Murder By Cop SC

[Spiderman]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/04/07/charges-in-sc-police-shooting/25430473/

Unnecessary shooting by N. Charleston SC cop. When will it ever end?

[tucker6]

While what was done here is criminal, things like this will never end because we are dealing with spontaneous human emotions. Just as the rare pilot commits suicide into a mountainside with 150 aboard, so too will the occasional cop decide to shoot a man in the back. You'll never stop it completely. Wanting our police forces 100% free of these sort of actions is laudable but not reasonable to expect. You will never weed out all bad acts, but through training and counseling, you can reduce it as much as possible.

[Clocker]

When will it ever end?

When all the human beings are replaced by perfect robocops.

[tucker6]

When all the human beings are replaced by perfect robocops.
I took his comment as trolling for a reaction from conservatives on here. Otherwise, it was a pointless thought. You cannot end something like that.

[classhandicapper]

At least this time we may avoid all the demonstrations, riots, and mayhem due to lies, ignorance, bad reporting, and political motivations. This one appears to be clear cut.

[MutuelClerk]

I can't breathe. Now it's I can't watch. Rogue cops must be held accountable. Hopefully the police are starting to realize big brother is always watching. I'm sure we have all had minor issues with cops that have left us wondering about them as a whole. I see a lot of them as frustrated jocks who enjoy their power over people. I believe most have their hearts in the right place but this has to stop. Robocop isn't far away.

[GameTheory]

Body cameras on every cop, all the time. And if a recording goes "missing" just as there happened to be some incident, assume wrongdoing.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Body cameras on every cop, all the time. And if a recording goes "missing" just as there happened to be some incident, assume wrongdoing.

That's basically how the public is treated anyway so seems reasonable.

[Neumeier]

The guy recording was really brave: he may have been in trouble if the cop saw him

[Tom]

You think the cop might have shot him?

[Tom]

That's basically how the public is treated anyway so seems reasonable.

The public should wear cameras.
Then we can se the whole story.

We already have "COPS" (bad boys bad boys), now we need "ROBBERS."

[Rookies]

You think the cop might have shot him?

THAT cop? Absolutely.

Fired 8 shots into the back of some guy running away at < 5 MPH. EIGHT... into an unarmed back! And then, tried to plant Taser evidence afterwards and state that his life was in danger.

A cold blooded killer.

Video cameras are turning everything around today. If these murdering cops are going to be thinking about doing shite like this, they'd better be doing it faaaar away from any prying eyes.

[highnote]

Had he not been caught on camera there would have been a much different set of "facts".

Like the saying goes, "There are the facts and then there is the truth."

[Tom]

A cold blooded killer.

Or a cop caught up in a struggle.
I seriously doubt he would have injured anyone else.

The cop deserved to be locked up, but, once again, the guy would be alive today had he not resisted.

How many people who DO NOT resits are ever shot and killed?
Anyone got any statistics on that?

[Tom]

Had he not been caught on camera there would have been a much different set of "facts".

Like the saying goes, "There are the facts and then there is the truth."

Obviously.
Even on camera, it appears he tried to do something to soften the blow to himself.

How come this guy is caught on camera and it matters.
The kid in Ferguson was caught too, and it doesn't matter to many?

[highnote]

People probably resist arrest, even when they are innocent, because they fear what is going to happen to them if the cops take them into custody.

A person who runs from a cop might be innocent, but also mentally unstable.

For example, what if a person has schizophrenia and runs from a cop? That person may be totally out of touch with reality and may not have committed any crime at all. Is it justifiable for a cop to shoot a terrified person in the back just because they are fleeing the cop?

Maybe the cop is mentally unstable? He may be guilty of shooting a fleeing man, but if the cop is insane, he is guilty by reason of insanity.

This is why it is important to gather as many facts as reasonably possible before coming to a conclusion.

[Tom]

This is why it is important to gather as many facts as reasonably possible before coming to a conclusion.

Unless the victim is Black.
Then Al Sharpton tells them what happened.

[GaryG]

Apparently arresting the cop for murder is not enough to satisfy the "activists". The local bbq restaurant leaves CNN on the tv with no sound and bluegrass music on the sound system. This story was on damn near non-stop. I think they are looking for another excuse for rioting and looting. No justice, no peace....know what ahm sayin?

[horses4courses]

It's impossible to justify this killing.
That obviously won't stop some from trying, though.

[tucker6]

It's impossible to justify this killing.
That obviously won't stop some from trying, though.
Like who exactly??

[horses4courses]

Like who exactly??

It merely requires a little reading between the lines with some posts.
Easily done......

[Hank]

Apparently arresting the cop for murder is not enough to satisfy the "activists". The local bbq restaurant leaves CNN on the tv with no sound and bluegrass music on the sound system. This story was on damn near non-stop. I think they are looking for another excuse for rioting and looting. No justice, no peace....know what ahm sayin?

.know what ahm sayin? Yeah, I think every one knows what you are saying.

[tucker6]

It merely requires a little reading between the lines with some posts.
Easily done......
please enlighten us

[newtothegame]

I have absolutely no problem saying this guy is apparently a murderer.
But, here is my problem.....Why did the OP not post all of the other killings? You know every killing that happens ......In Chicago, dozens of people are killed WEEKLY. Where are those post?
That leads me to believe this is not about the person who was killed....
So, what could the OP be after??? Inquiring minds want to know.....

[Clocker]

In Chicago, dozens of people are killed WEEKLY. Where are those post?

You mean those black on black drive-bys? Not to worry. Al Sharpton is there every week with his "Black Lives Matter" demonstrations. He just keeps it low key to avoid personal publicity.

[NJ Stinks]

How come this guy is caught on camera and it matters.
The kid in Ferguson was caught too, and it doesn't matter to many?


The guy in Ferguson was videoed roughing up a store clerk without punching him while stealing some cigars. This cop was videoed shooting the unarmed guy in the back 8 times killing him. All because the alleged lawbreaker had broken tail light.

That you cannot understand why one video matters more than the other is hard for me to grasp.

[newtothegame]

So NJ, here is your chance....there are literally hundreds of killings weekly (all over the country). Why is it THIS ONE matters? Where is the outrage for all of the other kilings? Where are the CNN stories ALL day long on those?
Why did the OP chose THIS story versus all of the other ones??

Would the OP have chosen this story if it were say a BLACK COP killing a BLACK guy?
How about a WHITE COP KILLING A WHITE GUY?

For that matter how about if it were a black cop killing a white guy? I don't seem to recall any of those scenarios being played all day.

So, what is missing here??? hmmmmm


ALL lives matter! Don't be a hypocrite and use these murders for political or self righteous feelings. Libs are supposed to be the ones who love everyone...the protector of mankind.....yet, seems they cant keep the RACE CARD out of their dingy hands!
And here I thought we were told OBAMA was going to unite America and make race relations better...... Seems the opposite is happening!

[NJ Stinks]

So NJ, here is your chance....there are literally hundreds of killings weekly (all over the country). Why is it THIS ONE matters? Where is the outrage for all of the other kilings? Where are the CNN stories ALL day long on those?
Why did the OP chose THIS story versus all of the other ones??

Would the OP have chosen this story if it were say a BLACK COP killing a BLACK guy?
How about a WHITE COP KILLING A WHITE GUY?

For that matter how about if it were a black cop killing a white guy? I don't seem to recall any of those scenarios being played all day.

So, what is missing here??? hmmmmm


ALL lives matter! Don't be a hypocrite and use these murders for political or self righteous feelings. Libs are supposed to be the ones who love everyone...the protector of mankind.....yet, seems they cant keep the RACE CARD out of their dingy hands!
And here I thought we were told OBAMA was going to unite America and make race relations better...... Seems the opposite is happening!

This killing would be big news no matter what the color of cop and the victim.

The video is huge in this particular case.

[newtothegame]

This killing would be big news no matter what the color of cop and the victim.

The video is huge in this particular case.

B.S......
Show me or point me to a killing that has taken up every news channel for an entire day or days........
The video is damning and I believe the cop shoukd fry for the killing. However, I am not involved with the trial.

But please point me to all of the kilings that take center stage......
Even the Boston Bomber (found guilty) isn't getting this much play...and how many were mangled or killed in that???

[PaceAdvantage]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/04/07/charges-in-sc-police-shooting/25430473/

Unnecessary shooting by N. Charleston SC cop. When will it ever end?When will what ever end? If you mean people killing people (whether it's a cop doing the killing or being killed, or civilian on civilian), the answer is NEVER.

Now you can get some rest.

[Clocker]

When will what ever end? If you mean people killing people (whether it's a cop doing the killing or being killed, or civilian on civilian), the answer is NEVER.

We know that. None of that matters. The only thing that matters is white cops killing black civilians.

