Pretext stops are a police custom for stopping black people ... Yes, police can pull you over for hanging an air freshener in your car

Squire

Active member
There is more to Air Freshener pretext stops than meets the eye. Police admit they are pretext causes for traffic stops.

In most cases, especially at night, the police cannot see the 'Air Freshener" until after the vehicle has been stopped and they approach and view from the front. So after they have stopped a vehicle without cause they then conduct further interrogation and search after spotting "Air Freshener".

Air Freshener pretext stops are a crime against black people.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/12/us/police-shooting-air-freshener-trnd/index.html

Yes, police can pull you over for hanging an air freshener in your car

By Faith Karimi, CNN

Updated 0230 GMT (1030 HKT) April 13, 2021

(CNN)Moments before police fatally shot Daunte Wright during a traffic stop Sunday in a Minneapolis suburb, he called his mother and told her he'd been pulled over for hanging air fresheners from his rearview mirror.

It's not clear how much of a role the air fresheners played in the traffic stop. Brooklyn Center Police Chief Tim Gannon told reporters Monday that Wright was originally pulled over for an expired tag and that when officers approached his car, they saw an item hanging from the rearview mirror.
Officers ran Wright's name and found a gross misdemeanor warrant, Gannon said, without providing additional details on the dangling item or the warrant. He said the shooting appeared to be "accidental."

But Minnesota is one of at least several states with laws that prohibit hanging items from a vehicle's rearview mirror or affixing them to the windshield on the grounds that they could obstruct the driver's vision.
Police chief gets emotional during tense press conference

"A person shall not drive or operate any motor vehicle with ... any objects suspended between the driver and the windshield, other than: sun visors; rearview mirrors; driver feedback and safety monitoring equipment when mounted immediately behind, slightly above, or slightly below the rearview mirror," Minnesota's law states.

Such minor infractions have been questioned by Black motorists and others who view them as a pretext for racially motivated traffic stops.
"We have concerns that police appear to have used dangling air fresheners as an excuse for making a pretextual stop, something police do too often to target Black people," the ACLU of Minnesota said Sunday. It called for an independent investigation into the shooting.

Wright's death has sparked protests and further inflamed tensions in a city already on edge over the police killing of another Black man. Testimony continued Monday in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who is charged in the May 2020 death of George Floyd.

Air fresheners in cars have led to legal challenges
Police traffic stops because of dangling air fresheners have already led to several court challenges.
In September 2018, police pulled over two Black men in Chicago for having an air freshener hanging from a rearview mirror. During the stop officers found weapons in the vehicle, and the men were each charged with unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.

The men did not allege they were racially profiled. But they moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the air freshener was not sufficient probable cause for the officers to pull them over.

Last year a federal appeals court ruled that the stop was legitimate, saying police had "reasonable suspicion" to believe that the tree-shaped air freshener obstructed the driver's view. Both men were sentenced to prison.

A person raises their hands as police approach near the site where Daunte Wright was shot in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.

In October 2012 WNBA star Seimone Augustus, then a player with the Minnesota Lynx, complained on Twitter that she had been pulled over at a mall in Roseville, a Minneapolis suburb, for having an air freshener in her car. She said the officer then questioned her about her out-of-state license plates and other crimes in the area.

"Supposedly he stop me for an air freshener hanging in my window, but then went on talking about theft at the mall," tweeted Augustus, who is Black. "And the fact that my car was at the mall with out of town plates ... I thought this was a free country."

A Roseville police spokesman told ESPN the traffic stop had nothing to do with race and that Augustus was only issued a warning.

Virginia just added another provision to its law
Several other states, including California, Pennsylvania and Arizona, prohibit drivers from hanging things that would obstruct their vision near the windshield.

Under Arizona state law, it's illegal to have an object near the rearview or side mirrors if it "obstructs or reduces" the driver's view.
But a sheriff's deputy was fired in Arizona last year after he pulled over a Black man for having an air freshener hanging from his rearview mirror, then repeatedly asked him if he had drugs in the car.

