accepted professional standards.

    I suspect this is true for police in some circumstances. They’re allowed to do things that would be statutory crimes if non-LEOs did them. But, if they do those things in a manner that violated department regulations/policies, it can be a crime, often manslaughter.

    Paul In Sweden in reply to bigo. | December 17, 2021 at 2:20 pm

    Officer Kim Potter drew her Glock pistol instead of her taser. She has stated this. IMO Officer Kim Potter recognized that two fellow police officers were majority inside of the vehicle of the known fugitive, and should the known fugitive drive off, great bodily damage or death would befall her two fellow officers.

    The problem comes with “taser, taser, taser” and the emotional breakdown on bodycam footage afterwards.

    This woman dedicated 26 years to her community.

    This is a good woman. Officer Kim Potter is the embodiment of someone that gives all they have to the community.

    The chances that someone like me would be on a jury are slim to none. I have actually never received a jury notice, although I have not lived in the US for 20 years now. If I was on this jury there would be no way I would vote to convict her of anything. She acted with the best intentions, selflessly, to keep her community safe.

    I’m a NewYorker, I would prefer my cops to be 6’5″ Irish cops, who if I strayed from the line could put me back in line or arrest me. Officer Kim Potter does the same job. She should be showered with accolades, a crescendo of applause, she should be held in the highest regard.

      Whether she is found guilty or not will depend on whether or not the jury is given proper instructions on what the issue of fact is and what the law is that applies to that issue of fact. Did she consciously for count 1, or unconsciously for count 2 engage in conduct that created a substantial and unjustifiable risk of injury to Wilson. And the answer is no–the law gave her a legal right to use force and that means there was no unjustified risk of injury to Wilson. The unjustified risk was the unjustified risk of injury to the officers and to society that Wilson posed.

      She certainly didn’t come across as a hardened criminal.

    OldCop876 in reply to bigo. | December 17, 2021 at 8:34 pm

    I hung around to watch the conference on jury instructions. Thankfully, Judge Chu inserted language suggested by the defense instructing the jury that violations of police department policies were not violations of law. The prosecution then wanted the instructions to say that the jury could consider violations of policy in deciding Potter’s guilt or innocence.

    There was some back and forth on this point, but the last thing I heard the judge say was, “I’m not putting that in”, in response to the prosecution’s request. If I understood her ruling correctly, that was the right call.

Paul In Sweden | December 17, 2021 at 1:34 pm

FREE KIM POTTER!!! Stop this now.

I guess over and over can’t have been how she was coached.

She will be different after lunch but the damage is done she does not sound believable.

    tekovyahoser in reply to mtx3. | December 17, 2021 at 2:38 pm

    You’re watching a different trial. She comes off as authentic and truly remorseful for what happened.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to tekovyahoser. | December 17, 2021 at 6:59 pm

      .

      Are you illegally carrying a gun if you’re working behind the counter, standing next to your mother in the pizza shop your family owns?

      this is exactly the kind of nitpicking that one has to be aware of in liberal excuse me leftist jurisdictions. Where I live there wouldn’t even be a question of it being okay.

Would love to hear what Mr. Branca thinks about the shooting yesterday by a 14-year old pizza worker in Philly. Does that look like justifiable self-defense and does it make any difference that he MAY have used a handgun that he had tucked in his waistband? Are you illegally carrying a gun if you’re working behind the counter, standing next to your mother in the pizza shop your family owns?

The young man hasn’t been charged…yet. But, the local media sure does seem like they’re slowly trying to ramp up pressure to do just that. I mean, how dare the great unwashed protect themselves from the criminal element that is coddled by the city and state.

    texansamurai in reply to TargaGTS. | December 17, 2021 at 3:57 pm

    had that been me, standing next to my mother as some thug throttled/robbed her, the only thing substantially different would be that the sob would not have left the restaurant alive–kudos to that young man

    Needed a double tap the kids only mistake.

    Colonel Travis in reply to TargaGTS. | December 17, 2021 at 5:58 pm

    The kid told police the robber was strangling his mom and that he got the gun from under the counter. The video contradicts both those things. Immediately behind the robber was an innocent bystander, who is lucky he wasn’t hit. I have read that Pennsylvania law says that if you are justified using deadly force for self-defense, the defender can’t be criminally liable for his injury to bystanders.

    But was this justifiable use of deadly force? From what I saw in that video, the only thing being attacked was a cash register. Pennsylvania isn’t Texas, where it’s possible (key word) to use deadly force to protect tangible, movable property.

    I’d like to know more about this incident but the kid could very well be in trouble.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to TargaGTS. | December 17, 2021 at 7:01 pm

    Please, see just above.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Accessibility by WAH
Send this to a friend