because of the defendant s actions, not daunte wright s. she knew she had a loaded gun on her duty belt, a gun that she carried every single day on the job. she carried it on the right side every day, for 26 years. and that s the weapon she used. that s the weapon she drew. that s the weapon she pointed. and that s the weapon she fired. members of the jury, that s culpable negligence and that s reckless handling of a firearm, resulting in death. this case is about the defendant s rash and reckless conduct. it s not about her being a nice person or a good person. even nice people have to obey the law. it s not about the smell of marijuana. it s not about a gross
this traffic stop on april 11th was nothing out of the ordinary. so ordinary, in fact, that the defendant told you herself that she wouldn t have even stopped this car. she wouldn t have even stopped daunte wright if she had been alone. for the air freshener and the expired tags. but they did. she and officer lucky pulled this car over. and the defendant had initially observed the interaction between officer lucky and daunte wright, when he first approached, she was hanging out toward the back. she told you, it appeared to be a fine conversation. officer lucky wasn t in any distress. and then in the squad car, they learn about this ex parte order for protection and a gross misdemeanor warrant. and sergeant johnson shows up
are not in the city? why? to remind him of the geographical boundaries. and reminding him of the limitations of the pursuit policy? what do you mean? you can t just get into a high speed car chase or shoot up a car without a specific reason, right? yes. our pursuit policy limits what we can pursue for. a gross misdemeanor warrant doesn t qualify for a vehicle pursuit? not according to our policy. you had just reviewed that policy with officer lucky? yes. what happened with the stop, you said that there was a turn signal the wrong turn signal.