# Southern cop shoots man running away in the back..



## guno (Apr 7, 2015)

*North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*

*North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier*


----------



## Preacher (Apr 7, 2015)

Video captures police killing of unarmed black man TheHill

Enjoy prison asshole! That badge won't protect your ass now!


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

Fleeing felon rule...for the 100th time.  Officer attempted non lethal force via tazer. 

Now,  you want to make a valid complaint?  Tampering with evidence by moving the tazer closer to the victim.

That's what is going to sink this guy.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by _Tennessee v. Garner,_ 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."[2]

"A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."

—Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 7, 2015)

guno said:


> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> 
> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier*


Judging before the facts again idiot?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

When I was young, the cop would walk.

Now he will go to prison for life.

The cop is a flight risk, so no bail.  Put him where his mother and wife and daughter can never hug him again.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

The video clearly shows the officer had no fear for his life or others.  Yup, the video is a just view of the event.


----------



## DarkFury (Apr 7, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> ...


*And the guy was running away from the ILLEGAL street purchase of a hand gun. Funny, I thought LIBERALS wanted to STOP those things?*


----------



## Unkotare (Apr 7, 2015)

Another racist troll thread from the racist troll.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

Not by shooting a man dead who was no threat to the cop or anyone else.  The cop will go to prison for life.


----------



## Godboy (Apr 7, 2015)

Shoot him in the back, shoot him in the front... who cares? As long as hes dead and never going to bother anyone again, its a win.


----------



## DarkFury (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Not by shooting a man dead who was no threat to the cop or anyone else.  The cop will go to prison for life.


*Thugs die in thug life. Hell they sing about it. Thug dead, book closed. NEXT?*


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

And the far right reactionary thug racialists are happy.


----------



## hjmick (Apr 7, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > guno said:
> ...




Where do you get your facts?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 7, 2015)

hjmick said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



He doesn't need any, he has his ignorance and stupidity to fall back on.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.

Cold blooded murder. Thank goodness someone captured this. All over a lousy broken tail light. 

I can't believe what I'm looking at.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> 
> Cold blooded murder. Thank goodness someone captured this. All over a lousy broken tail light.
> 
> I can't believe what I'm looking at.


Yeah, shot for the tail light.

Not for resisting arrest, and running from warrants for the lowest crime of all, failure to support children he fathered.

It's all about the tail light, yeah, right.

It is all about karma.

Pay your fuckin' child support, and you don't have these problems.


----------



## Mr. H. (Apr 7, 2015)

He did initially run from the officer. Still, no reason to shoot him in the back 8 times. That's fucked up.


----------



## Papageorgio (Apr 7, 2015)

Disgusting, the cop, needs to be tried by his peers and face his punishment. My heart goes out to man's family.  This guy is another the reason that police officers get a bad name.  

I should wait until a jury hears the case, however this is very disturbing.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Mr. H. said:


> He did initially run from the officer. Still, no reason to shoot him in the back 8 times. That's fucked up.



Probably not.

No excuse for not supporting your children either, but, that don't mean shit, it serves no agenda.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The video clearly shows the officer had no fear for his life or others.  Yup, the video is a just view of the event.




The man who was shot attacked the officer and stripped him of his tazer.

"A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...*Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either  to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.*"

—Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​A valid criticism would be that the officer tampered with evidence.  But the is nothing unlawful in shooting a dangerous fleeing felon...back front or sideways, armed or unarmed,  in most states.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

The man wasn't supporting his family.

That is why he is dead.

Nobody runs from a tail light ticket, tens of thousands fail to pay their child support.

When the cops have a warrant, you take the bust like a man, or, risk getting shot if you resist and run.

Some bad choices led to this, and they started with failure to support children that he brought into this world, and ended with resisting a lawful arrest.


----------



## Gracie (Apr 7, 2015)

What about the black cop that was kneeling right there when the white cop dropped the object? Will he get off?


----------



## Preacher (Apr 7, 2015)

Road wouldn't be defending a cold blooded murderer if the victim wasn't black.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Gracie said:


> What about the black cop that was kneeling right there when the white cop dropped the object? Will he get off?


What about the before and after parts of the video?

There will be a trial, in the meantime, maybe people should learn to support their kids, and not run from warrants.

Or, does the 14th Amendment give people the right to decide which warrants they will submit to, and which they will run from?


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> ...



You don't get killed in cold blood for child support. Have you seen the pictures or the video?

