Arriving by the busload, hundreds of people filled the atrium of the Hennepin County Government Center in downtown Minneapolis to show support for Ryan Londregan, a Minnesota State Trooper who was in court on murder and manslaughter charges Monday morning.

Wearing burgundy t-shirts carrying the slogan, “Trooper Londregan is innocent,” the group of off-duty law enforcement and other supporters recited a prayer and cheered when Londregan walked by.

Londregan is charged with murder, manslaughter and assault in the fatal shooting of motorist Ricky Cobb II last summer on Interstate 94 in north Minneapolis. Troopers stopped Cobb for having no taillights, but soon learned he was wanted for violating a domestic no-contact order. He didn’t follow commands to exit his vehicle and put the car into drive, causing it to lurch forward as Londregan and a colleague were partially inside trying to remove Cobb.

Londregan fired his service weapon, striking Cobb twice. Trooper Brett Seide has said that he feared for his safety and Londregan protected him. Several use of force experts have opined that Londregan was justified in the shooting because he was protecting Seide.

Cobb’s killing didn’t draw the level of protests typically seen in the Twin Cities when an unarmed civilian is killed by law enforcement. Instead, in Londregan’s case, large demonstrations have been led by officers. At Londregan’s first court appearance in January, more than a hundred supporters gathered outside the courthouse in solidarity with the trooper. The crowd mushroomed for Monday’s omnibus hearing after various groups put a call out for more to show support for Londregan.

As the hearing began upstairs, a small group of counter-protesters gathered in the lobby, shouting “We don’t like killer cops.” Some of Londregan’s supporters argued with them; the rest turned their backs and began signing God Bless America.

Up in the quiet courtroom, Londregan sat with his defense attorneys with his wife, family and members of a law enforcement trade union behind him. Across the aisle, Cobb’s family filled the first two rows.

A senior prosecutor in the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office sat alone following a shake-up in the legal team in recent weeks. A different senior prosecutor who played key roles in prosecuting former officers Derek Chauvin and Kim Potter walked away from Londregan’s case. County Attorney Mary Moriarty said her office is assembling a new team, which may include outside legal counsel.

Probable cause arguments

In written and oral arguments before Judge Tamara Garcia, parties take opposing stances on whether enough probable cause exists to support the charges against Londregan.

His defense team asked Garcia to dismiss for lack of probable cause because he was justified in killing Cobb.

The state says that’s the same argument lawyers for ex-police officers Derek Chauvin and Kim Potter made and, like judges in both cases, Garcia should also reject it because a jury decides if an officer’s use of force was justified.

Further, the state says allowing that defense argument at an omnibus hearing would turn it into a bench trial, and such argument should be reserved for a contested hearing at a later date.

On the other hand, defense attorneys argue that state statute allows affirmative defenses at omnibus hearings and it’s happened before. The legal team references a 2006 decision by Kevin Burke, former chief judge of Hennepin County, dismissing misdemeanor charges against former Minnesota Viking Daunte Culpepper, the quarterback accused of lewd acts in the infamous Lake Minnetonka boat-party sex scandal.

Burke ruled that Culpepper’s testimony — he was playing dice on the cruise and did not have a lap dance —and another witness would exonerate him of the charges, so he dismissed the case on lack of probable cause.

Londregan’s defense team further claims that an “offense” is a crime and “no crime is committed when a person intentionally takes the life of another if the person’s action was taken in resisting or preventing an offense that the person reasonably believed exposed…another person to death or great bodily harm,” according to the motion filing.

It continues: Not allowing law enforcement officers the ability to challenge probable cause in a use of force case means any officer “would potentially be subjected to an expensive, time-consuming and demeaning trial entirely at the whim of a county attorney — regardless of the amount of force and if the force was justified,” the filing reads.

Several use of force experts have already opined that Londregan followed his training and was justified in the killing. Londregan’s defense team has lodged a strong opposition against Moriarty, whose own use of force expert initially shared with prosecutors that he believe