IMO: THE CONVICTION OF KIM POTTER

I haven’t been following the trial of Kim Potter, the Minneapolis Police Officer who was recently convicted of the manslaughter of Daunte Wright, a Black motorist. I try not to pay attention to these court cases because a lot of the times the results of the trials are not want you really want. It erodes the idea of democracy and that everyone gets treated the same under the law. This case is no different. Potter, a veteran officer without any other disciplinary actions to speak of or that was reported, was convicted of first degree manslaughter. This is not to say that the family of Daunte Wright doesn’t deserve justice, but the charges against Potter doesn’t fit how the law reads. To be guilty of first degree manslaughter, it requires intent to harm but not necessarily an intent to kill, or that the action that preceded it was unlawful, i.e. a guy approaches someone at a bar and punches him because of an off color remark where the intent was to create harm but not to kill. Potter was doing her lawful duty when the incident occurred therefore negating any possibility of it ever being first degree manslaughter. She was there, doing her job. The second degree charge required prosecutors to prove Potter caused his death “by her culpable negligence,” meaning that Potter “caused an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm” to Wright, but Wright was refusing to follow the officer’s orders creating the necessity to use an intermediate weapon. Here’s the tricky part, the prosecution admitted that Potter actually thought she had her taser and not her service weapon when she shot. That statement by the prosecution negates the officer creating great bodily harm or consciously trying to cause anyone’s death because Taser’s are seen as non lethal intermediate weapons, by the same people that prosecuted Potter. I’m not saying Potter isn’t guilty of something, just not what they charged her with.

Potter was railroaded, not by the prosecutors or Daunte Wright’s family, but by every officer that should have been charged for manslaughter and got away with it. Her sentencing is a causation (don’t know if that’s the right word) of circumstances that are out of her control. In Florida, back in the 1950’s, a Sheriff took three black inmates from the jail to the court. He stopped in a secluded area and put three bullets in each one before they reached the court room for trial. That was the treatment. No one questioned him about it and he merely stated that the still handcuffed dead black youths tried to escape. You don’t even have to go back that far. Recently, the Supreme Court just found that a black inmate that died in a jail after a tussle with the police, inside the cell, was justifiable because somehow the definitions, literally just the words from a previous case, didn’t line up to find a conviction of the officers.

With all the protests, bad publicity, screams for justice because of what I believe to be bad decisions or rulings, in my opinion (which doesn’t mean much), all, by the way, seemed right to me and I agree with (the protests and bad publicity not the rulings, wanted to make that clear), except for the looting ( I don’t agree with looting), Potter was fighting a battle she had no way of winning even though she should have, easily. This a rebound effect, where you pull on something and then you let go, it snaps to the other side with ferocity, until you can come to a center or mutual understanding of how things should work. I see a lot of reporting on what newspapers call bad policing but when I read the circumstances, it seems like that the officer was right in his decision. The fight is on against qualified immunity, but you have to be careful that when presenting your opposition, that the case does, in fact, show that qualified immunity is the reason for the non conviction and not the circumstances.

I don’t blame Wright for his fear of the police, given the previous given example about how you could die in a jail cell, where you are ultimately in someone else’s care, or for him running, but it was still wrong according to the law. The courts are ultimately responsible. They have to see the facts for what they are and not impose a requirement for accountability that is so absurd that it creates fear in the public of predators with badges that run wild doing what they want when they want. Accountability is a cornerstone of a civil society. For this experiment, democracy, to work, you have to make sure that everyone follows the rules, not just a certain segment of the population.

My blarticle states that both sides are right and that both sides are wrong. Until someone with good common sense comes and resolves this, and it has to come from the Supreme Court, this will be what happens in this country, bad people staying out of prison running everything and good people locked up. This case should have been resolved by a payout to the Wright family and the retirement of Officer Potter.

Please click up or down to show if this makes sense to you or not.

MICHIGAN SHOOTING

That young man, at the age of 15, had no chance to lead a normal life.

