What Is The Difference Between The Wright And Babbitt Shootings?

Contact Your Elected Officials

Within an hour of each other, charging decisions in two lethal police shootings were announced with strikingly different conclusions. The decisions reached in the shootings of Daunte Wright in Minnesota and Ashli Babbitt in Washington highlight concerns over the political and legal elements that can influence such decisions. The timing of the two decisions that involved two chaotic situations raises questions why charges were filed in Minnesota, but not in Washington.

In the Minnesota shooting, police were attempting to arrest Wright who, after a traffic stop, was found to have an outstanding warrant forย fleeing police with an unlicensed firearm. Wright broke free of officers while he was being handcuffed and jumped back into the car to drive away.ย Kim Potter decided to deploy herย stun gun againstย Wright, which would likely be viewed as a reasonable level of force in that circumstance.ย However, in the struggle, Potter grabbed her service weapon rather than her Taser. In the video, theย officer is heard yellingย โ€œtaser, taser, taserโ€ before she swears and says, โ€œHoly S**t I just shot him.โ€

Weapon confusion cases

The case has tragically familiar elements as a โ€œweapon confusionโ€ case. There are so many such weapon-confusion cases that departments have tried a variety of solutions, from adding special training to new designs for stun guns. The problem is such training can be lost to the fog and frenzy of the violent scene.

The case is similar to what happened in 2009, when Bay Area Rapid Transit officers struggled with Oscar Grant to arrest him. With Grant on the ground, BART officer Johannes Mehserle warned he was about to use a Taser but then grabbed his service weapon and fired a fatal round into Grantโ€™s back.

The videotape of the incident showed Mehserle moving his thumb over his weapon as you would to release a safety on the Taser. (His service weapon did not have that type of safety release). The jury rejected second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter charges but found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Unlike past cases, the prosecutors did not overcharge Potter. However, under the criminal provision, the prosecutors must show that the 26-year veteran โ€œcreat[ed] an unreasonable risk, and consciously [took] chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.โ€ The question is whether a possible split-second mistake legally constitutes a conscious choice of an officer.

The Babbitt shooting

In Washington, the Justice Department announced that it would not charge the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 riot. The decision in Washington had a number of striking differences. Potter was charged within a few days. It has been months since Babbitt was shot in the Capitol. The identity of the responsible officer has not been made public.Babbitt was an unarmed Air Force veteran without a criminal record. While she was clearly trespassing and at the forefront of a riot, there is no claim that she was threatening any officer or possible person with serious bodily injury or death. Indeed, near her were other officers who could have been hit by the round. (Babbitt was trying to climb through a broken door in the Speakerโ€™s Lobby as police fought back the mob).

If the officer intended to shoot Babbitt, it would not likely meet the standard for a justified shooting under governing cases like Tennessee v. Garner (1985). If the officer fired blindly or wildly, it would appear to have many of the same negligent elements as the Wright shooting.

In rejecting charges, the Justice Department statement notably does not say that the shooting was clearly justified. Instead, it noted that โ€œprosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so โ€˜willfully.โ€™โ€  It stressed that this element requires a showing of โ€œa bad purpose to disregard the lawโ€ and that โ€œevidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.โ€

Of course, โ€œweapons confusionโ€ cases are often caused by an officerโ€™s acting out of โ€œfear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or poor judgment.โ€ Yet, in one case an officer is charged and in the other the officer is cleared.

An uncertain line

For the public, the line of distinction can be hard to discern. For officers, that uncertain line can be the difference between discipline and incarceration. Officers have to be able to see that line clearly in carrying out duties with often in split second decisions in violent incidents.

Both of these deaths were tragic. There was a clearly different political contexts and timelines for the decisions. After Babbittโ€™s death, there was no outcry over her death because she was part of an infamous riot that stopped a constitutional process of certifying presidential electoral votes. Yet, the shooting does not appear any more justified than the Wright shooting, which was likely an accident. The Justice Department indicates an intentional shot was fired by an officer either at Babbitt or the mob generally. It does not explain which.

Violent riots are unfortunately common today in cities ranging from Minneapolis to Portland to Washington. The use of live rounds however have never been authorized absent a particularized showing of a significant threat to an officer or others. Nothing in the announcement in the Babbitt case answers how such a showing was made by the officer.

In the end, these cases capture the uncertain line in these cases of when mistakes or errors by police are criminal matters. There is a credible basis for the charge in the Wright shooting, but a jury will now have to decide if this was a conscious decision or tragic (but noncriminal) mistake. All such cases are highly fact specific. However, the Babbitt decision leaves more questions than answers for the public and police alike.

By Jonathan Turley

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAYโ€™s Board of Contributors. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley

Read Original Article on JonathanTurley.com

The Thinking Conservative
The Thinking Conservativehttps://www.thethinkingconservative.com/
The goal of THE THINKING CONSERVATIVE is to help us educate ourselves on conservative topics of importance to our freedom and our pursuit of happiness. We do this by sharing conservative opinions on all kinds of subjects, from all types of people, and all kinds of media, in a way that will challenge our perceptions and help us to make educated choices.

250 Countdown

Those 56 intrepid men who signed put their very lives, honor and fortunes on the line. There was no auto-quill to accommodate their signatures.ย 

How the Senate Parliamentarian Changed the OBBB

An unelected bureaucrat does a important job in the U.S. Senate. Elizabeth MacDonough enforces senate rules on Trumpโ€™s โ€œOne Big Beautiful Billโ€.

The Sacred Honor of the 56

Today we're celebrating the sacred honor of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence.

Alligator Alcatraz: A Bold Step Toward Secure Borders

Alligator Alcatraz funded through FEMA, represents a decisive move by the Trump admin to address illegal immigration with efficiency and resolve.

Is America Broke?

Silicon Valley investor and economic commentator Balaji Srinivasan made...

New White House Faith Office Aims to Ensure US Is Beacon of Freedom for Others

The White House Faith Office wants to see the United States as the leader in advancing religious freedom, its faith director Jennifer Korn said.

Federal Reserve Rates Are Too High, Says Former World Bank Chief

Rates should be between 0.25 and 1.75 percent rather...

Newly Naturalized Citizens Say What American Freedom Means to Them

Nearly 820,000 people pledged allegiance to the United States and became naturalized citizens in 2024.

Noem Waives Environmental Restrictions to Fast-Track Water Barriers in Rio Grande

DHS Sec Kristi Noem waived federal environmental laws to fast-track construction of 17 miles of waterborne barriers in the Rio Grande in South Texas.

US Keeps Pressure on Chinese Goods Amid Vietnam Trade Deal

Transshippingโ€”rerouting goods through a third country to disguise the origin of the productsโ€”is a focal point of trade negotiations with Asian markets.

White House Report Reveals Top Earners, Staffers Working for No Salary

The Trump admin released its yearly report that shows the salaries for White House staffers, also revealing officials who arenโ€™t accepting salaries at all.

Transportation Secretary Urges Governors to Remove Political Messages From Crosswalks, Intersections

Duffy sent letters to governors, mayor of D.C., and gov of Puerto Rico urging them to remove political messaging from intersections and crosswalks.

Bessent: US, India Near Agreement to Lower Tariffs

The United States and India are โ€œvery closeโ€ to a trade agreement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Tuesday.
spot_img

Related Articles