No one has denied that the white cop here killed the black guy without a shred of evidence of justification. The cop was fired, arrested, charged with murder, and faces the death penalty. But somehow that is not enough, because the cop was white and the victim was black. Apparently we also need double secret probation here, and only the moonbats know what that entails. :rolleyes:

[NJ Stinks]

B.S......
Show me or point me to a killing that has taken up every news channel for an entire day or days........
The video is damning and I believe the cop shoukd fry for the killing. However, I am not involved with the trial.

But please point me to all of the kilings that take center stage......
Even the Boston Bomber (found guilty) isn't getting this much play...and how many were mangled or killed in that???

Nothing much more I can say. I do agree that the news channels -including FOX News - are giving this way too much coverage. But I get tired of hearing about the Boston trial too. The defendant's lawyer admitted her client was guilty at the beginning of the trial for crying out loud.

It's almost like nobody wants to talk about Rand Paul! :p :)

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

It's almost like nobody wants to talk about Rand Paul! :p :)

I did hear he is starting a war on women by not being courteous enough to female reporters. It's for real now.

[JustRalph]

No idea what this guy was thinking.

Just don't know.

[woodtoo]

Maybe he was thinking " I ordered you to stop and you didn't, I even tasered

you to try and stop you and that didn't work. I even yelled at you to stop

when you ran away and you still would not stop. I'm a cop and you must stop when ordered by me.

bang*bang*bang*bang*bang* OOPS!! SH*T!!DAMN!! I can fix this,

He mistakenly tried to be cop, judge, and jury. FAIL.

[woodtoo]

There is more to this event than their letting on IMO. He was charged very

quickly and will have his day in court,as he should.There was an unnamed

passenger in the car when it was stopped,who? The stage has been moved to

New York with Ryan Julison involved. A BGI guy who was on board in the

G.Zimmerman case. Follow the money folks ,this will be all about lawsuits.

Truth be damned. :bang:

[highnote]

... the guy would be alive today had he not resisted.

That is conjecture. It is impossible to know what would have happened if he had not run. All we know from the video is that he was shot in the back while he was running.

There is now police dash cam video and I've heard there was another person in the victims car. A big question is why was he running?


How many people who DO NOT resits are ever shot and killed?

The same SC cop we are talking about was accused of shooting a man in the stomach with his stun gun when the man was raising his hands above his head to surrender. He was not killed, but he also was not resisting, but he was still shot.

"Mario Givens, the man who accused Slager of excessive force in 2013, told the AP that Slager woke him before dawn by loudly banging on his front door, and saying 'Come outside or I'll Tase you!'

'I didn't want that to happen to me, so I raised my arms over my head, and when I did, he Tased me in my stomach anyway,' Givens said. "

http://news.yahoo.com/dash-cam-video-shows-officer-pursuing-man-shooting-221654486.html


Anyone got any statistics on that?

I just read an article that there are no reliable data on police shootings in the U.S.

http://news.yahoo.com/why-dont-know-many-americans-killed-police-223000471.html

[JustRalph]

I know what would have happen if he had not resisted. He would have gone to jail on the child support warrants that were issued for him. 18k in back child support would have meant he would have spent the night in jail. Probably released the next day. Why run?

I have no idea why the cop shot him. Stupidity? Who knows.....

[highnote]

We will never know what would have happened if he had not resisted. We can only speculate. He probably would have been arrested without incidence.

For all we know the victim may have known the cop and had good reason for running because he feared for his life based in a prior threat the cop made to him. This is speculation, too.

Hopefully, the discovery of the facts will point to the truth. Until the facts are known and analyzed we can only speculate about the probabilities of various scenarios.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Nothing much more I can say. I do agree that the news channels -including FOX News - are giving this way too much coverage. But I get tired of hearing about the Boston trial too. The defendant's lawyer admitted her client was guilty at the beginning of the trial for crying out loud.

It's almost like nobody wants to talk about Rand Paul! :p :)

The Rand Paul who is polling ahead of Hillary in Colorado and Iowa in head-to-head match-ups? And within a few points in Virginia?

[RunForTheRoses]

The Police Officer definitely did not handle the situation well either because of poor training (that is, Mr. Scott behaved very irrationally and quite dangerously if he tried to grab the taser but he should have been taught thoroughly how to handle such crazed situations, I would think) or poor temperament. Shooting the not so fleet Mr Scott appears to be indefensible although I believe the former officer deserves his day in court.

What I do not believe is that this proves the media and racial arsonist driven meme of racist White police officers hunting down poor innocent blacks. The elephant in the room is the extremely high rate of violent crime in the black community.

[bks]

I did hear he is starting a war on women by not being courteous enough to female reporters. It's for real now.

Really? Could you point me to where you heard that?

[Ocala Mike]

The elephant in the room is the extremely high rate of violent crime in the black community.



Seriously? Executing an unarmed black man after a traffic stop has something to do with the prevalence of violent crime in the black community? To me the elephant in the room is the "Fort Apache" culture of police departments so out of touch with the communities they police that they have adopted a policy of "shoot first, cover up later."

[Tom]

Really? Could you point me to where you heard that?

All the MSM is covering his berating of Savanah Guthrie on the Today show.

Why would a real candidate waste his time on the Today Joke. Show.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Really? Could you point me to where you heard that?

http://www.learncartoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/dean_point_left.jpg

[PaceAdvantage]

I know what would have happen if he had not resisted. He would have gone to jail on the child support warrants that were issued for him. 18k in back child support would have meant he would have spent the night in jail. Probably released the next day. Why run?

I have no idea why the cop shot him. Stupidity? Who knows.....he shot him because the cop hated black people and hanging him from the tree was too time consuming.

In fact, I heard the cop had a pile of dead blacks in the back of his squad car...the take for that day...

Yes, I know I'm making light of a tragic situation, but the way some people talk about cops lately, you'd think we'd be finding open pits filled with executed minorities at the hands of all these racist cops...it gets to the point where these isolated instances (thanks to the Internet and everyone's dying need to be heard, which I am grateful for when it comes to horses anyway) get projected into some giant problem which most likely does NOT exist.

[johnhannibalsmith]

But the hysteria that the country's largest religion by a double-digit multiple is actually under some kind of attack is legit and pretending that all gays are activists is rational. Let's not pretend only people of certain affiliations get swept up in that mentality.

[PaceAdvantage]

When's the last time you saw me complaining that Christianity is under attack (other than left-leaners having them at the top of their hit list, which is true..lol)

And when is the last time I posted about gay-activists being some sort of problem?

I don't pay much attention to that nonsense. Christianity deserves lots of what they get anyway...I just wish other religions were treated as roughly by those who target Christians.

[johnhannibalsmith]

When's the last time you saw me ...

I didn't quote your post because I had hoped maybe you'd see that I was offering a rebuttal not really to you, but just to make a simple point in general.

[RunForTheRoses]

Seriously? Executing an unarmed black man after a traffic stop has something to do with the prevalence of violent crime in the black community? To me the elephant in the room is the "Fort Apache" culture of police departments so out of touch with the communities they police that they have adopted a policy of "shoot first, cover up later."

You are taking my post out of context. I am talking about the insta protesters who are linking this with other proven false allegations. You do admit you and your ilk were wrong about Mike Brown and the hands up don't shoot BS?

The more interactions with the police the more such incidents will happen. As, I believe it was Tom above who wrote "Why did he resist?" It was not a premeditated act imho.

[thaskalos]

You are taking my post out of context. I am talking about the insta protesters who are linking this with other proven false allegations. You do admit you and your ilk were wrong about Mike Brown and the hands up don't shoot BS?

The more interactions with the police the more such incidents will happen. As, I believe it was Tom above who wrote "Why did he resist?" It was not a premeditated act imho.

So what if it wasn't "premeditated"? Is it supposed to be "premeditated" in order for it to be a heinous crime?

Did you see the ease with which the armed officer fired at the fleeing unarmed man...and the lengths he went to, to cover up his crime? He shot an unarmed man eight times , even when the man posed no threat to the officer...and you think it might have been because the officer didn't have the "proper training?

[PaceAdvantage]

So what if it wasn't "premeditated"? Is it supposed to be "premeditated" in order for it to be a heinous crime?

Did you see the ease with which the armed officer fired at the fleeing unarmed man...and the lengths he went to, to cover up his crime? He shot an unarmed man eight times , even when the man posed no threat to the officer...and you think it might have been because the officer didn't have the "proper training?Who is saying it's not a heinous crime?

Look, you either think he's one of among a handful of bad apples, as happens in every walk of life, or you think this is endemic and that there are thousands of police officers walking around, looking to kill minorities at the drop of a hat.

I don't believe in the latter...I believe in the former...which means there is nothing that can be done about this, so why are we trying to create controversy where none exists.

This guy apparently broke the law, and he will be punished, just like every other convicted murderer out there in every walk of life.

