Page 2 - Weapon Confusion News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Error. i think the judge ran very tight ship, one that wasn't necessarily going to garner questions from the outside, or would ultimately result in an appeal. i think that it is possible that kim potter's attorneys may look to talk about the politicized nature of the trial, but i don't think there was any that surface through the trial that may have influenced the jury in such a way that this verdict was not fair and impartial. i'm confident this is likely to stand going forward, if there is a way for the defense to find grounds for appeal. there have been instanceses of weapon confusion in ...

Potter to take the stand. essential. it was a game changer for the defense. a lot of us who watched the trial saw how incredibly aggressive the prosecution has been. certainly we heard professor turley talk about, maybe we should rethink some of these laws on the books when it comes to weapon confusion like in this case where it's clear that officer potter had no conceivable intention whatsoever to shoot and kill mr. wright. that's clear. certainly the way she presented herself at such an authentic anguished way, it was clear as someone who took the stand that she really meant it. she had no i...

Nothing. i think that's critical in this case. >> jacqui: in terms of what suits we might see following this, do you think the police department bears any responsibility when you've got this question of weapon confusion? we are talking to jonathan turley last hour that there's been back and forth about whether a taser and gun should be kept on opposite sides of the body. maybe in a different place, you've got different muscle memory. is that something the family might approach in a lawsuit? >> sure. the deeper pocket is going to be the police department. they may also sue kim potter personally...

Act on a highly ambiguous standard. the judge tried. i think she did a great job in explaining to the jury how it had to reach a decision. but in the end, it was just cloaked in ambiguity. the jury was originally a hung injury. they went to the court because they didn't feel that they could reach a conclusion. they only reached a conclusion with the prodding of the court. the question that follows this case is whether the law itself needs to be examined. i have an opinion -- i'm sorry. a column coming on "usa today" on that. minnesota needs to look at whether this -- whether these types of wea...

She consciously disregarded what she was doing? that is the rubicon for the jury. some members night dominic might not be willing to cross it. >> jacqui: jonathan, you use the word "consciously." that's a key word of this case. how significant is it that the jurors' interpretation of that word is a major factor in the outcome here? >> it should be a major factor. i have been in these weapon confusion cases for a long time. the reason is you're not supposed to just criminalize negligence. this is supposed to be something above that, where you are making a conscious decision to be reckless. for ...