Several states have misdemeanor laws prohibiting hanging items from rearview mirrors.
In Virginia, a "dangling object" near a car's windshield used to be grounds for a valid stop, but a new law that went into effect on March 1 changed things, said Andrew Flusche, a traffic attorney in Stafford, Virginia.

"Virginia still penalizes dangling objects, but the police now must have another justification to first stop the vehicle," he said.
"Dangling object stops are a classic example of a pretextual stop, where the police are looking for a valid reason to stop a motorist for something else -- such as suspicion of DUI or maybe to try to search the vehicle," Flusche said.

Police say 'pretext' stops are necessary to fight crime
So-called "pretext stops" allow police to use minor traffic infractions or broken taillights as grounds to investigate motorists for more serious crimes.

Police have defended the stops as crucial for fighting possession of illegal drugs, weapons possession, human trafficking and drunken driving.

But civil rights groups say the tactic unfairly targets Black drivers.
In 2018, the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Bakersfield Police Department in California after its officers jailed a Black man who was driving a car that had an air freshener hanging from its rearview mirror. The police also demanded personal information from the man's passengers, the ACLU said. The city of Bakersfield settled the lawsuit in 2019 without admitting any liability. ...
 

Texan

Active member
Did the police write the law? Their job is to enforce the law. Did Daunte run from police to get out of an air freshener ticket, or was it a warrant for his arrest for something a little worse? If he hadn't ran, the cop wouldn't have shot him.(accident or not)
 

Squire

Active member
Did the police write the law? Their job is to enforce the law. Did Daunte run from police to get out of an air freshener ticket, or was it a warrant for his arrest for something a little worse? If he hadn't ran, the cop wouldn't have shot him.(accident or not)
It is already established that police don't have a right to shoot "runners".
 

Texan

Active member
It is already established that police don't have a right to shoot "runners".
I never said they did. Whether the shooting was on purpose or an accident, the cop is facing charges and it will come out in court. What are you suggesting? Defunding cops? Disarming cops? Sending in social workers? Change the cop's rules if you want, but people will always make mistakes or break the rules and you'll have to settle it in court.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
Daunte Wright was pulled over for an Expired License Plate. The air freshener hanging from the mirror was noticed after the stop.
 

Squire

Active member
Why would police bother with the 'air-freshener' pretext and then cite other reasons for the stop.

They were trying to create a plausible pretext for a stop that was probably without cause.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
There is more to Air Freshener pretext stops than meets the eye. Police admit they are pretext causes for traffic stops.

In most cases, especially at night, the police cannot see the 'Air Freshener" until after the vehicle has been stopped and they approach and view from the front. So after they have stopped a vehicle without cause they then conduct further interrogation and search after spotting "Air Freshener".

Air Freshener pretext stops are a crime against black people.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/12/us/police-shooting-air-freshener-trnd/index.html
Wow, another unarmed Black American, shot to death by an armed White police officer. Why the fuck are we talking about hanging air fresheners under rear-view mirrors, expired rego, obstructing the view of traffic, racial profiling, or any pretext for traffic stops? These are all the products of White society's distraction machine. Its job is to protect its legally armed sociopaths, by sowing as much spin and disinformation as it can. And, to create as much doubt and confusion as possible.

Whatever the reason was for the shooting is irrelevant. The facts aren't. The results aren't. This coward shot and killed an unarmed Black American, and the best his chief can say, is that it was an accident? Or, that it must have been an accident. His sorry means nothing to the victim's loved ones. This coward used unnecessary and unreasonable deadly force(I don't give a shit what he may have been thinking), and should be held accountable(Manslaughter). But society needs people willing to run towards the fire, and to collect/create its revenue. And, the loss of a few minorities? Well,. shit just happens!