There are priests who murder...there are teachers who murder...there are KIDS who murder...there are all types of people we think "shouldn't" or are not "capable" of murdering, but who do...

There are bad people out there...shocking headline, I know...

[thaskalos]

he shot him because the cop hated black people and hanging him from the tree was too time consuming.

In fact, I heard the cop had a pile of dead blacks in the back of his squad car...the take for that day...

Yes, I know I'm making light of a tragic situation, but the way some people talk about cops lately, you'd think we'd be finding open pits filled with executed minorities at the hands of all these racist cops...it gets to the point where these isolated instances (thanks to the Internet and everyone's dying need to be heard, which I am grateful for when it comes to horses anyway) get projected into some giant problem which most likely does NOT exist.

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.

[RunForTheRoses]

So what if it wasn't "premeditated"? Is it supposed to be "premeditated" in order for it to be a heinous crime?

Did you see the ease with which the armed officer fired at the fleeing unarmed man...and the lengths he went to, to cover up his crime? He shot an unarmed man eight times , even when the man posed no threat to the officer...and you think it might have been because the officer didn't have the "proper training?

So what if it wasn't "premeditated"? Is it supposed to be "premeditated" in order for it to be a heinous crime?

Where did I say it was not a heinous crime. In my original post I said it was indefensible. I wrote it was not "premeditated" because there is a huge meme going around in the media and certain communities which I guess you are blind to that has White Policeman hunting down poor innocent blacks. Look at some of the posts here:
https://twitter.com/hashtag/blacklivesmatter

and elsewhere

Did you see the ease with which the armed officer fired at the fleeing unarmed man...and the lengths he went to, to cover up his crime? He shot an unarmed man eight times , even when the man posed no threat to the officer...and you think it might have been because the officer didn't have the "proper training?[/QUOTE]

So what do you think? Cracka policeman woke up that morning hoping to kill a black? Again, I said it was indefensible.

[PaceAdvantage]

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.That's not really an answer, I think you'll agree. He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it?

Why not just drive down a dark alley and pick off a homeless guy if he's that itchy to off somebody...

Why do it in the middle of some open area where there are bound to be witnesses?

No, he didn't shoot him because he "knew he could have gotten away with it."

He shot him for another reason...AND he probably thought he could get away with it...but he didn't shoot him simply because he thought he could get away with it.

[thaskalos]

Who is saying it's not a heinous crime?

Look, you either think he's one of among a handful of bad apples, as happens in every walk of life, or you think this is endemic and that there are thousands of police officers walking around, looking to kill minorities at the drop of a hat.

I don't believe in the latter...I believe in the former...which means there is nothing that can be done about this, so why are we trying to create controversy where none exists.

This guy apparently broke the law, and he will be punished, just like every other convicted murderer out there in every walk of life.

There are priests who murder...there are teachers who murder...there are KIDS who murder...there are all types of people we think "shouldn't" or are not "capable" of murdering, but who do...

There are bad people out there...shocking headline, I know...

As I said...I believe he shot him because he thought he could get away with it. And he WOULD have gotten away with it...if there was no video.

I don't care how rare this is...and I don't care what color is the victim's skin. Even one wrongful death is too much, in my book...if it could be prevented. Put cameras on all the cops...and suspend them indefinitely if they ever report an altercation with their camera shut off.

[Ocala Mike]

you and your ilk




I have an ilk? Whenever anyone starts using phrases like this or "you people," it's time to tune out.

Thas is spot on, by the way. Premeditation is not the issue, group dynamics and the "us vs. them" mentality is.

I am a white man, part of a group that used to be subject to much prejudicial stereotyping (at least back in my parent's day). I believe that, if you took a poll of law-abiding black men, they would not share the opinion that what's going on is not a problem that should be addressed by a democratic society.

[PaceAdvantage]

As I said...I believe he shot him because he thought he could get away with it. And he WOULD have gotten away with it...if there was no video.

I don't care how rare this is...and I don't care what color is the victim's skin. Even one wrongful death is too much, in my book...if it could be prevented. Put cameras on all the cops...and suspend them indefinitely if they ever report an altercation with their camera shut off.How did the world survive before cameras?

I'm surprised there are any non-whites left in the world...all these racist cops from the civil rights movement up until the advent of cell-phone cameras...how did they survive as a race?

[thaskalos]

That's not really an answer, I think you'll agree. He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it?

Why not just drive down a dark alley and pick off a homeless guy if he's that itchy to off somebody...

Why do it in the middle of some open area where there are bound to be witnesses?

No, he didn't shoot him because he "knew he could have gotten away with it."

He shot him for another reason...AND he probably thought he could get away with it...but he didn't shoot him simply because he thought he could get away with it.

I didn't say that he shot him JUST because he thought that he could have gotten away with it. If the black man was just an innocent bystander, then he would still be alive today. What I meant was that he would have never shot him in such a manner if he really thought that he would have had to answer for his crime.

[thaskalos]

How did the world survive before cameras?

I'm surprised there are any non-whites left in the world...all these racist cops from the civil rights movement up until the advent of cell-phone cameras...how did they survive as a race?

See...this is when you start with the smart-alecky remarks, and the conversation changes tone.

[RunForTheRoses]

I have an ilk? Whenever anyone starts using phrases like this or "you people," it's time to tune out.

Thas is spot on, by the way. Premeditation is not the issue, group dynamics and the "us vs. them" mentality is.

I am a white man, part of a group that used to be subject to much prejudicial stereotyping (at least back in my parent's day). I believe that, if you took a poll of law-abiding black men, they would not share the opinion that what's going on is not a problem that should be addressed by a democratic society.

FTR I was pretty sure you were a white guy, nearly 100% certain. I used "your ilk" which does not have racial connotations, because you so vociferously took me to task for what wrote.

[bks]

http://www.learncartoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/dean_point_left.jpg

Thought you were being serious.

[Saratoga_Mike]

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.

The forensics (bullet entry) would have been a huge problem for him, no?

[RunForTheRoses]

I have an ilk? Whenever anyone starts using phrases like this or "you people," it's time to tune out.

Thas is spot on, by the way. Premeditation is not the issue, group dynamics and the "us vs. them" mentality is.

I am a white man, part of a group that used to be subject to much prejudicial stereotyping (at least back in my parent's day). I believe that, if you took a poll of law-abiding black men, they would not share the opinion that what's going on is not a problem that should be addressed by a democratic society.

So what is the remedy? Totally castrate the police? Even more Diversity training? Even more Affirmative Action? reparations? Make Obama Emperor for life?

[Clocker]

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.

Do you really think that there was that much thought involved? That there was any thought involved?

The guy had defeated the cop's attempt to arrest him and was getting away. I bet the cop was cranked up on adrenaline, mad as hell, and irrationally determined that this guy was not going to totally humiliate him by escaping. So he shot first and thought later.

[Tom]

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.

You have absolutely no evidence that is the reason. He may have been on an adrenaline rush, remember, the dead-beat dad had already scuffled with him.
No excuse for what he did, and he deserves to be charged, but there is nothins so far to indicate he wanted to kill him or that he tried to cover it up.
In fact, the first video, of the stop, shows he acted approraitely and it was the victim who set the stage for the events that followed.

[bks]

Look, you either think he's one of among a handful of bad apples, as happens in every walk of life, or you think this is endemic and that there are thousands of police officers walking around, looking to kill minorities at the drop of a hat.

You are being willfully obtuse. The point is: when a cop kills someone (black or white), they go into cover-up mode WITH THE PERFECTLY REASONABLE EXPECTATION that their fellow police will help in the cover up.

That's what this cop did, and yes, he would have gotten away with it had there been no video.

The idea that most cops are motivated to kill blacks is a red herring. No such motivation exists or need exist. The point is that police work in performed within a racist, corrupt system that seeks to conserve and extend its own power, and seeks to never hold police officers to account (even for murder) if at all possible.

[Tom]

I didn't say that he shot him JUST because he thought that he could have gotten away with it. If the black man was just an innocent bystander, then he would still be alive today. What I meant was that he would have never shot him in such a manner if he really thought that he would have had to answer for his crime.

He never would have shot him if he not tried to get away.

[Tom]

So what is the remedy? Totally castrate the police? Even more Diversity training? Even more Affirmative Action? reparations? Make Obama Emperor for life?

Next time someone steals your car, call a Black guy.

[Spiderman]

Do you really think that there was that much thought involved? That there was any thought involved?

The guy had defeated the cop's attempt to arrest him and was getting away. I bet the cop was cranked up on adrenaline, mad as hell, and irrationally determined that this guy was not going to totally humiliate him by escaping. So he shot first and thought later.

Hot headed police force aspirants need not apply. Much easier for cop to call-in: "unarmed man, black - wearing green/white shirt, running through park toward ____________, apprehend".

