Bulletpoint the reasons for the downward departure. Started watching the video but was turned off instantly when a toss away line was spoken about the deceased & a basically gushing description was given about the murderer. Not going to invest anymore time in the clip, but am interested in why the sentence was so low.
- Uncontested evidence that it was an accident by drawing her gun rather than a taser with the intention to draw the taser
- Judge accepts that she is remorseful
- Uncontested that she is particularly amenable to probation & is a lawful person who has no record & has been a pillar of her community for all her life until one error
- Proven that no Blakely factors were actually appropriate (only 1 shot, not firing wildly and didn't abuse her position of authority because she was lawfully arresting Daunte Wright and was within policy to use her taser)
- Purposes of jail are; Removal, Rehabilitation, Deterrence & Retribution. Only retribution is served by a prison sentence.
- The conduct is less serious than the usual circumstances of reckless manslaughter given that she was in the line of duty, never intended to us a gun in a split second moment at a tense scene where other officers were in harms way which creates a mitigating circumstance. There was no personal animosity towards the victim
She then quoted Barrack Obama stating that people should be more empathetic to understand each other (while tearing up), then explained that the Potter was trying to do the right thing in the line of duty but made a tragic mistake and deserves a sentence significantly below the guideline for reckless homicide.
The defence team pointed out that 60% of women (and 30% of men) in Minnesota get a downward departure for sentencing so seems like its probably reasonable for this case given her record, the mitigating circumstances and it not being a crime of malice/crime of intent (so not a danger of reoffending).