As reported by NBC ” On Tuesday, prior to the shooting, another teacher alerted school officials to a drawing the teacher found on Ethan Crumbley’s desk. It contained a drawing of a gun pointing at the words “the thoughts won’t stop, help me,” the prosecutor said.”

This young man was bullied by means unknown to him and now there are 5 families that will spend many Christmas without their sons and daughters and he was born just to live in a cage. The people really responsible will go home and open their presents with their kids and this is the country we live in.

Now, why wouldn’t anyone that feels that this could happen to their kids not want to get an abortion in a country that doesn’t give a crap about anyone but themselves. This is ridiculous.

So many stories about external devices that create inhumane thoughts through extraordinary means and that the government has deemed fantastical even though so many people know. This is crazy as hell, which by the way, for those that believe, a lot of people will be headed towards. Good luck. At least he has a good chance for an insanity plea.

Please stop harming our children!!!!!

RITTENHOUSE VERDICT AND THE AFTERMATH

In one of my blarticles, I wrote that I didn’t think that Rittenhouse should have been charged with murder. The jury came back and found him not guilty. I think that is the right decision. I understand the feelings of half the population that felt otherwise, I mean two people are dead and one was injured. How is it that no one is responsible. Sometimes, the people responsible are the people that were injured. I know that might seem callous but it is the unfortunate truth. I try and put myself in Rittenhouse’s shoes and thought what would I have done if people started to chase me and wanted to take my gun, what would I do? Especially if I couldn’t outrun them. Defend myself seems the most likely scenario. The truth is I would never be in that situation because I would never go to a riot with a gun but that isn’t illegal in Kenosha. The outrage should be at the circumstances. How is it that a person that can not legally buy cigarettes, can’t legally buy alcohol, and in some states can’t legally drive by himself, can open carry a weapon? The government has deemed that people of his age at the time of the incident aren’t mature enough to make those decisions but they think they are mature enough to carry a weapon that can end someone’s life. Rittenhouse was and maybe still is, undoubtedly, immature and little bit of a dumb dumb but the law that allowed him to carry a weapon wasn’t his fault. It’s the fault of older people who should have known better. Right now is the perfect time to have perspective and attack silly laws like that one. It isn’t the time to pile on an immature dumb kid that saw to many war movies. Use what your given not what you don’t have. Use the circumstances of how this could have happened in the first place, not a verdict that was fair, even though sad. I know some might disagree, but piling on this kid is just going to turn off what leverage you might have. Be smart so this doesn’t happen again. Pass laws that would stop this from happening again and use this case as the reason or example why.

So funny, not the incident, but the fact that he can’t even vote or join the military without his parent’s permission, but somehow the laws in Wisconsin allow him to open carry. Crazy.

GUN LAWS AND CONCEALED CARRY

The Supreme Court is taking up a case of concealed carry in the State of NY, one of the strictest states for carrying a weapon outside the home. This case will decide how people across the country can carry while in public and that decision will have ramifications across the country, I’m aware I said it twice. This case is not an easy case to decide and I don’t envy the Justices because no matter what you do or decide, you will have detractors. The left will cancel you, while the right will, well, maybe, riot and take over your court. This is definitely a lose lose case. No one will be happy with the outcome as one side will say that you didn’t go far enough and the other side will just say you got it wrong, that’s why I’m confused that they took it up in the first place. The best solution, in my expert legal opinion, which is equivalent to a drunk person trying to pee into a shot glass, I might get some of it in but most of it is going on all over the woman’s shoe next to me while she slaps the shit out of me, would be to kick it back to the State and let them make the decision for their borders. If people don’t like the decision, their are other borders to live in. This case is fraught, fraught I say, with pitfalls and backlash. Personally I believe that choosing who can and who can’t carry concealed is crazy because sometimes that is based on more factors other than stated. Money, in this case large donations, has it’s privileges. No bureaucracy is ever 100% legit. There is always a little corruption.