[Saratoga_Mike]

So what is the remedy? Totally castrate the police? Even more Diversity training? Even more Affirmative Action? reparations? Make Obama Emperor for life?

Twist words and make unjustified leaps much?

[Clocker]

Hot headed police force aspirants need not apply. Much easier for cop to call-in: "unarmed man, black - wearing green/white shirt, running through park toward ____________, apprehend".

Unfortunately, those issues are hard to predict, or develop over time under the stress of the job. If supervisors were aware of anger problems in the past, then they share some blame for this.

[Robert Fischer]

As I said...I believe he shot him because he thought he could get away with it. And he WOULD have gotten away with it...if there was no video.

I don't care how rare this is...and I don't care what color is the victim's skin. Even one wrongful death is too much, in my book...if it could be prevented. Put cameras on all the cops...and suspend them indefinitely if they ever report an altercation with their camera shut off.

I agree 100%.

Take away the free opportunity to abuse suspects, and make it a disincentive, and it completely changes the dynamics of these encounters.

Most of these cops may be good. There may just be a tiny minority or police officers who are 'bad apples'. Even so, we shouldn't allow such interactions to take place under 'the honor system'.

It is actually a very immoral thing to allow as a ruling class or a gov't. It would be like leaving your car unlocked in the inner-city with money on the dashboard. You are in effect causing these poor 'bad apples' to act out, - when you allow them to wield unchecked power...

[PaceAdvantage]

See...this is when you start with the smart-alecky remarks, and the conversation changes tone.Because I just can't wrap my head around exactly what the NEW problem really is here?

There have never been bad cops?

There is a way to eradicate "murder by cop?"

The answer to the first question is NO.
The answer to the second is also NO.

But let's have a national debate... :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

You are being willfully obtuse. The point is: when a cop kills someone (black or white), they go into cover-up mode WITH THE PERFECTLY REASONABLE EXPECTATION that their fellow police will help in the cover up.

That's what this cop did, and yes, he would have gotten away with it had there been no video.

The idea that most cops are motivated to kill blacks is a red herring. No such motivation exists or need exist. The point is that police work in performed within a racist, corrupt system that seeks to conserve and extend its own power, and seeks to never hold police officers to account (even for murder) if at all possible.Yes, that's it.

And what do black cops do in all of this? And other minority cops?

Do they have trunks full of dead white innocents who were running away from them only to be gunned down from behind.

Here we go on the ridiculous merry go-round...and thaskalos wonders why I cop an attitude.

[upthecreek]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/geraldo-dashcam-video-gets-officer-slager-off-his-murder-charge/

[ArlJim78]

He never would have shot him if he not tried to get away.
So the way to apprehend an unarmed person who is fleeing a traffic stop on foot is 8 or more bullets in the back?

[Tom]

So the way to apprehend an unarmed person who is fleeing a traffic stop on foot is 8 or more bullets in the back?

Of course not. that has nothing to do with what I said.
I pointed out it NOT the cop who put the events in motion.
The dead-beat Dad did that.

This was a racist cop looking for trouble, as many still are insisting.
The cop acted properly until the DBD decide to run.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Thought you were being serious.

I thought you were being patronizingly literal.

The remark was what I thought was an obvious allusion to the media frenzy condemning him for not treating a couple of women interviewers with kid gloves after they challenged him. The eye-rollingly canned political reaction to run with that angle makes me want to tune out already.

[highnote]

He never would have shot him if he not tried to get away.

You're speculating. You don't know what the cop would have done if the victim had not tried to get away..

For all we know the cop told the victim he was going to kill him right then and there and that is what caused the victim to run.

Or maybe the cop said, "I'm going to give you a head start and then I'm going to come after you and kill you."

If we ever learn why the man ran away then we might know why he was shot.

For all we know, there might be a damn good reason the cop shot the victim.

That's why cases are tried in a court of law. Innocent until proven guilty.

[Tom]

You're speculating. You don't know what the cop would have done if the victim had not tried to get away..

For all we know the cop told the victim he was going to kill him right then and there and that is what caused the victim to run.

Or maybe the cop said, "I'm going to give you a head start and then I'm going to come after you and kill you."

If we ever learn why the man ran away then we might know why he was shot.

For all we know, there might be a damn good reason the cop shot the victim.

That's why cases are tried in a court of law. Innocent until proven guilty.

Utter nonsense!
Did you watch the video of the pull over?
The cop was in his car when the DBD bolted.
What are you smoking?

Hey, try this - they were runing towards a grassy knoll, and Badge Man fired a shot at the cop, who returned fires and the DBD was in the way.

[highnote]

Utter nonsense!
Did you watch the video of the pull over?
The cop was in his car when the DBD bolted.
What are you smoking?

Hey, try this - they were runing towards a grassy knoll, and Badge Man fired a shot at the cop, who returned fires and the DBD was in the way.

You keep saying that if the victim would have not tried to get away the cop would have shot him. You keep saying you know what the reality would have been if the victim did not run.

I say there is no way of knowing what would have happened if the victim would have not run away. You can estimate the likelihood of a different scenario, but you can never know for certain.

That's like saying if Secretariat had not run in the KY Derby Sham had a 100% chance of winning. There is no way of knowing what would have happened if Secretariat did not run. All we know for certain is what the actual outcome of the race was. Anything else is speculation.

[Ocala Mike]

This was NOT a racist cop looking for trouble, as many still are insisting.




Fixed that for Tom; the monkey ate the missing word!

[fast4522]

People will act just like animals, just because one can does not mean they have enough cause to shoot OR even take a gun out of the holster. For those who get loose and act like animals that should be treated as such and corralled another time. Too many want to play cowboys but few understand how to be professional enough to safeguard everybody.

[Ocala Mike]

Because I just can't wrap my head around exactly what the NEW problem really is here?

:


Why does it have to be a NEW problem? Unaddressed OLD problems can be addressed too and, yes, national debates are probably useful. I believe bks said that it's the whole system of law enforcement that needs to be looked at, and I would extend the inquiry to an examination of the judicial and penal systems as well.

[ArlJim78]

Of course not. that has nothing to do with what I said.
I pointed out it NOT the cop who put the events in motion.
The dead-beat Dad did that.

This was a racist cop looking for trouble, as many still are insisting.
The cop acted properly until the DBD decide to run.
Of course the cop didn't set things in motion.
But that's what cops do!! They respond to things that are set in motion by others. This is not even in question, and great that he acted properly until the guy started to run.
This thread wasn't started to discuss the parts where the cop acted properly, because those events have been overshadowed by the fact that he suddenly decided that murdering the suspect was going to be much easier than pursuing him.

[Ocala Mike]

And what do black cops do in all of this?



Actually, many of them are quite conflicted, taking heat from the community for siding with "the man." and facing the usual racist claptrap from those "on the job" with them.

[highnote]

Why does it have to be a NEW problem? Unaddressed OLD problems can be addressed too and, yes, national debates are probably useful. I believe bks said that it's the whole system of law enforcement that needs to be looked at, and I would extend the inquiry to an examination of the judicial and penal systems as well.


The penal system should definitely be looked at. I'd like to see the use of "for-profit" jails discontinued. There is too much of an incentive to keep inmates incarcerated longer than necessary and this ultimately costs taxpayers more money. Too many individuals with mental illness get sent to jail rather than to treatment centers. Oftentimes, for example, people with schizophrenia are sent to jail where they do not get the necessary medicine and mental health care for months on end. They eventually get sent to a treatment center and then released when their condition is brought under control. Had these people been sent directly to a treatment center a lot of taxpayer money that was used to pay for their jail time could have been saved.

[PaceAdvantage]

Why does it have to be a NEW problem? Unaddressed OLD problems can be addressed too and, yes, national debates are probably useful. I believe bks said that it's the whole system of law enforcement that needs to be looked at, and I would extend the inquiry to an examination of the judicial and penal systems as well.I disagree entirely.

The entire system doesn't need to be looked at. Because you will NEVER be able to change the mentality that goes into being a cop. The brotherhood involved...the "us/good guys against them/bad guys" mentality that is pervasive (and for good reason).

You might as well scrap the entire thing, because it's not going to change.

Despite the few VERY OBVIOUS flaws, the system WORKS, in my opinion. The bad apples eventually get rooted out...

[Ocala Mike]

the "us/good guys against them/bad guys" mentality that is pervasive (and for good reason).



We agree to disagree, then. Assuming the "good reason" is self-preservation, you are positing the police as an occupying army in a war zone, exactly the mentality that needs to change.

Yes, there are "bad guys" out there and, no, I don't want them running wild, but there has to be a more progressive approach to the problem than what I see on the Western Channel every day (my wife loves "Gunsmoke").

[Tom]

I say there is no way of knowing what would have happened if the victim would have not run away. You can estimate the likelihood of a different scenario, but you can never know for certain.

