Defending Officer Kim Potter in the Shooting of Daunte Wright - A Legal Analysis

It is a challenging task to mount a defense for a 26-year veteran police officer, especially one like Kim Potter, who accidentally discharged her taser as a firearm during the arrest of Daunte Wright. This incident has raised profound questions about the use of force in policing and the legal standards that define when such force is justified.

Relevance of the Taser

One fundamental argument in defense of Officer Potter is that the fact that she was using a taser is not relevant to the justification of her actions. Consequently, we must consider whether a reasonable officer would have deemed it necessary to use lethal force in the circumstances.

The Legal Standard for Use of Force

The law governing the use of force by law enforcement officers is governed by a specific standard that does not take into account the officer's intent. This standard is the reasonable police officer standard, which determines whether the use of force was justified based on what a reasonable officer would have done in the same situation, rather than the exact actions taken by the officer in question.

The determining factors for a use of force include:

Severity of the Crime

Officer Potter was arresting Daunte Wright for an outstanding warrant for not appearing in court, where he was charged with carrying a pistol without a permit. Additionally, he had a prior record of aggravated robbery, and was out on bail while possessing a firearm illegally. These facts, including the severity of the crime and his history of fleeing and previous illegal behavior, would raise significant concerns for any reasonable officer.

Immediate Threat to Safety

The second factor is whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others. During the arrest, Wright was attempting to flee the vehicle in which he was being restrained, which clearly presented a risk to the safety of the arresting officers and potentially the public.

The body camera footage clearly shows that Wright was actively resisting arrest and attempting to flee. This behavior would overwhelmingly suggest that a reasonable officer would perceive an immediate threat.

Conclusion

Regardless of the specific force used by Officer Potter, the question of justification revolves around whether a reasonable officer would have found it necessary to use lethal force under the circumstances. Given the serious offense involved, Wright's history of violence, and his active attempt to flee, it is arguable that the use of lethal force was a reasonable response by a law enforcement officer.