There's no doubt that this cop blew him away for no reason.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Odium said:


> Road wouldn't be defending a cold blooded murderer if the victim wasn't black.


I am not defending the cop, in fact, lying motherfucker, I said it is good this cop will be off the streets.

Does being black grant a right to not support the children you bring into the world, and the right to run from legitimate arrest warrants?

This guy fucked up long before the cop fucked up.

Why do you ignore that part?


----------



## The Professor (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> ...



The reason for the stop is insignificant.  The man was running away, that is trying to escape.  A police officer may use deadly force to prevent an escape, but only if the person is a dangerous felon, so sayeth the SCOTUS.  Being in arrears on child support does not give the officer the right to use deadly force, nor does fleeing to avoid going to jail for non-support. The minor scuffle he had with the officer did not make him a dangerous felon, at least not by any definition of the term that I am familiar with and I have a JD.   The officer had no right to use deadly force to prevent the man's escape. He should be found guilty.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...


He blew him away for running from a warrant after resisting arrest.

A jury will punish him according to law.

Support your kids, and this shit doesn't happen to you.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

The Professor said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...


Agree, and that is what juries are for.

I hope the cop gets just what the law calls for.

And this dead deadbeat got just what karma calls for.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> ...



You don't get killed in cold blood for child support. Have you seen the pictures or the video?

There's no doubt that this cop blew him away for no reason.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)




----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The video clearly shows the officer had no fear for his life or others.  Yup, the video is a just view of the event.
> ...


White would convict him.  Video shows there was no dangerous fleeing suspect, clearly.  Life for the cop, easily.  Better keep his back to the wall at all times.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


>


An edited 27 seconds?

I hope some people learn that even the fastest man can't outrun the slowest bullet.

It is too much to hope deadbeat parents learn to support their kids though.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner would not be defending the cop if the victim were white.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Roadrunner would not be defending the cop if the victim were white.


Death by cop is not the sentence for being a dead beat in child support arrears.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> > Road wouldn't be defending a cold blooded murderer if the victim wasn't black.
> ...


Immaterial.  The cop was bad cop, period.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

I don't know what preceded it, but it seems kid threw something on cop before he run.
There is no excuse for shooting him in the back.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Odium said:
> ...



A jury will decide that, right?

Funny, Bergdahl is innocent of desertion and supporting the enemy until tried and convicted, but you have already convicted this guy.

If I was on the jury, I might well vote the DP for him, after I heard the whole story.

I sure would not convict on a 27 second video alone.


----------



## DarkFury (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


*Dead thug. "When the monkey dies the movie is over".....Joe Bob Williams late movies.*


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

The way I heard it,  the officer used his tazer first,  It either misfired,  or wasn't effective.  The man who was shot then attacked the officer,  either stripping the tazer away,  or knocking it to the ground and was grappling with the officer.  when the officer broke free and went for his gun,  the offender...now a dangerous fleeing felon then attempted to escape again.

That is when the officer,  stripped of his tazer,  resorted to deadly force to prevent escape.

"A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."

—Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​


----------



## Gracie (Apr 7, 2015)

This cop MURDERED that man. Period. I don't give a rats ass if he had 30 kids he didn't help pay for.  Takes two to tango. If the mother can't afford to raise the kids on her own she shoulda kept her fucking legs shut knowing this guy is a deadbeat dad. But he shouldn't be DEAD by being shot in the back 8 fucking times.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




Probably...because he moved the Tazer.  Dumb.  Other than that,  I bet he would walk.

The law is the law...and the fleeing felon rule as modified by under Tennessee v. Garner is the threshold for justified deadly force in most states.  

Don't run from the police,  don't fight with the police.  It seems pretty simple.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

If policemen fear for his life, fine, shoot him. But once he flees policemen is not defending anything.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Gracie said:


> This cop MURDERED that man. Period. I don't give a rats ass if he had 30 kids he didn't help pay for.  Takes two to tango. If the mother can't afford to raise the kids on her own she shoulda kept her fucking legs shut knowing this guy is a deadbeat dad. But he shouldn't be DEAD by being shot in the back 8 fucking times.



I just don't get why he handcuffed the corpse.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> If policemen fear for his life, fine, shoot him. But once he flees policemen is not defending anything.



So he can escape and attack another police officer?  Maybe he kills the next one.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > If policemen fear for his life, fine, shoot him. But once he flees policemen is not defending anything.
> ...