The preponderance of the evidence suggest a normal, routine traffic stop.
the cop had never shot anyone else, givne them a head start.

Your post is inane.

[Tom]

Why would the cop shoot the guy for no reason, as you suggest?
Just because he was Black?

Says more about YOU than the cop.

[highnote]

the cop had never shot anyone else, givne them a head start.
.

There you go again, speaking in absolutes. This particular cop had already been investigated for shooting a man with a stun gun when the man had his hands above his head and was surrendering.

[highnote]

Why would the cop shoot the guy for no reason, as you suggest?
Just because he was Black?

Says more about YOU than the cop.

HUH? I never mentioned race. You're the one who is interjecting race. The fact that you would even presuppose the I am suggesting anything regarding race says a lot about you.

[highnote]

Tom, it just occurred to me that you must be making millions if not billions playing the horses given that you appear to know what is going to happen in any scenario and you know what other people are thinking. :D

You should strike while the iron is hot and before you lose your super powers. I once heard a theory that if you could predict the future perfectly you could rule the world within a week!

[tucker6]

There you go again, speaking in absolutes. This particular cop had already been investigated for shooting a man with a stun gun when the man had his hands above his head and was surrendering.
Now who is speaking of absolutes. We don't know that the stun gun incident happened as reported. The story you report came from the alleged victim. I have no way of knowing the truth of that incident, and neither do you.

Btw, you act as if "shooting' a man with a stun gun is akin to shooting a person with a real gun. The cop shocked him with a stun gun. There is no shooting involved.

[highnote]

Now who is speaking of absolutes. We don't know that the stun gun incident happened as reported. The story you report came from the alleged victim. I have no way of knowing the truth of that incident, and neither do you.

I didn't say he shot him with a stun gun. I said he was being investigated for shooting him with a stun gun. Tom said he never shot anyone before. We don't know if he shot anyone before or not. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't.

Btw, you act as if "shooting' a man with a stun gun is akin to shooting a person with a real gun. The cop shocked him with a stun gun. There is no shooting involved.

It is similar in that you point a weapon at someone, pull a trigger, and strike them with an object and penetrate the skin.

If they are not similar then why is the phrase "shot with a stun gun" used?

[Tom]

There you go again, speaking in absolutes. This particular cop had already been investigated for shooting a man with a stun gun when the man had his hands above his head and was surrendering.

And you think a natural progression is for him to give the guy a head start and then shoot him?

Ridiculous.

How about this, the guy was Black - he probably was waiting for a change to stick the cop with a hidden razor.

[Tom]

HUH? I never mentioned race. You're the one who is interjecting race. The fact that you would even presuppose the I am suggesting anything regarding race says a lot about you.

Nice try, but you are far too obvious.
We don't know if he shot anyone before or not. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't.


It is apparent you don't know anything.

[fast4522]

He shot him because he knew that he could have gotten away with it. And he would have...if there was no video.

A very sad view if the policeman thought like that, I think that he will burn in hell. We are all accountable, find out when your all done.

[highnote]

Nice try, but you are far too obvious.


It is apparent you don't know anything.

I know that a journalist in an article on Yahoo news wrote the cop was investigated for shooting someone with a stun gun when the person had his hands above his head.

I know that this same cop has been charged with murder for shooting a man in the back and killing him.

You said the victim would not have been shot if he had not run.

I say there is no way to know for sure what would have happened if the victim had not run because it is a hypothetical situation. How can you know with absolute certainty what would happen in a given scenario if that scenario never happened?

Just like you don't know who would have the won the KY Derby if Secretariat had not run.

Basically, your view comes across as being that you think the victim deserves some of the blame for being "murdered" for running from the arresting cop and that he'd be alive today if he hadn't run.

I say there is no way of knowing what would have happened if he would not have run.

[johnhannibalsmith]

It sure seems an absurd point to argue. There isn't much that appears rational about the cop's actions based on what is out there, so presuming he'd do this or that for one reason or another seems pointless. Cause and effect with this guy seems about as unpredictable as it gets.

[highnote]

It sure seems an absurd point to argue. There isn't much that appears rational about the cop's actions based on what is out there, so presuming he'd do this or that for one reason or another seems pointless. Cause and effect with this guy seems about as unpredictable as it gets.

I agree and that is my point. Just because the cop's actions don't seem rational doesn't mean they aren't. And just because it doesn't seem rational for the victim to run away from the cop doesn't mean that it wasn't a rational thing to do. Maybe the cop should not have been charged with murder based on only the video evidence because maybe there is more to the story?

The case will go to trial to try to determine exactly what happened and why.

The cop may end up being guilty of murder, but if I had to deliver a verdict solely based on what I've seen, I would probably say there is reasonable doubt and that the cop is not guilty of murder. I would need more information before I would be confident in issuing a guilty verdict.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I didn't mean to compel you into all that because I can't imagine a scenario where the shooting as captured is justified. Unless the guy had a nuclear bomb in his pants like that weird dude on the plane, shooting him eight times center mass in the back while he's at an easy gallop is real tough to find a reason for,

[highnote]

I didn't mean to compel you into all that because I can't imagine a scenario where the shooting as captured is justified. Unless the guy had a nuclear bomb in his pants like that weird dude on the plane, shooting him eight times center mass in the back while he's at an easy gallop is real tough to find a reason for,


Again, I agree with you, and that is why he is charged with murder, but more facts about the case need to be known and the million dollar questions are why the victim tried to run away and was the reason he was running away reason enough for the cop to feel justified in shooting him in the back?

[johnhannibalsmith]

... why the victim tried to run away and was the reason he was running away reason enough for the cop to feel justified in shooting him in the back?

I'd like to hear some of the possibilities here that you are hanging on to that is keeping you from passing judgment on this one. Your principal is admirable, but it doesn't seem terribly applicable here.

Your first question is unlikely to ever be answered. One person can give you the "facts" there, and he's dead. Everything else is supposition or hearsay at best.

The second question, as phrased, implies that the officer feared his safety and was in mortal danger if you are concerned with "why he felt justified" - because that's pretty much the only way anyone is going to absolve him based simply on "why he felt justified".

Again, short of the panty bomb or James Bond-esque poison darts that shoot out of the heels of his Jordans, I'm not seeing a thing that could have had this guy so terrified that he felt the need to - very calmly raise his weapon while exposed, take steady aim, and plug him like its target practice.

I'm big on reasonable doubt. I actually thought O.J. probably should have been acquitted. I see zero reasonable doubt here. The only doubt you can dream up is borderline science fiction. Unreasonable doubt. Hang him.

[woodtoo]

The cop, Slager had a taser probe in his chest it appears, and Scott had the

wire tangled in his leg as he was fleeing,from the video I've seen.Slager may

have been somewhat incapacitated.

[Sly7449]

Check out the Video Press Conference

Another Side of A Day of an Officer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki-R0d7DIAE

[highnote]

I'd like to hear some of the possibilities here that you are hanging on to that is keeping you from passing judgment on this one. Your principal is admirable, but it doesn't seem terribly applicable here.

Without getting too semantical, every possibility that can be thought of before this goes to trial is a probabilistic event. Some possibilities might seem utterly ridiculous and others might seem reasonable. However, one of those ridiculous possibilities might not seem so ridiculous once other facts come to light.

So when someone states that the victim certainly would not have been shot if he had not run I find it interesting to question the reasoning behind that statement.

Just like if Secretariat had not run in the KY Derby, Sham did not have a 100% chance of finishing first. We will never know the answer to the KY Derby scenario because it never happened.

Likewise, you will never know the answer to whether the victim would or would not have been shot if he had not run because that scenario did not happen.

I'm interested in knowing the motivation and reasoning behind the belief that he would not have been shot if he had not run because it is a probabilistic event. As more facts come to light the probability changes of the victim not being shot if he had not run. I just don't see that it there is a 100% chance he would not have been shot if he had not run.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Without getting too semantical... I just don't see that it there is a 100% chance he would not have been shot if he had not run.

I have no interest in the whole what he might have done if and then but maybe not and all that. Running is not a crime punishable by lethal force, so frankly I don't give one shit either way.

I was replying only to the portion where based on what you've seen of the story that you would acquit based on reasonable doubt.

[Rookies]

Again, I agree with you, and that is why he is charged with murder, but more facts about the case need to be known and the million dollar questions are why the victim tried to run away and was the reason he was running away reason enough for the cop to feel justified in shooting him in the back?

50 (?) year old dude is running away at about 5 MPH. He sure as hell wasn't Carl Lewis and unless that Cop was a quadriplegic, he could have easily caught him or called for backup within a block,

What "facts", other than 'Bang-Bang-Bang-Bang-Bang-Bang-Bang- (pause) Bang in the back of a slow runner, would anybody not in a parallel universe have missed?

