she needed to say her peace. she did it remarkably well. she did it in a way where she connected with everyone. there was a juror in tears. i ve had many jurors in tears. it s very emotional after they make a decision as weighty as these are. she couldn t have done any better. however the law was instructed to them by the judge and they re taking it seriously, they re facing a holiday i hoped they came back with a hung jury or that can they come back monday. this is the holidays. what relatives are coming in, what the reaction will be. you know, let s put that aside. but it didn t happen that way and we respect the verdict, respect the jury. i think they could have come back on the man 2 instead of the man 1. now the issue is the judge.
decision was correct based on the four corners of what was going on in the courtroom. now, of course go ahead. gillian: i was going to say, kim potter as you pointed out showed a lot of incredible remorse, amount of remorse on the stand. she reportedly showed remorse on the scene in real time after she shot duante wright, too. what were they instructed about that? you know, i don t know what the judge instructed. i know as a judge myself, i would tell them that you cannot in any way, shape or form worry about what the sentence is going to be. that is for me to determine and not for you to worry about. basically saying to them, don t worry about the consequences or the result of what you re going to be doing. so i m sure that s what they heard and they took that in to the deliberation room. this is a very, very unique
criminalizing these mistakes, are you going to make them less likely? these are officers that didn t do a calculus of risk. they mistook a weapon in a blink of time. the fact that that can be acted as a criminal matter won t weigh-in on that decision. so again, the question is do we have civil liability, termination of a police officer s position and of course, the desire of all police officers not to take a life without legitimate cause. that s a debate worth having. it doesn t belittle what about to mr. right and doesn t mean this is a wrong conclusion for the jury. they followed the law. the question is this the law that we want to have in terms of a standard or do we want to be more clear when it should be a