Plus, carrying concealed is kinda crazy. Florida is a perfect example of that. People get this courage that they never had before and they start to want to be defacto law enforcement. Looking for problems to solve. This is going to sound bad, but I am ex-law enforcement and in 20 years I carried concealed, while not working, maybe a total of five times. Excluding that one year after I retired. Never needed it. Didn’t even like to carry it while not working. Sounds crazy right. Like the young man doing somersaults at the party and dropping his service weapon that accidentally shot someone in the leg, I felt like it took away from my time with my family. Just the fact that I had it with me, felt like a burden. I understand for some it makes them feel empowered, but that’s the wrong kind of empowerment.

On the other hand, if you are going to allow concealed carry, then let everyone carry concealed. Like I stated prior, sometimes it’s bureaucratic nonsense that allows some people to carry and some people not to carry. Or maybe we just let elderly people carry concealed, those that hit retirement age, 67, and let them be the Wild Bill Hiccups of our generation as they squint through their reading glasses an unload a barrage of gunfire after you parked in their handicap parking spot. Their the ones that get assaulted the most. Or how about if everyone just kept their guns in their cars and houses and didn’t carry at all. The fact that you think that you need to carry concealed says a lot about your confidence in your fellow human beings, doesn’t it.

One thing is for sure, looking at history to decide whether to allow concealed carry is the wrong way to do it. They didn’t have cell phones in Wyatt Earp’s time. And I’m here to tell you that wireless technology might be more dangerous then guns. The technology out there these days should be considered when ruling on cases like this. People seem to get a little crazy around those wireless technology based items. Last thing anyone needs is a plethora of people that all of a sudden become “allergic” to wireless devices and go unhinged. Everyone knows what I’m talking about, thumbs tingle, palms itch, feet vibrate, noses twitch… It’s going to be a mad mad mad mad world, loved that movie, out there if you start to mix weapons with wireless technology. No… I say let each State decide for themselves. That’s the safest way not to let this snake bitten case come back and bite you in the ass, because they will blame you the first time someone goes unhinged and it will start to erode your credibility.

HOW THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD JUDGE ABORTION

I don’t know how the Supreme Court is going to handle the current challenge to abortion, but, in my legal opinion, which won’t get you a cup of coffee even if you have the money to pay for it, the male judges should recuse themselves. I wouldn’t want to be the person telling a woman what she can and can’t do. If the ruling only affects women, shouldn’t only women be the judges? A man telling you what your duties as a woman are…. feels sort of 19th century. Most likely won’t happen.

GUESS WHICH IS TRUE

After reading the Washington Post article and thought how cool that whole conspiracy theory guessing game was, I thought I would give it a try.

Can you guess which of these statements are true?

  1. The earth is neither flat or round, it’s actually a triangle.
  2. The sun is made of American cheese, that’s why the Russians hate us, unlike the moon which is mozarella
  3. A DHS Agent once overdosed a colleague with sleeping pills in an attempt to keep him from talking about criminal activity that he was involved in, same agent would then try and force himself on his colleagues wife after telling the other agent they were going to turn him in because they knew his wife was in the country illegally prior to their marriage, that same agent would then ignore his colleague about a possible terrorist incident because he was busy trying to find out what hotel a flight attendant was staying in, the possible terrorist incident, people involved, turned out to be tied to the December 2009 Christmas bombing, all while the agent was taking illegal steroids. That same agent would later seemingly hit on his colleague by asking him what was the size of his appendage. That agent is now retired early collecting a full pension. The other agent is retired with full benefits as well, even though he met his wife in the U.S..
  4. Godzilla is real and running for President of the United States.

Alright, if you can’t guess which one is a fact, I’ll give you a clue, Godzilla isn’t running for President, she, most likely a she, is a fictional animal created for movies. One of them is 100% true.