[thaskalos]

Again, I agree with you, and that is why he is charged with murder, but more facts about the case need to be known and the million dollar questions are why the victim tried to run away and was the reason he was running away reason enough for the cop to feel justified in shooting him in the back?

Is this a gag?

A 50 year-old guy runs away from a cop...and the cop kills him by shooting him eight times in the back. And then the cop walks back to the point where the two men were initially standing, picks up something off the ground...and drops it by the dead body. And you are sitting there wondering if there was a reason for the cop to feel justified in shooting the guy?

Boy...are we glad all the detectives aren't like you. :rolleyes:

[johnhannibalsmith]

I swear I just heard an airplane let out an oink.



NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — During a sermon at a North Charleston church, the Rev. Al Sharpton said Sunday that swift action taken by a white mayor and police chief in the South could set the tone for handling future questions of police misconduct across the country.

"It's not about black and white. It's about right and wrong," Sharpton said. "What this mayor did is what we've been asking mayors to do all over the country: Not do us a favor, just enforce the law."


Revrum Al avoids the shutout and actually tallies one. Way to go!


http://news.yahoo.com/rev-al-sharpton-expected-visit-north-charleston-065613768.html

[highnote]

I have no interest in the whole what he might have done if and then but maybe not and all that. Running is not a crime punishable by lethal force, so frankly I don't give one shit either way.

I know you weren't. I was actually making reference to Tom's post earlier where he said the victim wouldn't have been shot if he wouldn't have run. I say there is no way of knowing what would have happened because that scenario never happened. Just like Secretariat ran in the Derby. So there is no way of knowing which horse would have won that year if Secretariat hadn't run.

I was replying only to the portion where based on what you've seen of the story that you would acquit based on reasonable doubt.

With only the video to tell the story there aren't enough facts to prove the cop guilty of murder, in my opinion. Hopefully, the trial will shed some light on the whole incident.

[highnote]

Is this a gag?

A 50 year-old guy runs away from a cop...and the cop kills him by shooting him eight times in the back. And then the cop walks back to the point where the two men were initially standing, picks up something off the ground...and drops it by the dead body. And you are sitting there wondering if there was a reason for the cop to feel justified in shooting the guy?

Boy...are we glad all the detectives aren't like you. :rolleyes:


You and Rookies are ready to hang him high. I'm just saying there needs to be a trial and that as many facts as possible should be heard before a verdict is rendered.

I agree that it doesn't look good for the cop. It didn't look good for O.J., either, but he walked.

And what if the cop is mentally ill? Maybe he is bi-polar? Who the hell knows? I certainly don't know all the facts surrounding this case. I've seen a video clip that was made on a cell phone. I'd like to hear what the cop has to say and also the passenger in the car. I'd like to hear testimony from other people who came in contact with the cop that day and also the victim.

You may criticize my detective work, but I'd rather be thorough and right than careless and wrong.

[highnote]

another shooting happened, but this time the cop's excuse was that he thought he had a stun gun in his hand, not a loaded pistol:

http://news.yahoo.com/video-released-showing-killing-black-oklahoma-suspect-202659435.html

The cop who did the shooting is a 73 year old deputy.

[thaskalos]

another shooting happened, but this time the cop's excuse was that he thought he had a stun gun in his hand, not a loaded pistol:

http://news.yahoo.com/video-released-showing-killing-black-oklahoma-suspect-202659435.html

The cop who did the shooting is a 73 year old deputy.

I'll never understand police procedure in cases like these. The old cop shoots the guy with his real gun instead of a stun gun as the guy is lying on the ground, and the old cop quickly apologizes...but the other two muscular cops have their knees on the dying man's neck and back, while telling him "f**k your breath" when the wounded victim complains that he is losing his breath? "He shot me"...the dying man cries out...and the policeman answers, "You ran...shut the f**k up"?

What the heck is going on here?

[Robert Fischer]

What the heck is going on here?

aww... they're just caught up in the heat of the moment

the lines blur, Thask

adrenalin, fear, anger.

These heroes put their life on the line for us everyday, and then some scumbag puts their lives and our lives in danger??

They would need special training to separate procedure from acting out sadistic low-level human behavior.

And that training simply isn't cost-effective, much like using cameras in a business interaction (at least not a police/citizen interaction).

Just ask yourself, if he wouldn't have ran, would they have had to sadistically murder and brutalize him?

I can almost guarantee you that he would be alive today had he not run.

[Rookies]

"You and Rookies are ready to hang him high. I'm just saying there needs to be a trial and that as many facts as possible should be heard before a verdict is rendered. You may criticize my detective work, but I'd rather be thorough and right than careless and wrong."

ANYBODY can suggest any wild & crazy defence and no doubt, this murderer, will have to do so, to escape the crowbar saloon.

I haven't even mentioned that he appears to gin up faux evidence, in the mistaken belief that the blue code will protect him on the "fear for one's life", b.s. That, before today's judge and jury- the digital phone, caught him in full killing spree!

Not someone, who decides to pump 8 shots into the back of a slow moving 50 year old, without either a weapon or being a threat.
NO verbal warning.
NO warning shot.
NO call for assistance.

Who TF did he believe he was taking down on this routine uhh...traffic stop?
America's most wanted ? Osama? Hitler?

Nobody understands what you're on about here, other than the latest:
"Look, it's a panda in a niqab", deflection.

[Inner Dirt]

aww... they're just caught up in the heat of the moment

the lines blur, Thask

adrenalin, fear, anger.

These heroes put their life on the line for us everyday, and then some scumbag puts their lives and our lives in danger??

They would need special training to separate procedure from acting out sadistic low-level human behavior.

And that training simply isn't cost-effective, much like using cameras in a business interaction (at least not a police/citizen interaction).

Just ask yourself, if he wouldn't have ran, would they have had to sadistically murder and brutalize him?

I can almost guarantee you that he would be alive today had he not run.

First cops are supposed to be trained and conditioned not to react like the average citizen. Also supposedly they are psychologically evaluated numerous times during employment screening to pick candidates that are likely to remain calm under pressure.

Heroes? I could have fell out of my chair laughing. The vast majority of cops never fire a weapon in the line of duty, The huge majority of workplace injuries are from traffic accidents, not related to high speed pursuits. The news and Hollywood distorts the public perception of cops, they don't run into dark building with a 9mm pistol chasing 3 guys with machine guns. In the rare instance they do engage someone they usually have superior weapons, numbers or both. If you are unarmed they will use a nightstick or stun gun, if you have a knife they will use a pistol. If you have a full auto weapon the cop runs and hides and calls the SWAT team.

Like I said it is the news and Hollywood, the average criminal doesn't resist when caught. For every televised fleeing or fighting suspect 1,000s are apprehended without incident. My dad was a city cop and state police for 20 years he said he drew his gun 3 times, never fired it, and was never in an on the job fight.

Go ahead and believe what the news and Hollywood present you. I guess you believe all the old west face to face gun battles. They were rare, for every Gunfight at OK corral a 1,000 guys were shot in the back.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... Hopefully, the trial will shed some light on the whole incident.

You've got five guys riding you now, so I'll back out. I can't argue with refusing to render an opinion at all until the entire trial transcript has been read and evidence evaluated. The use of the phrase "reasonable doubt" implied to me that you could actually interpret the evidence that we know in such a way as to present an alternative theory to the state's that would cause a reasonable person to doubt the state's theory and narrative of what transpired.

[PaceAdvantage]

With only the video to tell the story there aren't enough facts to prove the cop guilty of murder, in my opinion. Hopefully, the trial will shed some light on the whole incident.I disagree. There is no way in the world that anyone can argue that cop's life was in danger at the point he executed Walter Scott.

He's as guilty of murder as anyone can be.

[PaceAdvantage]

I'll never understand police procedure in cases like these. The old cop shoots the guy with his real gun instead of a stun gun as the guy is lying on the ground, and the old cop quickly apologizes...but the other two muscular cops have their knees on the dying man's neck and back, while telling him "f**k your breath" when the wounded victim complains that he is losing his breath? "He shot me"...the dying man cries out...and the policeman answers, "You ran...shut the f**k up"?

What the heck is going on here?Heat of the moment...that's what's going on...the fog of war...

Or maybe all those cops just were hoping to ruin their lives by shooting another suspect on the ground...that's probably what it was...they did it on purpose because they wanted to **** up their careers and their lives... :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

First cops are supposed to be trained and conditioned not to react like the average citizen. Also supposedly they are psychologically evaluated numerous times during employment screening to pick candidates that are likely to remain calm under pressure.

Heroes? I could have fell out of my chair laughing. The vast majority of cops never fire a weapon in the line of duty, The huge majority of workplace injuries are from traffic accidents, not related to high speed pursuits. The news and Hollywood distorts the public perception of cops, they don't run into dark building with a 9mm pistol chasing 3 guys with machine guns. In the rare instance they do engage someone they usually have superior weapons, numbers or both. If you are unarmed they will use a nightstick or stun gun, if you have a knife they will use a pistol. If you have a full auto weapon the cop runs and hides and calls the SWAT team.