If I were a Black American, I would make as many White friends as I could. I would definitely always travel with a White America whenever driving, statistically, for my safety. But driving alone and Black, is becoming suicide by cop. I doesn't matter if you are asleep at the wheel, having an anxiety attack at the wheel, riding a bicycle without lights, trying to run away unarmed, if you are already in handcuffs, if you are a child or a woman, or even if you are half-naked at the wheels. Your chances of dying by a bullet from a frightened cop, is not just imaginary. Especially, if you are a Black American.

These are supposedly trained professionals. There should be zero deaths of unarmed civilians during traffic stops.
 

DreamRyderX

Active member
..


Source: The Daily Beast
......Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, police on Monday released ▲▲▲ video footage ▲▲▲ from the body-cam worn by the officer <Officer Kimberly Potter> who shot and killed 20-year-old Daunte Wright during a traffic stop. At a press conference, Brooklyn Center Police Chief Tim Gannon played the video which shows two officers approaching Wright’s car during the April 11 encounter. The footage, which was posted on YouTube by local CBS affiliate WCCO, shows a struggle as one of the officers pulls Wright from the vehicle and tries to handcuff him for what police said was an outstanding warrant. After Wright, who is Black, manages to get back in the driver’s seat, Officer Kim Potter, who is white, pulls her gun and yells, “Taser, Taser!” She then shoots Wright. The officer appears to drop her gun on the ground and says, “Holy shit, I shot him.”

“As I watch the video and listen to the officer’s commands it is my belief that the officer had the intention to deploy their taser but instead shot Mr. Wright with a single bullet,” Gannon said
Nothing can change the actual events as they unfolded, but it seems as Gannon said, Officer Kimberly Potter obviously only intended to taser Wright, but unfortunately, unknown to her, she grabbed the wrong device, & instead of discharging her taser as she had always intended to do, she accidentally fired the wrong device........she shot Wright with her service firearm instead.

Unfortunately for Wright, Shit Happens.............may he rest in peace.....
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
..


Source: The Daily Beast

Nothing can change the actual events as they unfolded, but it seems as Gannon said, Officer Kimberly Potter obviously only intended to taser Wright, but unfortunately, unknown to her, she grabbed the wrong device, & instead of discharging her taser as she had always intended to do, she accidentally fired the wrong device........she shot Wright with her service firearm instead.

Unfortunately for Wright, Shit Happens.............may he rest in peace.....
Unfortunately for Wright, he was stopped by amateur immature keystone cops, in a state of fear and panic. If this death was an accident, due to incompetence and making a mistake under pressure, then we now have a new excuse for killing unarmed Blacks. Mistaking the taser, nightstick, torch, or any other equipment, for the service revolver? Pathetic and irrelevant. Getting hit by lightning is an accident. Accidently firing the wrong device??? Really??? What's next, "I didn't know it was loaded."? Or, "It just went off by accident."? Don't laugh, these are real excuses, presented as a legal argument.

Fortunately, the law doesn't give a shit about these excuses. Manslaughter/Involuntary Manslaughter holds that this cop is directly responsible for her actions. Her actions were unreasonable, unnecessary, unlawful, and certainly unjustifiable. Would anyone hazard to guess what might happen to this coward in uniform, if there was NO public outrage for her actions?
 

DreamRyderX

Active member
.........the law doesn't give a shit about these excuses. Manslaughter/Involuntary Manslaughter holds that this cop is directly responsible for her actions. Her actions were unreasonable, unnecessary, unlawful, and certainly unjustifiable ...........
Well, you may prevail, but when all the dust settles the State's Prosecution will still have to unanimously convince 12 out of 12 jurors that she did exactly as you say, after all the State has 100% of the burden of proof, while the defense must only convince one (1) juror that the State failed to convince them beyond a reasonable doubt........remember, on the day the Jury is the Law........
 
Last edited:

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
I don't think this shooting had anything to do with race. It appears to me that this was a tragic mistake made by a person under stress.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Well, you may prevail, but when all the dust settles the State's Prosecution will still have to unanimously convince 12 out of 12 jurors that she did exactly as you say, after all the State has 100% of the burden of proof, while the defense must only convince one (1) juror that the State failed to convince them beyond a reasonable doubt........remember, on the day the Jury is the Law........