MORE ABOUT ABORTION

The fight for abortion rights is under way and it looks like it will decide future political outcomes. What I don’t understand is why this is an issue in the first place. The Governors of these States that want to abolish abortion have a rationale that doesn’t make sense to me. They are saying that they can force a woman to be a mother but some of these women don’t want to be a mother. So can they force a man to be a dad? I know they can force them to pay child support but that’s not really being a dad, is it. The majority of the reasons for wanting an abortion are, as listed by the National Institute of Health are:

  1. Three-quarters said that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities;
  2. two-thirds said they could not afford to have a child;
  3. half said they did not want to be a single parent;
  4. and they were not mature enough to raise a child.

Let’s all assume that proper measures were taken to prevent pregnancy, my son was born even though contraceptives were being used but I was older, making good money, and I actually loved the woman that I would marry while she was (just in case you didn’t know who was the pregnant one) 8 months pregnant, but that’s not always the case. Telling a woman that she has to have a child in a place where there is still no medical insurance for everyone, their child could end up like George Floyd or Dulce Alavez, to be born into poverty, to be born into a community where the school system more resembles a day care and not an educational institute, where systematic racism (pretty much the same as systemic but a little less intentional and more ingrained in how the system works) still exists, is wrong. Why don’t we fix these problems that I listed before we force people to do something that they find morally objectionable, bringing a child into a place that doesn’t care about them but only cares about telling people what to do. Sometimes forcing people to have a child is more like feeding a prison system than it is complimenting humanity. These women know what’s best for them and what they are and aren’t capable of doing and handling and sometimes, at that point in their lives, being a mother isn’t one of them.

As I write this I know that I won’t change the minds of everyone, I might just change the mind of one person, but if it is the right person, a Supreme Court Justice maybe (here, I tremendously over assert that my blog is note worthy and not something people accidentally click on by accident when looking for recipes on how to remove stains from clothes), then it can have the outcome desired. As for the religious beliefs go in this situation, I urge you to keep those thoughts personal and not let them interfere with legal decisions. Not everyone has religious beliefs and the separation of church and state is important, plus God, who I do believe in, can pretty much handle things on his? her? own without our help, I hear that the omnipotent one is pretty powerful. Unless you are telling me God speaks to you, than that’s a conversation you need to have with mental health care workers or the FBI.

It doesn’t escape me that the people making these decisions are mostly male and well to do and they want to make the decisions about women, most that are struggling to survive financially. I don’t think anyone in the Governor’s Office are missing a meal (at least by the way they look) or lack any medical insurance or worry about affording that private school. Abortion is one of the few cases where someone asserts themselves into someone else’s life but it hasn’t anything to do with them. Most cases you have to show the outcome will affect you for you to have a voice, in this case you don’t even have to know the person to have an opinion on what she can do.

And as far as the people that say that I’m glad that my mother didn’t have an abortion, I bet there are a shit load that wish that Jeffery Epstein’s mother had decided to get one. For that matter any person that sexually assaulted a person that their mother had decided to get one.

IMO: DON’T ABOLISH THE FBI. JUST MAKE THEM BETTER.

There have been calls by some prominent newspapers to abolish the FBI. Their reasoning is the same reasons you would abolish any and all law enforcement. Hitmen, sexual predators, on the take, politically motivated, etc. but what makes them any different, in these terms, than any other law enforcement agency? If you look at any law enforcement agency you will find all this and some I failed to mention, so why would you abolish them and not all others? Their not even the worst, but these news outlets do make a good point that they are climbing to the top, if their not careful and implement some hard lines.

One of the jobs that these women and men do is investigate fraud. Any kind of fraud, nationwide. From any kind of medical fraud i.e. charity care fraud, to ID fraud, i.e. fake U.S. passports, to immigration fraud,, i.e. the 9/11 hijackers, they missed that one but I’m sure they will get all the rest. Those three alone will put you away for 30 years. That’s a lot of time for people to think about their mistakes. 30 years for someone, lets say that is 25, won’t see the light of day until 55. And if they’re illegal, back to the country you left because you couldn’t make a living, seems harsh. I would probably do anything to avoid that. First thing I would do is not do it.

