I covered this issue in another post but I will make a few comments again since the issue will not go away anytime soon.
What I said was that I need to understand Minn law a bit more before concluding that the prosecutor did the right thing and that he was just being ultra-smart by making sure that the defendant did not get a acquittal and walk. It sounds good and reasonable but I am not there yet. As I said, many states allow for a prosecutor to charge at a higher level but that the jury can convict on a lesser crime if it is upon the same set of circumstances. Thus, for example, a person could be charged with 2nd degree but the jury could still convict on 3rd degree if they found sufficient facts for that. In a quick look, I see that that is allowed in Minn in general, although maybe there is a specific statute not allowing for homicide. I doubt it but just state again, that I need to see full clarification of that issue before giving kudos to the prosecutor for doing the right thing. Prosecutors are also always protecting their arses and want to see wins to advance their political careers. They dont want a total loss but they dont want to lose on the original charge either for reasons that may have more to do with their career than justice.
Secondly, and I covered this in my other post, your point about whether the defendant's reflection, demeanor, and careful attentiveness to the killing process constitutes "pre-meditation" is very much subject to argument and decision by the jury. If his actions were part of the heat of the moment, emotional rage, or the fog of conflict that would probably get him off the "premeditation" charge, but we don't see that there do we. We see a deliberate action being implemented to a handcuffed person, thus eliminating any defense that the officer's life and safety were at risk.
My view is that the prosecutor may be a chickenshit. That the proper charge is 2nd degree and the jury can also be charged by the judge with finding 3rd degree if they find sufficient facts for that. I am not married to that view. A clarification of Minn law could do that, but I did a little research and it did not cause me to change my view.
It is also possible that I am right about the ability to change charges but there is a different scenario going on. ie the prosecutor just charged on the lower crime to satisfy the mob but is reserving the right to charge at a higher level as the facts develop. That could be okay and that would actually be a smart move by the prosecutor and I will say so if that develops.