Like I said it is the news and Hollywood, the average criminal doesn't resist when caught. For every televised fleeing or fighting suspect 1,000s are apprehended without incident. My dad was a city cop and state police for 20 years he said he drew his gun 3 times, never fired it, and was never in an on the job fight.

Go ahead and believe what the news and Hollywood present you. I guess you believe all the old west face to face gun battles. They were rare, for every Gunfight at OK corral a 1,000 guys were shot in the back.

He was being sarcastic.........

[thaskalos]

Heat of the moment...that's what's going on...the fog of war...

Or maybe all those cops just were hoping to ruin their lives by shooting another suspect on the ground...that's probably what it was...they did it on purpose because they wanted to **** up their careers and their lives... :rolleyes:
As another poster told you a few days ago, you are being deliberately obtuse. You know what I am getting at, but you are dodging my point in the same manner that Boxcar dodges questions about God.

At least 4 armed cops are chacing an unarmed man...and you are talking to me about the "fog of war"?

They illegally shoot the guy while he is lying on the ground, leaving him mortally wounded...and then they start manhandling and cursing at him...instead of having at least a little concern for the condition of the victim? Three armed burly cops kneeling on a dying man...and THEY are the ones feeling the "fog of war"?

If these cops want to know what the "fog of war" feels like...let them go drive a cab at Chicago's south side.

[PaceAdvantage]

Whatever man. You're right. You have all the answers. You know exactly what was going through their heads...they are perfect human beings acting with perfect knowledge at every split second of time.

When are you going to run for President so that I can vote for you?

I'm not being obtuse. I'm giving you an explanation.

The only other explanation is that these guys figured it was time to ruin their lives. I suppose that makes a lot more sense.

[thaskalos]

Whatever man. You're right. You have all the answers. You know exactly what was going through their heads...they are perfect human beings acting with perfect knowledge at every split second of time.

When are you going to run for President so that I can vote for you?

I'm not being obtuse. I'm giving you an explanation.

The only other explanation is that these guys figured it was time to ruin their lives. I suppose that makes a lot more sense.
What explanation are you giving me? That the 4 armed cops who were chasing the unarmed man were all stressed out because of the "fog of war"? Aren't chases on foot a routine part of a cop's job...what's the big deal? Even the cops on the old Dragnet TV show would sometimes have to chase an unarmed suspect down.

Why are these cops all stressed out when they have to do a little running, PA? Did they think that handing out traffic tickets would be the entire responsibility that they would have to shoulder?

[PaceAdvantage]

What explanation are you giving me? That the 4 armed cops who were chasing the unarmed man were all stressed out because of the "fog of war"? Aren't chases on foot a routine part of a cop's job...what's the big deal? Even the cops on the old Dragnet TV show would sometimes have to chase an unarmed suspect down.

Why are these cops all stressed out when they have to do a little running, PA? Did they think that handing out traffic tickets would be the entire responsibility that they would have to shoulder?I never mentioned stress. I wasn't thinking about stress at all.

Fog of war doesn't have anything to do with stress...it has to do with the flow and processing of information in a chaotic situation...even obvious stuff, like the sound of a gun going off or someone telling you they just shot the suspect accidentally...you know, obvious stuff like that, that in the heat of the moment (or the fog of war), may not be processed so obviously because it is so unexpected...

[thaskalos]

I never mentioned stress. I wasn't thinking about stress at all.

Fog of war doesn't have anything to do with stress...it has to do with the flow and processing of information in a chaotic situation...even obvious stuff, like the sound of a gun going off or someone telling you they just shot the suspect accidentally...you know, obvious stuff like that, that in the heat of the moment (or the fog of war), may not be processed so obviously because it is so unexpected...
What did you see on that video that could have been considered "unexpected" by any cop?

[PaceAdvantage]

Ummm...the fact that the suspect was shot? That could reasonably be assumed to be completely unexpected...we're talking about the 73-year-old who thought he had a taser in his hand, right?

If not, no wonder we aren't communicating well...that's what I thought you have been referring to...

[highnote]

I disagree. There is no way in the world that anyone can argue that cop's life was in danger at the point he executed Walter Scott.

He's as guilty of murder as anyone can be.

Like I have repeatedly said, it is probable that the cop was in the wrong, however, it is not 100% certain. When more facts are known then the reason's behind the cops actions should become clearer and more certain.

I'm not ready to convict the cop and say he is 100% guilty without a trial.

[thaskalos]

Ummm...the fact that the suspect was shot? That could reasonably be assumed to be completely unexpected...we're talking about the 73-year-old who thought he had a taser in his hand, right?

If not, no wonder we aren't communicating well...that's what I thought you have been referring to...
So..."Fog of War" to you are the circumstances that the actions of the cops themselves bring about?

The old cop, who should be working only as a greeter at Walmart, wrongfully shoots an unarmed man who is lying on the ground...and this creates this "Fog of War"...which makes the rest of the officers show a depraved indifference for the wounded man's life?

Okay...I think I got it now. :ThmbUp:

[highnote]

You've got five guys riding you now, so I'll back out. I can't argue with refusing to render an opinion at all until the entire trial transcript has been read and evidence evaluated. The use of the phrase "reasonable doubt" implied to me that you could actually interpret the evidence that we know in such a way as to present an alternative theory to the state's that would cause a reasonable person to doubt the state's theory and narrative of what transpired.


My reasonable doubt comes from the fact that all the facts have not been presented and analyzed.

From what I read there was a scuffle. In the video I see a string of some sort hanging from the cop. Was that part of the taser that was shot into the victim?

Something caused the cop to shoot Walter Scott.

Maybe the cop freaked out because the victim grabbed his taser?

Was it bad policing? Was it racism? Was it fear? Was it panic? Was it hatred? Was it anger? Was it a combination of those? Was it something else?

There are different levels of murder. Some are premeditated. Others happen spontaneously. First degree, second degree, etc.

I don't see this as a black and white case (that's a figure of speech, not about race). This case seems to have a lot of gray area. For me, that gray area is where the reasonable doubt comes from.

[thaskalos]

Like I have repeatedly said, it is probable that the cop was in the wrong, however, it is not 100% certain. When more facts are known then the reason's behind the cops actions should become clearer and more certain.

I'm not ready to convict the cop and say he is 100% guilty without a trial.
He doesn't have to be "100% guilty". Just guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[PaceAdvantage]

So..."Fog of War" to you are the circumstances that the actions of the cops themselves bring about?

The old cop, who should be working only as a greeter at Walmart, wrongfully shoots an unarmed man who is lying on the ground...and this creates this "Fog of War"...which makes the rest of the officers show a depraved indifference for the wounded man's life?

Okay...I think I got it now. :ThmbUp:Wrong. Not even a good try.

[thaskalos]

Wrong. Not even a good try.
PA...how much would you charge me in order to allow me to put you on ignore?

[woodtoo]

I disagree. There is no way in the world that anyone can argue that cop's life was in danger at the point he executed Walter Scott.

He's as guilty of murder as anyone can be.


He was in hand to hand combat with a felon,and was then tased in the struggle. Manslaughter max.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA...how much would you charge me in order to allow me to put you on ignore?Oh, I am c r u s h e d . . .

I give you credit for that one...

Next thing you know, you'll be writing your "good bye" thread while solely blaming me for your departure from this board.

Such drama...

Where's your open-mindedness to other opinions?

[highnote]

The old cop, ...... wrongfully shoots an unarmed man who is lying on the ground...and this creates this "Fog of War"...which makes the rest of the officers show a depraved indifference for the wounded man's life?




My first thought when I saw the video was that this is a good example of man's inhumanity to man.

The victim is on the ground. The deputy shoots him with a bullet. A cop pins the victim's head to the ground using his knee. The victim complains with his dying breath that he can't breath. The cops don't let up on him; they don't try to save him; they tell him to shut up; they don't show compassion.

I know that this could be a potentially dangerous situation for the cops. The guy could have turned around and started shooting at them. But he didn't.

If you're a cop then you better have nerves of steel, be a quick thinker and be able to assess a situation very quickly, otherwise, you will probably end up dead or kill someone.

btw... I'm surprised that no one has chimed in to say that if the guy hadn't been doing something illegal or if he hadn't run from the cops he'd still be alive.

[highnote]

He doesn't have to be "100% guilty". Just guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.


Yep. And without a trial I am not ready to say he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[highnote]

He was in hand to hand combat with a felon,and was then tased in the struggle. Manslaughter max.


Wait a second. You're saying manslaughter max. Others are saying guilty of murder.

