BROOKLYN CENTER, Minn. — The white Minnesota police officer who fatally shot Daunte Wright, a 20-year-old Black man, after appearing to mistake her handgun for her Taser will be charged with second-degree manslaughter on Wednesday, a prosecutor said, following three nights of protests over the killing.
Note the connection with the violent riots falsely labeled 'protests'. America is officially a mobocracy, where charges are filed in response to violent thugs burning and looting entire cities. Note that this phony 'journalist' is fully aware of the looting going on. He just buries it in literally the last paragraph.
The killing has brought hundreds of people to the Brooklyn Center Police Department each night, where they have been met by Minnesota National Guard members and State Patrol troopers who have fired tear gas, rubber bullets and other projectiles at the crowd. Some of the demonstrators have launched fireworks and thrown rocks and bottles of water at the police. Officers arrested 79 people on Tuesday night. Dozens of businesses in the region were broken into earlier in the week, but there were few reports of looting on Tuesday.
Also note how the police reactions to their mob violence is described first. As if the police started firing teargas for no reason, and they responded with rocks. It's also interesting that the 'rubber bullets' is attributed to the police as a whole, while with the rioters labeled demonstrators, it's suddenly "Some of the demonstrators".
If this was not bad enough, look at the top. They have an entire series about their sacred class member getting himself killed:
The Shooting of Daunte Wright What to Know Officer to Be Charged Officer Resigns Daunte Wright’s Life Taser vs. Gun
His life? Was one of crime and getting a girl pregnant at age 17 or 18. Doesn't mean that a cop so incompetent that she cannot tell a pistol from a taser after over 2 decades on the force should be anywhere near the police force. Imagine if she had killed someone worthy.
They really are going through the motions. See you in a few months for the inevitable acquittal that gets her off but gets his family a pay off from the city.
Eh, no. You were wrong twice just in the past 24 hours.
I usually go too sadistic for their plans and too lenient when it's against them.
It's not necessarily the 'sadism' that you are wrong about, but about capabilities. A fundamental tenet of realism is that one does not consider intentions, but capabilities.
I'm not even willing to consider that possibility. She will not go down. Women have gotten away with far more obvious killings.
Nice excuse. So if you think it is such an impossibility, then clearly your assumptions are flawed at best if you turn out to be wrong again. But I'm sure you'll just make up some BS excuse again, as you did here contrary to your vow just one hour ago that you would admit that you were wrong. "THEEEEY will get the governor to pardon her within 3 months." or "it's just an attempt to get black votes so THEEEY can kill me".
Though I cannot hold a candle to your great creativity.
Not really. Her name will be forgotten as soon as they get something else to talk about, and her case will be quietly dropped, with the family paid off.
Their capabilities are limitless. They control both branches of government, the entire economy, the Supreme Court, financial services and Big Tech.
Her name will be forgotten as soon as they get something else to talk about
You still haven't explained how that would be any different from all the other sacred characters they stopped talking about when they got someone else.
and her case will be quietly dropped
ROFL. OK, so after claiming that she would not be named nor her picture published, about which you were wrong, and claiming that she would not be charged, about which you were wrong, you are now claiming that the prosecution will 'quietly drop' the case.
That will be bet three that you will be wrong about, with two more to go after that.
Their capabilities are limitless.
Yet they haven't managed to kill you, which you claim is what they want.
I knew they'd have to. In the face of evidence of negligence/incompetence, their insurance provider would compel them behind the scenes to bring charges.
I've worked at a gun range that also provides training to LEO agencies such as shoot houses, cs chamber for certification, etc.. One of the things we offered training on was deployment of tasers and the departments we worked with all had the policy to treat tasers as a lethal weapon and they should only be deployed under the same justified use of force conditions as you would use with your sidearm.
The flip side of that was that any situation in which a taser was used also would have been considered justified in the use of a firearm as well. Part of the rationale behind that logic was in case something like this did happen. Even if the officer thought they were deploying the taser, but pulled out the gun they'd be justified under the law in our state.
I find that madness. Just because a taser can potentially be lethal, does not mean that it is equivalent to something that is intended to be lethal. What is the point of having a taser at all, if no distinction is to be made?
The law ends where liability begins. Everyone thinks the banks are a secret cabal that runs the world but I assure you it's actually the insurance companies that pull the strings behind the scenes.
Qualified immunity be damned, I guarantee you the city leaders of Brooklyn Center got a call from a very senior person at whoever insures their police telling them to either give them charges or find another provider.
All departments I've ever worked with are self-insured with the tax payer on the hook ultimately. That's the one difference between governments and businesses is that governments can ultimately pass the buck literally back to the people...
Part of that is a municipality by municipality thing. Minneapolis is considering making INDIVIDUAL officers to get personal law enforcement liability as one of the reforms; they'd basically be like doctors in that sense. Doctors have to get personal liability for practicing medicine.
This would effectively outsource the vetting of police officers to insurance companies, because if you couldn't find a company willing to insure you, you can't take the job.
Well that and that charge is accurate. 2nd degree manslaughter - due to sheer incompetence/negligence on her part. She fucked up.
No, it's not murder. She literally fucked up. Daunte wasn't an angel of course (dindunuffin, of course) but this is very cut and dry compared to Chauvin.
I'm kinda shocked that they actually named and charged her. I thought they'd sweep it under the rug and change the topic to something else.
I'm sure the white-woman-dominance group wanted to, but seems like they didn't have the control and power to pull it off. Honestly - I'm surprised. My guess was wrong.