Dunno details. But based on what we got now, it doesn't make sense. Why he would run from one towards the other, it there was the other.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> The way I heard it,  the officer used his tazer first,  It either misfired,  or wasn't effective.  The man who was shot then attacked the officer,  either stripping the tazer away,  or knocking it to the ground and was grappling with the officer.  when the officer broke free and went for his gun,  the offender...now a dangerous fleeing felon then attempted to escape again.
> 
> That is when the officer,  stripped of his tazer,  resorted to deadly force to prevent escape.
> 
> ...



Then I guess a jury will find him innocent.  I think we need to put more police on trial, we would be in many of these situations, why does a law enforcement officer get a review of his police peers only?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> If policemen fear for his life, fine, shoot him. But once he flees policemen is not defending anything.


He is in many cases defending the public.

In this case, an arrest has been made, the cop has been charged, a grand jury will convene, and if the cop is indicted,  a jury will decide his fate.

Is there a problem here?

Or, should we just return to lynching based on internet outrage?


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Time for the press conference: "If I had a son..."


----------



## whitehall (Apr 7, 2015)

Despite the assumption that the Police Officer is guilty it seems that he was charged with a crime and the system works. So what the hell have anarchists been whining about?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Time for the press conference: "If I had a son..."


If Obama had a son, would he be faster than a speeding bullet?

Would he pay his child support?


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Time for the press conference: "If I had a son..."
> ...



Isn't that what leftover campaign funds are for?


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > If policemen fear for his life, fine, shoot him. But once he flees policemen is not defending anything.
> ...



If that's the case, no argument here.

However, I think our cops are too easy on the trigger. Not this case only, most of them. 

Why shoot to kill anyways. Wounding him would prevent many other things.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


How do you shoot to wound?

Have you ever actually seen what a bullet does?

This ain't Roy Rogers, where you just "wing 'em with a flesh wound".

Most likely that was a .40 caliber HP.

A hit in the elbow or wrist can blow enough arteries and veins to bleed a guy out.

Shoot to wound is a hippy dream.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

Shoot to kill is a nightmare.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Apr 7, 2015)

Black racists will riot anyway.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



I have seen it way too many times. I felt it two times.

Sure, you can bleed out from one wound. From eight you bleed much faster. Was it necessary?


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Black racists will riot anyway.



Has anyone called Sharpton yet?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 7, 2015)

The suspect did not "now a dangerous fleeing felon [who] then attempted to escape again."

The video is as good as any eye witness and better than almost all of them.

Once the the motion to suppress the video as evidence is dismissed by the Judge, a plea deal will probably occur.  No defense attorney wants that video in evidence before a jury.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

When you shoot eight times, you aren't protecting the public, you are out to kill.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

The manner in which the cop blew him away and then when the man is  bleeding out he yells at him to put his hands behind his back and handcuffs him the officer appears to be trying to set up a scenario that people would buy into because he knew at this point he was caught on camera. 

Wow. Just wow. 

"After the gunfire, Slager glances at the person taking the video, then talks into his radio.

The cameraman curses, and Slager yells at Scott as sirens wail.

“Put your hands behind your back,” the officer shouts before he handcuffs Scott.

As another lawman runs to Scott’s side.

Scott died there."

North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...




Very true.  I'm just going by what I read.  That when the tazer misfired,  the offender attacked the officer.  The,  when the officer broke free and reached for his gun,  the offender attempted to flee again.  

So the question is...what could have been the offenders plan when he attacked the officer?

He couldn't just hold him and wait for help.  He had to either completely incapacitate the officer,  of kill him,  in order to escape.

There is no third option...except surrender,  which was the best option all along,  and one the offender never chose.

That made the offender a significant risk to other officers.  Which made lethal force an justifiable under the modification to the fleeing felon rule under Tennessee v Garner to prevent his escape.

The idea that shooting someone in the back to prevent their escape is unconscionable is a fallacy born of the Old West.

The job of the police is to protect the lives and well being of the public,  including other officers...not worry about what might or might not be considered fair,  chivalrous,  or gentlemanly.  

That's my take on it.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Black racists will riot anyway.



Most likely, since they think that justice only happens because of how much they break and burn and how loud they cry.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> When you shoot eight times, you aren't protecting the public, you are out to kill.




I didn't see the offender get down on the ground,  put his hands up or even stop running...until he could no longer run.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > Black racists will riot anyway.
> ...



From what I just read they don't want him or any agitators to come round. People just hijack the situation like Sharpton and others.