I agree with you that prosecutors, after this new Supreme Court ruling, now require the guilty verdict from all 12 jurors. Remember, that before this ruling, only 2 states(Oregon and Louisiana) could convict on a 10-2 majority verdict. Louisiana's laws were rooted in the trappings of the Jim Crow era. And, Oregon's laws could be traced to the rise of the KKK. Since so few Black Americans/minorities were appointed as jurors, White supremacy could constitutionally be maintained. The dissenting Justices seem only concerned with the burden this would have on the courts to get convictions. NOT ABOUT JUSTICE! I agree with the court's decision.

Out of curiosity alone. Here's a question for you and/or Seth. Suppose everything that this cop said was absolutely true. She meant to use only her taser, but mistakenly used her revolver instead(presumably to stop him from escaping). And, that this was just a very tragic accident. What crime do you think she should be charged with? Now, what if the victim was now your son or daughter coming home from their senior prom? What crime do you now think she should be charged with?

I'm not sure if ALL criminal jury offences would require a unanimous verdict. I need to do more research on specifically manslaughter cases. So far, I have only seen murder cases, that require a unanimous verdict.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
On the Yank forum ....

@Seth Bullock - thoughts on this? I'm guessing that you started your career without tasers and then possibly they were introduced during your time. Seems to me like LOTS of simulation would need to be done so that officers would instinctively know where their gun is and where their taser is, and make sure they draw the right one for the situation, especially for those who had spent YEARS with only a gun.
My answer to him ....

The problem is muscle memory under stress.

Typical Taser training is a 4-hour class where the officer learns how and why it works, when they may use it, and then they shoot it a couple of times. After that, they are "trained" on the Taser, technically. Retraining with the Taser is not required generally. I put "trained" in quotes because the truth is that there is an important difference between being technically trained and being trained to a point of reacting with muscle memory under stress.

Firearms training begins in the basic academy, and it is ongoing throughout an officer's career. Depending on the practice of the police agency, the officer may be required to take firearms training anywhere from 1-4 times a year. By the time an officer has 26 years of experience, they have probably drawn that pistol in training 1000 times, maybe a lot more.

Stress never helps us think better. Stress and the concurrent adrenaline can make us stronger and faster, but it never helps us think better. Under stress, an officer generally rises to the level of their training and preparation. I noticed this fact in my own career with myself. Things I had trained for repeatedly, I did well. Things I hadn't trained for, not so much.

Police officers are not super-human, they are just human. Kim Potter is a 48 year old woman who found herself in a physical struggle with a young male criminal. This is stressful and dangerous. This causes an adrenaline dump into the system, and when that happens, calm, logical thinking goes out the window, and we react. In those moments, all people are going to perform to the level of their prior preparation, training, and muscle memory.

We hear a lot about science these days, don't we? Well, this is the science of the toxic environment of physical conflict and awareness of danger. It's been tested extensively by people with expert qualifications, people with Phd's and such.

Unfortunately, it appears as though that stress resulted in thinking it was time to use a Taser, but her muscle memory resulted in her drawing her pistol. I have no reason to believe that she consciously knew she was holding her pistol in her hand, not the Taser. I feel very sorry for her.
 

DreamRyderX

Active member
SPOT ON!!! @Seth

Unless the Prosecution has an ace in the hole hidden somewhere, a decent defense attorney will have no problem whatsoever convincing some on the jury....at least 1......that there is abundant rational for reasonable doubt, that what she did was purely accidental & unintended.

.......Out of curiosity alone. Here's a question for you and/or Seth. Suppose everything that this cop said was absolutely true. She meant to use only her taser, but mistakenly used her revolver instead(presumably to stop him from escaping). And, that this was just a very tragic accident. What crime do you think she should be charged with?........
PS.......JFYI.......she was using an semiautomatic, not a revolver.