These trained professionals have solved some of the worst crimes that they haven’t committed (crimes perpetrated by them according to the news outlets and subsequent convictions) or convinced other people to do in this great country, so lets cut them a break. Add some accountability, maybe make examples out of some of them, I suggest adding a morality clause so they don’t open investigations on all the pretty ladies, and then let them work. If you think it was good before they were the top dogs, for some it was, just remember how some people would end up shot on the way to prison or the courthouse and the locals would say it was an attempted escape, even though they were still handcuffed, that was a while back but they put an end to some of it. They do.. do a good job on the civil rights front, at least give them that.

Howie Carr: Abolish the FBI? You heard it here first Boston Herald

Abolish the FBI

How much more do we need to learn about 2016 to realize the agency is a disaster? Wall Street Journal By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

THE HYPROCISY OF FEDERAL AND STATE PROSECUTORS

Federal and State prosecutors have two jobs. To prosecute wrong doers and to defend their respective employers when the wrong doers are their employees. In a case that is going to go before the supreme Court, Byrd v. Lamb docket # 21-184, where the question on hand is whether, under either step of the Abbasi test, line-level federal officers may be sued for violating the Fourth Amendment, the outcome of this case is either going to strengthen or weaken the protections of qualified immunity for federal agents.

The case revolves around how some federal agents can go rogue, read the synopsis below:

On the morning of February 2, 2019, Kevin Byrd was trying to drive out of a parking lot in Conroe,
Texas, when a Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) agent Ray Lamb stepped in front of Byrd’s
moving car, preventing Byrd from leaving and detaining him until local police arrived. Pet. App. 2a–3a, 53a. Though Lamb knew that Byrd had committed no crime, the agent pointed a gun at Byrd, tried to smash his driver’s side window with a gun, and threatened to “put a bullet through his f—king skull” and “blow his head off.” Id. at 2a. Lamb then pulled the trigger. Id. at 56a. The gun jammed. Ibid. When police arrived, Agent Lamb showed them his DHS badge, leading the police to detain Byrd for several hours. Pet. App. 2a–3a. The police did not release Byrd until they reviewed security footage of the parking lot,1 which confirmed Byrd’s innocence. Id. at 3a.

Agent Lamb was not on official business, he was acting on a personal issue. A family matter that involved his son where someone was driving drunk and another person was injured. In this case Agent Lamb’s son was the accused drunk driver and a friend of Mr. Byrd was the person injured. Mr. Lamb was sued by Mr. Byrd where Mr. Byrd won in District court but lost on appeal in the Court of Appeals.

Because Mr. Lamb was not acting on official business, he is not represented by the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Had he been on official business, his defense attorney would have been the U.S. Attorney’s office. The same U.S. Attorney’s Office that would have to investigate Mr. Lamb for wrong doing and either find him in violation or having acted in good faith. The problem is that type of behavior couldn’t reasonably be defended unless Mr. Byrd had a weapon of his own and was in the process of committing a crime, which he wasn’t. Here is where it gets tricky, finding Mr. Lamb in flagrant violation of his sworn duties would open the federal government to a lawsuit, finding that Mr. Lamb did nothing wrong insulates the government from any monetary damages. The problem lies in that given the alternative, the government will almost always find their employees not in violation thus shielding them from prosecution and civil litigation. It’s cheaper that way.

That dual role as prosecutor and defense lawyer puts the people, the taxpayers that pay the salaries of the U.S. Attorney’s office, at risk. The U.S. Attorney’s office has a sworn duty and oath to protect the citizenry, but seemingly not at the peril of costing the government money. So how can you protect the citizens from rogue actors and at the same time keep your oath? You can’t. If your job as defense lawyer comes before your job as prosecutor, then you have a conflict of interest that can’t be overcome. The way to solve it is to remove some of the qualified immunities that come with being a federal agent and a police officer. If the behavior is so egregious that any reasonable person would find for the plaintiff, then the government should play the role of prosecutor and not defense lawyer.

