Cop charged with murder

[popo22]

ZX9RCAM,


"This statement in bold has me confused, I can understand if it might have been cut and/or edited, but not in this instance.
Unless of course this video HAS been cut and/or edited...."

All I am trying to say is that the video is a depiction of a particular space in time without context or explanation of the actions that preceeded it, it is incomplete. That is why video is so often skewed and taken out of context, easily manipulated to serve an agenda.

 

[Mike1234567]

You shoot a man, running away from you and posing no threat to others, eight times in the back killing him. A bystander shoots video of the event including you tampering with evidence. Do you think any policeman or jury would find you innocent? HELL NO!! The police would haul you to jail and a jury would put you behind bars for a very long time... maybe even put you to death. Why are so many folks trying to give this dirty cop a break?

 

[TxBigfoot]

You shoot a man, running away from you and posing no threat to others, eight times in the back killing him. A bystander shoots video of the event including you tampering with evidence. Do you think any policeman or jury would find you innocent? HELL NO!! The police would haul you to jail and a jury would put you behind bars for a very long time... maybe even put you to death. Why are so many folks trying to give this dirty cop a break?

He was running away in a threatening, menacing way. (Sarcasm) That cop is dirty as hell. He deserves the same punishment as anyone else who shoots someone in the back.

 

[Younggun]

He will get his day in court and a prosecutor will get an opportunity to prove him guilty. I'm sick of people having to prove innocence.

I did notice that the video starts at the most opportune time to support the dead man. Maybe by coincidence, maybe not.

Looking at the situation objectively is not giving the cop a break.

 

[popo22]

There are allowances in the law (Garner vs.Tenn.) where the supreme court has established that there are instances where an "Officer" is justified in the "taking of a life" when the suspect ostensibly appears to be unarmed and is trying to escape. In certain situations the Officer "may" shoot a "fleeing felon" in the back (rare but they do exist). example: an Officer "KNOWS/sees" a suspect stab a victim in an alleyway and runs when the Officer tries to apprehend him. The suspect throws the knife away and is no longer armed. The Officer knows that a "serial murderer" has been preying on the area and has murdered several people and this particular instance meets all of the "mo(modus operandi)" of the offender. The offender runs toward an apartment complex (where other potential victims are) and the Officer believes he is not going to be able to catch him on foot. The Officer KNOWS that if he does not stop the suspect that others will die as a result of his escape. Is the Officer justified in using deadly force to stop the offender knowing all of the things mentioned or should he allow him to escape, knowing that he will kill again, possibly immediately? What about a serial rapist who just raped your daughter in the same alley, a serial arsonist who just set fire to an apartment complex one block down, or a "Terrorist" who just set off a bomb at the Starbucks"?

Do we know whether any of these elements existed in this incident judging only from what we see in this video and as presented by the media? ( I certainly do not know nor am I endorsing the Officers actions). Have we "ever" seen instances where the "media" has "skewed" the facts to drive a particular agenda? (Be your own judge).


Does this "video" give you enough information to make a judgement on what happened and what the Officer experienced or knows about the suspect? Is the media giving you all the information that the Officer knew at the time of the shooting? I am not saying one way or the other but until the "whole truth" is revealed is seems somewhat early to call the Officer or anyone else a cold blooded murderer. He may well be a murderer but I doubt that anyone knows that at this point, all we have seen is a short segment of a video, without context and lacking information other than what the media is pushing. Do I feel confident in saying the Officer is a cold blooded murderer based on this insufficient information? NO.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

ZX9RCAM,


"This statement in bold has me confused, I can understand if it might have been cut and/or edited, but not in this instance.
Unless of course this video HAS been cut and/or edited...."

All I am trying to say is that the video is a depiction of a particular space in time without context or explanation of the actions that preceeded it, it is incomplete. That is why video is so often skewed and taken out of context, easily manipulated to serve an agenda.

That helps....

 

[99taws6]

When I watched the video I saw it as they tussled during the "arrest" and the taser was deployed. I "assume" the taser was dropped and the officer "assumed" the deceased had it. When he then took off running the officer "stopped" him from being armed with a police issued weapon and causing any harm to the community or himself.

In my eyes it was a fine line between right and wrong at that time but it could have been argued with adrenaline and all that medical/psychology crap. The whole situation changed when it appears the officer goes back and "relocates" the missing taser to the area next to the deceased's body.

 

[Mike1234567]

How do you explain the officer knew where to taser was, ran directly back to retrieve it, then drop it by the body??

When I watched the video I saw it as they tussled during the "arrest" and the taser was deployed. I "assume" the taser was dropped and the officer "assumed" the deceased had it. When he then took off running the officer "stopped" him from being armed with a police issued weapon and causing any harm to the community or himself.

In my eyes it was a fine line between right and wrong at that time but it could have been argued with adrenaline and all that medical/psychology crap. The whole situation changed when it appears the officer goes back and "relocates" the missing taser to the area next to the deceased's body.

 

[Mike1234567]

Isn't the dead guy's only known offense failure to pay child support??