Should she be convicted of a crime you ask......IMHO.....absolutely not, from my personal point of view, & if there is a call for her to be convicted of a crime, it would be due to societies emotional overload due to the desire for justice for another's crime in another case.....but, not this one.

At the very worst, IMHO, she....or the PD.......could potentially be tried in a civil case for damages, where the burden of proof would be far easier to meet, whereas a split jury may produce a $$$ settlement.
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
On the Yank forum ....



My answer to him ....



The problem is muscle memory under stress.

Typical Taser training is a 4-hour class where the officer learns how and why it works, when they may use it, and then they shoot it a couple of times. After that, they are "trained" on the Taser, technically. Retraining with the Taser is not required generally. I put "trained" in quotes because the truth is that there is an important difference between being technically trained and being trained to a point of reacting with muscle memory under stress.

Firearms training begins in the basic academy, and it is ongoing throughout an officer's career. Depending on the practice of the police agency, the officer may be required to take firearms training anywhere from 1-4 times a year. By the time an officer has 26 years of experience, they have probably drawn that pistol in training 1000 times, maybe a lot more.

Stress never helps us think better. Stress and the concurrent adrenaline can make us stronger and faster, but it never helps us think better. Under stress, an officer generally rises to the level of their training and preparation. I noticed this fact in my own career with myself. Things I had trained for repeatedly, I did well. Things I hadn't trained for, not so much.

Police officers are not super-human, they are just human. Kim Potter is a 48 year old woman who found herself in a physical struggle with a young male criminal. This is stressful and dangerous. This causes an adrenaline dump into the system, and when that happens, calm, logical thinking goes out the window, and we react. In those moments, all people are going to perform to the level of their prior preparation, training, and muscle memory.

We hear a lot about science these days, don't we? Well, this is the science of the toxic environment of physical conflict and awareness of danger. It's been tested extensively by people with expert qualifications, people with Phd's and such.

Unfortunately, it appears as though that stress resulted in thinking it was time to use a Taser, but her muscle memory resulted in her drawing her pistol. I have no reason to believe that she consciously knew she was holding her pistol in her hand, not the Taser. I feel very sorry for her.

I'm afraid you are just manufacturing an excuse. Firstly muscle-memory is not exactly what you think it is. It is true that playing an instrument, lifting weights, writing a letter, ride a bike, learning to walk, or even firing and aiming a weapon, all requires the coordinated use of a series of individual muscles. If you do not play the instrument, lift the weight, ride a bike, or fire the weapon in years, you can easily relearn because of this "muscle memory". Sorry, but NO. the control and memory of these coordinated muscle movements, is controlled in the motor cortex in the brain. NOT in the "myonuclei" of muscle fibers. Muscles are NOT self-programmable.


Regarding stress as an activator, women respond to stress differently than men. Generally, women don't have the SRY gene, which is found on the Y chromosome. Its proteins are responsible for the secretion of cortisol and norepinephrine into the bloodstream. These chemicals are responsible for the male "fight or flight" response to stress. Put 2 male rhesus monkeys in the same cage, and they will try to kill each other.

Women generally don't have this gene. So, under stress they secrete endorphins and oxytocin into their bloodstream. These chemicals are responsible for their "tend or befriend" response to stress. Put 2 female rhesus monkeys in the same cage, and they will work to alleviate stress. Not fight or try to kill each other.


I think you are confusing a simple muscle reflex action(which requires no mental awareness), with a conscious and controlled learned muscle response. Unless she has taken out her taser or GUN blindfolded, and used them, 100's of times a day, I don't see a viable argument to be made. Reflex arcs are simple stimulus response pathways, not complex. Reaching for her taser or gun, pulling it out and aiming it, all requires many muscles to control and coordinate. This sounds just like another "twinkie defense"(Dan White), another "sexsomnia defense"(Jan Luedecke), or another "irresistible impulse defense"(Lorena Bobbitt). All, just more manufacture doubt, to protect the conservative's enforcers and cash cows.

