Just heard from someone1980:

One count of Terroristic Threats (felony, just in case there's some gross misdemeanor); case moved to Washington County; next court date Feb 14. someone1980 is sitting in on the press conference (whose? I dunno) right now, but will scan the indictment and tell me more later.

No contact order; nothing done about guns. Beard appeared with a bunch of supportive cops in doorkicker gear, to pat him on the shoulder, shake his hand, and wish him well.

I'd like to know what charges were offered to the GJ to start with.

My bad. They were not in door kicker gear. They were just big and bulkly, and thus looked like they could kick doors all day long and not be winded.

indictment
http://benjaminmayerphotography.blogspo ... tment.html

The attourneys are from Dorsey and Whitney and do they look sharp. The press conference was with the two lawyers.

According to them:
Landon was on duty at the time.
He went on the shoulder of the road to get around some traffic.
They are going to demand a jury trial
When a reporter asked about an eye witness account of Landon screaming "I am going to fucking kill you", the lawyer dismissed eye witness accounts as very unreliable.
Landon "pulled" his weapon in self defense
When asked if or when Landon identified himself as a officer there was a vague statement about it happening near the end (it was really smooth). The follow up question was "Can you be more specific?". The lawyer said "Thank you for your time" and walked away.

Never ever talk to the cops without your lawyer present. They can make eating shit sound like more fun then a sunny day in the rose garden.

Count 4: Terroristic Threats

What were the other 3 counts?

Apparently, they were no-billed, and the prosecutor, out of a great and deep sense of fairness, wanted to be sure that got out.

Could someone link me to information on who "Beard" is and why he's being indicted. Thanks

is there a reason why we've seen the same post on this thread about 4 times?

I'd still like to know what they were....out of my own great and deep sense of fairness.

There's an error happening whenever I hit submit. The post still gets submitted, but I can't see the confirmation of that. If I hit refresh, it submits again.

There's a server problem, at Dreamhost. We're getting hit heavily today, for some reason or other.

He's the cop who pulled a gun on a permit holder (and his family) in June and got shot for his trouble.

He's also the guy responsible for 'undercover' being redefined in Anoka and Hennepin counties as 'on your way home from work'.

Both of them were charged with this. Maybe I'm letting my common sense get the better of me, but I don't think it fits when applied to Treptow.

In my world, to threaten someone is to cause someone to believe that you will engage in violence against them, without actually doing so. I can threaten to hit you, or I can hit you. If I carry out the action, it's an action, not a threatened action.

So as I see it, Treptow didn't threaten to shoot Beard, he actually shot him. So the appropriate charges would be those for him have actually engaged in an act of violence against Beard, not those for him having only threatened an act of violence.

In other words, the undisputed fact that Treptow shot Beard should eliminate from consideration any charges for crimes of "threatening". He should be charged with aggravated assault or attempted homicide, or not. But these "threatening" charges should be off the table, once it is clear that an act of violence actually occurred.

As for the charge against Beard, there terroristic threats may make sense. Beard may have threatened Treptow, or he may not have. That's a question of fact that can be determined by the jury. But since Beard didn't actually commit an act of violence, that he threatened to is logically possible.

There seems to be overlap between 609.713 and 609.02 subd. 10 (definition of "assault"), assuming the definition of "an act" can be non-physical.

Yep.

Assault can be either a threat of or an act of violence.

Terroristic threats are only threats.

So if there is an act of violence, then assault seems the appropriate charge.

Or, in other words, if the circumstances excuse the act of violence, they inherently excuse any threats of violence he may have made.

That would be Terroristic Threats!

I would like to know what the other 3 non-billed charges were.