There are allowances in the law (Garner vs.Tenn.) where the supreme court has established that there are instances where an "Officer" is justified in the "taking of a life" when the suspect ostensibly appears to be unarmed and is trying to escape. In certain situations the Officer "may" shoot a "fleeing felon" in the back (rare but they do exist). example: an Officer "KNOWS/sees" a suspect stab a victim in an alleyway and runs when the Officer tries to apprehend him. The suspect throws the knife away and is no longer armed. The Officer knows that a "serial murderer" has been preying on the area and has murdered several people and this particular instance meets all of the "mo(modus operandi)" of the offender. The offender runs toward an apartment complex (where other potential victims are) and the Officer believes he is not going to be able to catch him on foot. The Officer KNOWS that if he does not stop the suspect that others will die as a result of his escape. Is the Officer justified in using deadly force to stop the offender knowing all of the things mentioned or should he allow him to escape, knowing that he will kill again, possibly immediately? What about a serial rapist who just raped your daughter in the same alley, a serial arsonist who just set fire to an apartment complex one block down, or a "Terrorist" who just set off a bomb at the Starbucks"?

Do we know whether any of these elements existed in this incident judging only from what we see in this video and as presented by the media? ( I certainly do not know nor am I endorsing the Officers actions). Have we "ever" seen instances where the "media" has "skewed" the facts to drive a particular agenda? (Be your own judge).


Does this "video" give you enough information to make a judgement on what happened and what the Officer experienced or knows about the suspect? Is the media giving you all the information that the Officer knew at the time of the shooting? I am not saying one way or the other but until the "whole truth" is revealed is seems somewhat early to call the Officer or anyone else a cold blooded murderer. He may well be a murderer but I doubt that anyone knows that at this point, all we have seen is a short segment of a video, without context and lacking information other than what the media is pushing. Do I feel confident in saying the Officer is a cold blooded murderer based on this insufficient information? NO.

 

[99taws6]

How do you explain the officer knew where to taser was, ran directly back to retrieve it, then drop it by the body??

Honestly I am only guessing but I think he realized it when the BP came down he noticed it and thought oh shit.

I don't think anyone deserves to die in a situation like this but I also don't think we know all the facts.

 

[99taws6]

Isn't the dead guy's only known offense failure to pay child support??

He also had an assault and battery where he also shoved a deputy but that was in 1987

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-carolina-details-walter-scott-michael-slager/

 

[Mike1234567]

Honestly I am only guessing but I think he realized it when the BP came down he noticed it and thought oh shit.

I don't think anyone deserves to die in a situation like this but I also don't think we know all the facts.

The officer didn't look back at where the chase first began. He didn't need to because he knew the taser was back there. I reiterate... the video shows the policeman running back without ever looking back... HE ALREADY KNEW THE TASER WAS BACK THERE.

 

[Mike1234567]

He also had an assault and battery where he also shoved a deputy but that was in 1987

South Carolina records reveal details about Walter Scott, man shot by cop Michael Slager - CBS News

Nearly 30 years ago?? Gimme a break!! There have been cops I'd like to beat the ever-loving SHIT out of for being complete pricks but fortunately I kept my cool. Cops are just people... good and bad just like the rest of us.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Isn't the dead guy's only known offense failure to pay child support??

Well unless you are specifically talking about "prior" offenses, I have to presume that running away from an officer carries some kind of penalty....

 

[texas skeeter]

He will get his day in court and a prosecutor will get an opportunity to prove him guilty. I'm sick of people having to prove innocence.

I did notice that the video starts at the most opportune time to support the dead man. Maybe by coincidence, maybe not.

Looking at the situation objectively is not giving the cop a break.

After watching the video numerous times I agree with YG's post. I still don't know all of the facts. But I will say it will be a tough fight for the officer to not get convicted of something. Whether the video was altered or not, A man shown running away from an officer with no visible weapon in his hand and with a 10yd lead gets shot in the back 8 times. We shall see....

 

[Mike1234567]

Well unless you are specifically talking about "prior" offenses, I have to presume that running away from an officer carries some kind of penalty....

So the penalty for running away from a police officer is death? Brownshirts?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

So the penalty for running away from a police officer is death? Brownshirts?

Never said that, only was asked for offenses committed, not the penalties thereof.....

 

[Mike1234567]

Never said that, only was asked for offenses committed, not the penalties thereof.....

Okay, but it seemed to be inferred... "<snip> I have to presume that running away from an officer carries some kind of penalty...."

Of course there's a penalty but it seems to me death by getting shot in the back is a bit extreme. What you wrote (to me) inferred getting shot in the back might be appropriate, in this case, and I completely disagree with that premise.

 

[99taws6]

Nearly 30 years ago?? Gimme a break!! There have been cops I'd like to beat the ever-loving SHIT out of for being complete pricks but fortunately I kept my cool. Cops are just people... good and bad just like the rest of us.

I agree it carries no weight in my eyes but you asked so I provided the facts.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Okay, but it seemed to be inferred... "<snip> I have to presume that running away from an officer carries some kind of penalty...."

Of course there's a penalty but it seems to me death by getting shot in the back is a bit extreme. What you wrote (to me) inferred getting shot in the back might be appropriate, in this case, and I completely disagree with that premise.

I may have been able to word it better, but I never meant that.