Our laws are there to protect us all from being harmed by anyone(accidentally or not). It is also there to punish those who would cause us harm. Another human was unlawfully, and unjustifiably killed by another human. The life of this 20yo is over before he could even legally buy alcohol. Any reason, other than lawful, is absolutely irrelevant!! We call people who discharge their gun in the air during a celebration, stupid, irresponsible, dangerous, and criminals, and will charge them with the relevant statute. But calling this incident only a "tragic accident", "muscle memory under stress", or "only part of the human condition", is the very definition of injustice.

The only innocent victim here is Daunte Wright. NOT this cop. Who under pressure couldn't tell the difference between a taser and a gun(either by weight, feel, or by looks). Maybe we should stop all taser, gun, or any weapons training for all cops, just to avoid them developing this "muscle memory" condition? I mean really, blaming it on the training??? How many more dumb excuses will Unarmed Black Death Victims need to endure? It took televised lynchings before most people finally realized, that this action is wrong. How many more excuses can you use to justify this real danger to Black American Lives? If I were Black, please travel with a White friend for your safety.

I would rather have the biggest, baddest, racists, and bigoted partnered with me, who doesn't panic under stress. Then someone who will panic the minute someone refuses to do what they are told. If he got away, so what? Get him another time. He must live somewhere, work somewhere, eat somewhere, or have friends and family somewhere. Had she used the taser instead of her gun, no one would be talking about this. But she didn't. And, claiming that she drew her gun by mistake is bad. But if it is true, it is even worse than bad.

Unfortunately, it appears as though that stress resulted in thinking it was time to use a Taser, but her muscle memory resulted in her drawing her pistol. I have no reason to believe that she consciously knew she was holding her pistol in her hand, not the Taser. I feel very sorry for her.
With all due respect Seth, this is probably the silliest thing I have ever heard. If even ONE of these things are true, it is a very sad and dangerous reflection on all police officers. I don't share your sorrow for her. All my sorrows go to the victim and his loved ones. Everything can be forgiven, except the taking of the life of an unarmed victim. I hope she rots in hell for what she's done. Preferably, in prison. If it was my child, she wouldn't make it to prison.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
@Shellandshilo1956

I feel sorry for her because I don't believe she shot Wright on purpose. What we know about this so far is that at the critical moment she shouted "Taser! Taser! Taser!" (This is meant as a warning to other police officers.) And then when she shot him, "Holy shit! I think I shot him!" or something to that effect. The evidence is that she thought she was shooting the Taser.

Why do you think that happened?

Looking back on many stressful and dangerous situations I dealt with during my career, objectively (not bragging) I think I handled them well ... except this one time. I clearly remember making a mistake that there was no reason for making when the incident is looked after the fact. Fortunately, it didn't result in anyone getting hurt or dying. Without going into all the details, it boils down to not processing plain English correctly. Plain, clear English! It was in the heat of a stressful, dangerous moment that I was clearly told something. I heard the words, and yet I visualized what they meant wrong, and then I followed that wrong path.

Why did I do that? I didn't want to do the wrong thing.

I may write more later, but I have to go now.

Seth
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Unless the Prosecution has an ace in the hole hidden somewhere, a decent defense attorney will have no problem whatsoever convincing some on the jury....at least 1......that there is abundant rational for reasonable doubt, that what she did was purely accidental & unintended.
What is this abundance of reasonable evidence? That she said, "taser taser", shot him, then said, "Oh God I shot him.", and dropped the gun? All on body cam, and seen by millions? Shades of Rodney King. Just another unarmed Black man dead, and another White cop that did it. Right? Did I miss this abondance of factual evidence? Are you more interested in justice for the victim, or hoping to legally circumvent it?