First paragraph:
Note the connection with the violent riots falsely labeled 'protests'. America is officially a mobocracy, where charges are filed in response to violent thugs burning and looting entire cities. Note that this phony 'journalist' is fully aware of the looting going on. He just buries it in literally the last paragraph.
Also note how the police reactions to their mob violence is described first. As if the police started firing teargas for no reason, and they responded with rocks. It's also interesting that the 'rubber bullets' is attributed to the police as a whole, while with the rioters labeled demonstrators, it's suddenly "Some of the demonstrators".
If this was not bad enough, look at the top. They have an entire series about their sacred class member getting himself killed:
His life? Was one of crime and getting a girl pregnant at age 17 or 18. Doesn't mean that a cop so incompetent that she cannot tell a pistol from a taser after over 2 decades on the force should be anywhere near the police force. Imagine if she had killed someone worthy.
Corrupt, lying scum.
More riots soon.
Maybe, but they're way more likely to convict on that charge.
it's also an accurate charge. Lady was a fucking retard. 100% negligence. What a "veteran".
They'll riot anyway. ACAB reeeeeee.
At the same time, the officer who shot into a crowd in the Capitol gets zero charges.
They really are going through the motions. See you in a few months for the inevitable acquittal that gets her off but gets his family a pay off from the city.
It was just one day ago that you confidently predicted and bet that her name and picture would not be spread.
Then, just one hour ago, you bet that she would not be charged.
This is now the fourth bet you are making about this case alone.
I'm surprised they charged her, but it's just an appeasement strategy. No way she'll actually go down.
Man, you really are the personification of the proverb "often wrong, but never in doubt".
Will you re-evaluate any of your assumptions if she does go down?
I'm usually right, I just differ on the extent of the treatment. I usually go too sadistic for their plans and too lenient when it's against them.
I'm not even willing to consider that possibility. She will not go down. Women have gotten away with far more obvious killings.
Being a woman didn't save Amber Guyger.
Eh, no. You were wrong twice just in the past 24 hours.
It's not necessarily the 'sadism' that you are wrong about, but about capabilities. A fundamental tenet of realism is that one does not consider intentions, but capabilities.
Nice excuse. So if you think it is such an impossibility, then clearly your assumptions are flawed at best if you turn out to be wrong again. But I'm sure you'll just make up some BS excuse again, as you did here contrary to your vow just one hour ago that you would admit that you were wrong. "THEEEEY will get the governor to pardon her within 3 months." or "it's just an attempt to get black votes so THEEEY can kill me".
Though I cannot hold a candle to your great creativity.
Not really. Her name will be forgotten as soon as they get something else to talk about, and her case will be quietly dropped, with the family paid off.
Their capabilities are limitless. They control both branches of government, the entire economy, the Supreme Court, financial services and Big Tech.
You still haven't explained how that would be any different from all the other sacred characters they stopped talking about when they got someone else.
ROFL. OK, so after claiming that she would not be named nor her picture published, about which you were wrong, and claiming that she would not be charged, about which you were wrong, you are now claiming that the prosecution will 'quietly drop' the case.
That will be bet three that you will be wrong about, with two more to go after that.
Yet they haven't managed to kill you, which you claim is what they want.
I called it days ago.
I knew they'd have to. In the face of evidence of negligence/incompetence, their insurance provider would compel them behind the scenes to bring charges.
I've worked at a gun range that also provides training to LEO agencies such as shoot houses, cs chamber for certification, etc.. One of the things we offered training on was deployment of tasers and the departments we worked with all had the policy to treat tasers as a lethal weapon and they should only be deployed under the same justified use of force conditions as you would use with your sidearm.
The flip side of that was that any situation in which a taser was used also would have been considered justified in the use of a firearm as well. Part of the rationale behind that logic was in case something like this did happen. Even if the officer thought they were deploying the taser, but pulled out the gun they'd be justified under the law in our state.
I find that madness. Just because a taser can potentially be lethal, does not mean that it is equivalent to something that is intended to be lethal. What is the point of having a taser at all, if no distinction is to be made?
Because people complained when cops brained people with batons, so a new tool needed to be found.
Because it's about the laws in our state that govern justified use of force, not the tool used.
And I've worked in insurance for two decades.
The law ends where liability begins. Everyone thinks the banks are a secret cabal that runs the world but I assure you it's actually the insurance companies that pull the strings behind the scenes.
Qualified immunity be damned, I guarantee you the city leaders of Brooklyn Center got a call from a very senior person at whoever insures their police telling them to either give them charges or find another provider.
All departments I've ever worked with are self-insured with the tax payer on the hook ultimately. That's the one difference between governments and businesses is that governments can ultimately pass the buck literally back to the people...
Part of that is a municipality by municipality thing. Minneapolis is considering making INDIVIDUAL officers to get personal law enforcement liability as one of the reforms; they'd basically be like doctors in that sense. Doctors have to get personal liability for practicing medicine.
This would effectively outsource the vetting of police officers to insurance companies, because if you couldn't find a company willing to insure you, you can't take the job.
Well that and that charge is accurate. 2nd degree manslaughter - due to sheer incompetence/negligence on her part. She fucked up.
No, it's not murder. She literally fucked up. Daunte wasn't an angel of course (dindunuffin, of course) but this is very cut and dry compared to Chauvin.
FTFY!
I'm kinda shocked that they actually named and charged her. I thought they'd sweep it under the rug and change the topic to something else.
I'm sure the white-woman-dominance group wanted to, but seems like they didn't have the control and power to pull it off. Honestly - I'm surprised. My guess was wrong.
Making women cops and giving them a gun, what could go wrong. I wonder how she feels about being "empowered" now.