I think you’ll always have that. A witness could say something on the stand, then the opposing attorney could object and have the objection sustained; the judge can instruct the jury to disregard that statement and have it stricken from the transcript.
Except that in our case we WERE allowed to use our recollection of the recording. The judge had NOT instructed us to disregard it. As he clarified when we all went back in the courtroom to ask the judge this question.
However in other cases where you are supposed to pretend you don’t know something that you do know… yeah, that’s problematic.
Another incident of a cop killing a suspect has the uptown neighborhood of Minneapolis on edge.
This time no body camera or dash cam footage.
Cops don’t have much credibility in thus city, particularly after the blatantly lied early on after the murder of George Floyd.
Seems like they have done some of the same here, initially saying it was a murder suspect. And then walking that back.
I expect the story to change even more as more information comes out
Likely the case of another trigger happy cop.
I wonder what carrier handles the liability coverage (presumably on a high excess basis) for the City of Minneapolis.
There’s insurance for police killings? 
In the US, just about anything can be insured…for a price.
It varies from state to state, but law enforcement liability is a standard set of coverage parts included in the bundle of casualty coverages governments can acquire.
I forget where Minnesota falls, but in some states court rulings severely limit municipalities’ ability to get casualty coverage lest they waive statutory immunities. In other states, municipalities pool their risks and essentially reinsure excess losses. And in still other states there’s a competitive private market.
I don’t know for certain / I haven’t seen anything specific for Minneapolis, but I would be not at all surprised if a large multinational insurer were picking up the tab for civil penalties above a six-figure SIR…and if liability coverage for municipalities in that federal judicial district weren’t getting pretty insanely expensive.
(Disclaimer: The above is based on past-life experience. Moved on to other things years ago.)
Believe it is written of Minneapolis that they self insure for liability risks.
But law enforcement liability coverage does exist in the market. I haven’t worked near it in well over 10 yrs. No clue who the players would be in the market if it still exists.
why wouldn’t there be? accidents happen, especially if you’re allowed to shoot at people
Has this killing been discussed in this thread?
https://www.nytimes.com/article/ronald-greene-video-louisiana.html
Yikes, just the first sentence sounds really really bad.
Qualified immunity should not apply to falsifying reports. Anyone who did should absolutely fry for that even if they weren’t involved in the beating.
Yeah. There needs to be prison time for those directly involved, possible jail time for those who covered it up, and loss of job/pensions all the way around on this one. At least from what I have read so far.
This area is not healing.
Also, as xpected, the one non-law enforcement witness to the police killing of Smith has released a statement that she never saw Smith with a weapon.
Better story of the incident
Star Tribune is trash
1 dead, 3 hurt after driver plows into protesters in Uptown Minneapolis | MPR News?
Potter convicted of 1st & 2nd Degree Manslaughter.
Reports are that the Jury had a decision on 2nd Degree immediately, but deliberately four 3.5 days before reaching a conclusion on 1st Degree Manslaughter.
1st Degree was due go Potter committing a misdemeanor with her reckless handling of her firearm
From the linked article:
in this case, the “reckless handling or use of a firearm so as to endanger the safety of another with such force and violence that death or great bodily harm to any person was reasonably foreseeable.”
Also, not sure why the thread name was changed again to mock coos killing innocent people.
Just checked who the OP was.
Yeah. Makes since that he thinks it is funny
Would she have been better off if she just claimed from the start that she went for her gun? That could have possibly been claimed as self-defence and avoided the whole “you were reckless with your weapons” thing.
Or, would that have moved it sorta into the “premeditated” territory…
This is what I had seen
https://twitter.com/EricChalouxKSTP/status/1474112490451705872?t=OzVXTBWWFa4EVytpVb7feA&s=19
Question I have for her is, “Where do you normally keep your taser, relative to your sidearm?” I mean, I’d keep the taser on my left hip (assuming I’m a right-handed gun shooter), seeing as it is usually needed for non-quick-draw use.
Based on the following from the linked AP article, they sort of tried that defense and it failed:
Potter’s lawyers argued that she made a mistake by drawing her gun instead of her Taser. But they also said she would have been justified in using deadly force if she had meant to because Johnson was at risk of being dragged.
Prosecutors sought to raise doubts about Potter’s testimony that she decided to act after seeing fear on Johnson’s face. Prosecutor Erin Eldridge, in cross-examination, pointed out that in an interview with a defense expert Potter said she didn’t know why she decided to draw her Taser. During her closing argument, Eldridge also replayed Potter’s body-camera video that she said never gave a clear view of Johnson’s face during the key moments.