Since 1968 until April 11th 2021, there have been a total of 172 unarmed Killings of Black Americans(including 26 unarmed Black American Females, and one unborn foetus), killed by White police officers(80%). 15 of these officers even went on to kill for a second, and even a third time. The signature excuse for many of these sociopathic cowards, is also their mantra. "I was in fear of my life.". And, over 90% of these cowards get away with it, to kill again.


The difference between us, is that I believe in justice. Not, "just us". I don't look at Blacks and other minorities as potential thieves, liars, murderers, criminals, or as being inferior beings. I look at them all as equal citizens, deserving of the same opportunities and protection under the law, without bias or prejudice, as I do.

You have stated that she should not be convicted of any crime, even though she shot and killed an unarmed human being. Are you saying that you believe that she did not commit a crime at all? Or, that if you simply say, "Oop, I'm sorry I made a mistake under pressure..", that you should not be accountable for your actions? I'm sure if the officer was a Black man, and the victim was a White female, you'd be singing a different tune. IMHO

And, if there IS a call for her to be convicted of a crime, IT WILL BE BECAUSE SHE ACTUALLY COMMITTED A CRIME!!! I get it. Paternal instincts kicking in. But if it were my child she "mistakenly blew away", she'd be dead.

There are many cases where there is a genuine fear for your life, and the use of deadly force is certainly justified. But, this is just not one of them.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
@Shellandshilo1956

I feel sorry for her because I don't believe she shot Wright on purpose. What we know about this so far is that at the critical moment she shouted "Taser! Taser! Taser!" (This is meant as a warning to other police officers.) And then when she shot him, "Holy shit! I think I shot him!" or something to that effect. The evidence is that she thought she was shooting the Taser.

Why do you think that happened?

Looking back on many stressful and dangerous situations I dealt with during my career, objectively (not bragging) I think I handled them well ... except this one time. I clearly remember making a mistake that there was no reason for making when the incident is looked after the fact. Fortunately, it didn't result in anyone getting hurt or dying. Without going into all the details, it boils down to not processing plain English correctly. Plain, clear English! It was in the heat of a stressful, dangerous moment that I was clearly told something. I heard the words, and yet I visualized what they meant wrong, and then I followed that wrong path.

Why did I do that? I didn't want to do the wrong thing.

I may write more later, but I have to go now.

Seth
I'm sorry Seth, your second paragraph, was a bit of a blur for me. So I won't comment. I do remember my FTO telling me, "when interviewing members in a domestic, never do it in the kitchen or the bathroom". I ignored that advice, and was cut and stabbed twice. I learned.

Regarding what the evidence suggests, I totally agree with you. I don't think she meant to shoot Wright either. I believe that she thought she was firing her taser, and not her gun. Based on the evidence, I also have no reason to disbelieve her.

But you know, as well as I, that legally none of that matters. In Manslaughter, the intent is irrelevant. It is only the action and the outcome that matters. Ignorance is no excuse.

Dan White, equipped himself with a .38 S&W with dum-dum bullets. Went into city hall through a basement window to avoid the metal detectors. He shot Mayor Moscone 4 times(2 in the head), reloaded, and shot Supervisor Milk 5 times(2 in the head). He then left, and later turned himself into Northern Police Station. So, from the evidence, what crimes were committed?

Capital Murder with special circumstances and premeditation. He killed, not one, but two government officials. He killed multiple victims. He killed in a cruel and inhumane way(using dum-dum bullets). This should have been a slam-dunk premeditated capital murder conviction. But when you fill the jury with soap opera grannies, and portray White as a blond blue eyed ex cop, ex fireman, who was fired by a crooked Italian, and replaced by a Gay, then the "twinkie defense" becomes truly opportunistic. So, instead of murder with special circumstances, he served only 5 years for Manslaughter. In later interviews he admitted that he regretted not killing Willie Brown and Dianne Feinstein. But they weren't in the building.

So is it possible that the White male paternity sympathy, can play a role in denying her victim justice. It was certainly the White female maternity sympathy that saved Dan White. I just don't want to see that happen in this case.
 
Top