In the case of Byrd v Lamb, as I play amateur judge and sleuth, it seems simple. The Supreme Court will most likely find in favor of Mr. Byrd because qualified immunity is only applicable when you are working a case and not on your own personal time. The case will overturned and sent back to the lower court, but I am wrong more times the the NY Mets lose, so, I hope Mr. Byrd gets his due and rogue agents like Mr. Lamb take heed, but chances are Mr. Lamb might walk, on the civil charges anyway.

The real problem is if the people that go rogue are in the U.S. Attorney’s office. Without the explicit consent of the U.S. Attorney, no one can prosecute them. That’s a whole new ball game. That scenario is likened to a doomsday scenario. In short, The King’s men should not be more powerful than the King himself. Their should be accountability.

This isn’t a great blarticle or great example on how this hypocrisy plays out, their are better ones but it will do for right now.

THE BORDER PATROL, THE OUTRAGE, THE WTF WHY NOW AND NOT BEFORE?

Jakelin is dead

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday expressed outrage at how Border Patrol agents on horseback confronted Haitian migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, saying the situation brought to mind how such tactics have been “used against the Indigenous people of our country, [have] been used against African Americans during times of slavery.”

“Human beings should not be treated that way,” Harris said, from Yahoo news.

Vice President Harris is absolutely right. Having the Border Patrol on horse back bearing down on you is as frightening as it can get for immigrants, all immigrants. So, being a former Border Patrol Agent myself, I ask why is it more evil now then when it was being done to Hispanics? Most people crossing the southern border are Hispanic and they have faced these same events and worse for many many years but the outrage is being let out now. Why now and not before? I don’t disagree with the Vice President but the TBS method is an unofficial guideline to how the border patrol does its work. TBS are initials for “turn back south” and the methodology is employed by the Border Patrol to limit arrests and save money on confinement, transportation, and court costs.

The reason for me is simple, I spoke about it before, in my previous blarticle. The Vice President can empathize and sympathize because the Haitians could be her daughter, her son, her mother or her father. It’s easier to empathize/sympathize when you can identify with the people being mistreated and the VP is in a position of power and authority where she can fix how these procedures should occur. It isn’t that she doesn’t care about Hispanics, it’s that she can’t identify with them as much as she can identify with the Haitians. It’s instinctual. I agree that these people should not have been rode at or towards but should have been confronted calmly and told that they have to return back south, unless they are making a run for it, then, well, then those horses are pretty damn fast and you will see them come right at you. The point being, until we can see each other as one race, the human race, instead of identifying each other by the amount of melanin we have or by the origin of our language, then this going to be the norm.

In BP detention centers, Hispanic children have been separated from their families, sexually assaulted, have died in custody, Hispanic women have been sexually assaulted, had their uteruses removed and had their children taken from them but there was no ?LM movement or outrage that somehow spurred change that would have prevented this from happening to Haitians. So now you’re shocked, I’m not, inaction leads to greater more horrendous acts, as does the lack of accountability. I hope the VP can spur (I hope you get the pun here) change and rewrite policy to where people are treated humanely and that accountability somehow makes its way into the system. To the BP, Just remember, the illegal immigrants are your customers, without them you wouldn’t have a job, so treat them like you would any other business, like you want their repeat business because they keep you employed and living that good government paycheck life. They’re not your plague, they’re the reason you can afford those giant shitty looking belt buckles.

I’m not very smart but how does that old saying go, they came for the Hispanics and no one said anything, now they came for the Haitians and there is only the VP left to say anything? Something like that. Point being, if you address wrong when it happens, then you don’t have to worry about it happening to you. And if you don’t have that address, its the southern border.

There is one sure way to pull everyone together, an alien invasion, I mean from outer space, not Belize. We find alien life, we’ll find a way to hate them, then we can all come together in that hate. In the end though, we’ll be listening to their martian music and wearing their jupiter clothes. Too bad it takes hate to bring people together, it would be much easier if it was cheese puffs.