In the Ahmaud Arbery, Kim Potter and Derek Chauvin murder trials the judicial process was not based on finding the truth, the judicial process empowered Vengeance masquerading as Justice at the expense of the Truth.
In each of these three murder trials, yes, I think all three parties were guilty, but, not guilty of murder, and there in lies the problem. The Prosecutor sets the charges and the Defendants must fight for acquittal against these charges.
While innocent until proven guilty has been the de facto belief system in the United States regarding our court, the U.S. court system is actually based on the Prosecution setting the parameters for the trial that is to go forth, while the defense gets no say in what the Charges could be. This seems more like, guilty and good luck being found innocent because we stacked the charges in such a way that the jury must find the defendants guilty of inflated charges because there is no other option being presented.
Lets examine all three trials one at a time. Kim Potter mistakenly shot and killed Daunte Wright once Mr. Wright escalated the situation by trying to flee in his car. Clearly Kim Potter did something wrong, but the prosecution set the case up as either Murder, or Officer Potter walks. What if Officer Potter's defense could have presented their own Defense platter of charges and the Jury chooses which set of charges they will consider once all the evidence has been presented. Now we are talking dimensional chess in which both sides can legitimately convey their version of events and let the jury choose which set of charges they wish to consider.
Potter's defense could have offered the following three lesser charges,
- unlawful pull over,
- dereliction of duty after a tragedy has occurred,
- Improper series of actions that allowed the defendant Wright access to his key and the driver's seat.
- Not guilty on the above charges
Meanwhile the Prosecution powers forward with their manslaughter and Murder charges.
Suddenly, the jury has a real choice. Obviously the three charges the Potter Defense could have put forward would be a reasonable alternative for the jury to consider if the jurors truly believed the shooting incident was an accident.
Instead, the jurors were caught in the unenviable situation of either innocent, and Officer Potter walks, or guilty of charges that maybe the Jurors thought were excessive but without any other choice, would go for the excessive charges because no other guilty options exist.
I will add to this topic later today.