It looks like there is some reasonable doubt here.

[thaskalos]

Oh, I am c r u s h e d . . .

I give you credit for that one...

Next thing you know, you'll be writing your "good bye" thread while solely blaming me for your departure from this board.

Such drama...

Where's your open-mindedness to other opinions?

You'll miss me when I'm gone...you just don't know it yet. :)

[johnhannibalsmith]

Wait a second. You're saying manslaughter max. Others are saying guilty of murder.

It looks like there is some reasonable doubt here.

Right, submit that line to a jury. This random person says murderer, this random person says hero. There's your doubt.

You want to be 100% certain and consider everything else reasonable doubt. I will bow out now.

[thaskalos]

Wait a second. You're saying manslaughter max. Others are saying guilty of murder.

It looks like there is some reasonable doubt here.
The only reasonable doubt is about whether some of you guys are in complete control of your mental faculties.

If this cop isn't indicted on murder charges...even I will take to the streets in protest.

[thaskalos]

My first thought when I saw the video was that this is a good example of man's inhumanity to man.

The victim is on the ground. The deputy shoots him with a bullet. A cop pins the victim's head to the ground using his knee. The victim complains with his dying breath that he can't breath. The cops don't let up on him; they don't try to save him; they tell him to shut up; they don't show compassion.

I know that this could be a potentially dangerous situation for the cops. The guy could have turned around and started shooting at them. But he didn't.

If you're a cop then you better have nerves of steel, be a quick thinker and be able to assess a situation very quickly, otherwise, you will probably end up dead or kill someone.

btw... I'm surprised that no one has chimed in to say that if the guy hadn't been doing something illegal or if he hadn't run from the cops he'd still be alive.

And I am surprised that no one has chimed in to say that, if guys didn't do anything illegal and run away from the law...then we wouldn't need the cops to begin with.

[highnote]

And I am surprised that no one has chimed in to say that, if guys didn't do anything illegal and run away from the law...then we wouldn't need the cops to begin with.


I was being sarcastic. Earlier in the thread and in the comments below news articles about this story many people have said that it's Walter Scott's fault he's dead because he tried to run away.

So I was surprised no one tried to make the same ridiculous argument that the guy in Oklahoma would still be alive if he wouldn't have run from the cops. To which I'd say, the guy would still be alive if a cop would not have shot him while he was on the ground and then after they shot him he might still be alive if the cops would have responded appropriately instead of pinning his head to the ground with a knee and ignoring his plea that he was losing his ability to breath.

So will these cops be charged with murder? They sure didn't seem to do anything to help him once he was shot. Or is that just negligence of manslaughter?

[highnote]

Right, submit that line to a jury. This random person says murderer, this random person says hero. There's your doubt.

You want to be 100% certain and consider everything else reasonable doubt. I will bow out now.

I'm not talking about submitting anything to a jury. I'm just saying that based on the video I have reasonable doubt that the cop committed murder. I'm not sure that he actually intended to kill him. Maybe he was just trying to incapacitate him? Who the hell knows what the cop was thinking in the "fog of war"? I'm not a mind reader. All I have to go on is some crappy internet video. I have not heard any testimony from anyone.

I certainly wouldn't want to send the cop to death row based on the evidence so far, but there are a lot of others who think he is a murderer. I'm not so sure he is.

Maybe you like declaring people guilty of murder without a trial. I don't. We differ on that point. What can I say?

[johnhannibalsmith]

I'm not talking about ... I'm not sure that he actually intended to kill him. Maybe he was just trying to incapacitate him? ...

Maybe you like declaring people guilty of murder without a trial. I don't. We differ on that point. What can I say?

Edited empty. **** it.

[highnote]

I know I said that I was done, but his post is one of the stupidest piles of shit I have read on this forum.

You are entitled to your opinion.

If you think there's a chance, any chance at all, that he was trying to incapacitate him... then I can't take anything you say seriously.

Of course there was a "chance" he was trying to incapacitate him. Very few things are absolutely 100% certain. You're making a judgment about a behavior that was captured by crappy video and put on the internet without the full context. We don't see the entire struggle that allegedly took place before the guy started running. We don't hear what words were exchanged, if any, between the two people. And yet you're 100% certain the cop had a 100% intention of trying to murder Walter Scott. And you ask how can you take anything I say seriously? :D

As for the last part... one second you are talking juries, then you aren't, now we are again. I want a ****ing opinion, not a verdict. Holy hell, are you reading my posts through some hacked version of Google translate?

Geeze, I've only been replying to questions in a thread on a freaking message board. Sorry my answers don't comply to some unwritten set of rules you have about the way things are supposed to be.

[horses4courses]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/13/hank-johnson-open-season-on-black-men_n_7059004.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

[woodtoo]

Only black men can kill black men?

[Tom]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/13/hank-johnson-open-season-on-black-men_n_7059004.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Stop running and see what happens. :rolleyes:


btw, is that OUR Hank?

[woodtoo]

That's the Hank who thinks Guam could tip over. :lol:

[JustRalph]

That's the Hank who thinks Guam could tip over. :lol:


I was wondering why I knew him........ :lol:

[woodtoo]

I was wondering why I knew him........ :lol:


Watched the clip earlier today, it was painful to see how serious he was.

[classhandicapper]

Only black men can kill black men?

I'm in favor of sending minority cops to minority neighborhoods.

I have no idea if it will help and idealistically I'm against quotas and such, but at least if someone is killed the controversy will be about policing instead of race.

[woodtoo]

I'm in favor of sending minority cops to minority neighborhoods.

I have no idea if it will help and idealistically I'm against quotas and such, but at least if someone is killed the controversy will be about policing instead of race.
Sadly we may begin to see this happening.It may help in the short term but overall

I'm not too sure.

[woodtoo]

A new zoom video clearly shows the taser and wires at the time of the shooting,its worth a look at The Last Refuge,about 5 stories down

[JustRalph]

I'm in favor of sending minority cops to minority neighborhoods.

I have no idea if it will help and idealistically I'm against quotas and such, but at least if someone is killed the controversy will be about policing instead of race.


This has been tried since the 60's. It doesn't work. In fact, several lawsuits have been filed by minority officers who state they were discriminated against because they were forced to work in minority areas. They won.

I have been on police calls where a shooting or something serious has happen and witnesses refused to talk to me and requested a black officer. But eventually when it gets down to crunch time, the witnesses will never go to court, no matter who the police officer was.

Often and almost always in shootings etc, the minority population refuses to cooperate and cases go unsolved for these reasons. If you don't play the game, you can't win.

[horses4courses]

several lawsuits have been filed by minority officers who state they were discriminated against because they were forced to work in minority areas. They won.

I'm thinking they won for one reason - they were discriminated against.

[JustRalph]

I'm thinking they won for one reason - they were discriminated against.

What does that have to with my point? The subject of the thread, and the associated post I was commenting on, isn't whether they won or not. It was just pointing out facts, for historical context based on the suggestion that minority cops should be working in minority areas.

take that break........ you need it

[horses4courses]

No disrespect intended.
You have practical experience in the matter, and know it doesn't work.

It just seems to be a convenient solution for some in order
to address the low level of minorities hired in many areas.

"Have them police their own"
Sounds like something out of '60s South Africa.

[classhandicapper]

I'm thinking they won for one reason - they were discriminated against.


Perhaps that's true, but perhaps not.

Police officers are not dumb. They know the "approximate" crime stats in each precinct. They may have been assigned to those precincts to create better trust between the police and the neighborhood, but they knew they were also being forced to go to the more dangerous areas. Who the heck would want that?

I just think no matter what you think on these issues, it's not good when the media makes many of these cases of poor judgment, bad policing, and accidents about race instead of what actually happened.

[FantasticDan]

This story is back in the news, as the case has been sent to the jury. Even tho the judge has allowed the jury to consider a lesser charge of manslaughter, one juror says he can not and will not vote to convict the cop, and so the jury is deadlocked..

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/02/us/michael-slager-murder-trial-walter-scott/index.html

[woodtoo]

This story is back in the news, as the case has been sent to the jury. Even tho the judge has allowed the jury to consider a lesser charge of manslaughter, one juror says he can not and will not vote to convict the cop, and so the jury is deadlocked..

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/02/us/michael-slager-murder-trial-walter-scott/index.html
The Judge made a big mess he wanted to be judge and jury. :ThmbDown:

[JustRalph]

I don't know how the hell this guy beats the rap.

The next jury will lock him up

[woodtoo]

"Mistrial Declared"

[woodtoo]

The Judge made a big mess he wanted to be judge and jury. :ThmbDown:
The jury saw through the Judges late charge of manslaughter brought in late Friday causing more doubt about the original charge of 1st degree murder,
which should not have been brought by the Prosecutor. I'll go out on a leg here and say the Judge would wish to send the jurors to jail.