"Pastor Thomas Dixon, a community activist, said that he is concerned about outsiders coming into the community to incite violence and rallies. He said the outcry of anger so often ends up “tearing down our communities,” and emotions should be diverted to something more constructive than violence.

“Good people get caught up with crazy people,” he said. “The smart reaction is to just gather and peacefully let your voice be heard without any foolishness or craziness.” 

North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Yet a citizen cannot use that very defense in most states Missourian.  It is considered manslaughter at a minimum.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > When you shoot eight times, you aren't protecting the public, you are out to kill.
> ...



I suppose waiting until backup arrived before engaging the person was not an option.  Oh wait, we were knee deep in cops within seconds of the shooting.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...



That is true.  But there is a difference between the responsibility and training of an officer and that of a citizen.  A citizen is limited to the immediate threats,  not apprehension or future theoretical threats.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



I'll have to rewatch the video,  but I only remember seeing one other officer...and there is no telling if he/she was visible at the time of the shooting.

Officers have to make split second decisions,  while we have the luxury of second guessing them for months after the fact.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> ...


Notice how the lefties turn it into about being about a tail light.   They also missed the part about Michael Brown attacking Darren Wilson.  It's about convenience to them.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...



Was it necessary?

I don't know, I wasn't there.

Would the cop have been reprimanded for letting him get away, if he had done nothing?

Is there a policy in place on when and why you shoot at a man who has physically resisted arrest?

Did the man say something we cannot hear, like a threat?

We do not have the information to make a decision, that is why we have grand juries and juries.

The cop may have only been arrested to protect him and placate the public.

We do not know these things.

What we do know, is the guy was a deadbeat dad not paying his child support.

I won't grieve for him.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



I'm no fucking leftie.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



When it quacks like a duck . .


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...





I spent several years garnishing deadbeat dads. Every time I got new garnishment papers and found another one it made my day. I had two file cabinets of nothing but garnishments on deadbeat dads. They ranged from cashiers to managers to executives. 

Deadbeat dads need to pay their child support.

They DON'T need to be killed. 

Now the children don't have a dad and no way to get child  support from their dad. 

Their dad is dead. 

Not because he didn't pay his child support. Because some stupid cop killed him. 

I know what it's like for your dad to be dead. Mine died of cancer in 2001 and I still to this day miss him very much. I got to grow up with my dad.

Those children won't have that luxury.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Missourian said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



I'm reading one of the first statements when the officer was still trying to spin that he felt threatened. Back up came after the shooting from what I can tell.

Bottom line is that there was an eyewitness who kept filming.

And Scott was 10 feet away running for his freaking life when he started firing from what I can tell from the stills but the officer still claimed that when he fired seven times as the man was running away from him that he felt "threatened".

Yet all shots were in his back. And he paused before he hit him with the eighth shot.

Here's another link for you Missourian.

Attorney North Charleston police officer felt threatened before fatal shooting - Post and Courier


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Go blow dead bears asshole.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Was it necessary?
> 
> I don't know, I wasn't there.
> 
> ...



I am not disagreeing with you on most of the things you said.

What I can't get over is shooting in the back someone that is running away. Even if cop had legal right to do so, and I don't know if he did or not, I don't see justification in that. Honor neither.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



Go fuck yourself bitch.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Here's the sequence I've got in stills at DM.






Here's where the cop starts to draw his weapon






Opens fire here. This is being threatened? Kiss my ass. 






Eighth shot to take him out.






Cop is charged with black man s murder after opening fire eight times and shooting him in the back as he ran away... and saying he did it because he felt threatened Daily Mail Online


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Here's the sequence I've got in stills at DM.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Problem is your stills don't show what happened prior to the first one.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Call me a leftie and it's fighting words buddy. You can call me a bitch, a douche bag, whatever you want.

But call me a leftie and I'll never forgive you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...


Since I don't care about you, I don't care what you do toward me.  I don't need your forgiveness nor care for it to start with.  Don't ask like anything you do is of value to me.

By the way, as far as the bitch comment, I repeat, if it quacks like a duck . . .


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

Whole video... New York Times

The officer shoots him, then runs over to him, handcuffs him, then runs back 15 feet to where they began, picks up the taser, then runs back to where the dead victim is, and drops the taser to the ground next to him.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Whole video... New York Times
> 
> The officer shoots him, then runs over to him, handcuffs him, then runs back 15 feet to where they began, picks up the taser, then runs back to where the dead victim is, and drops the taser to the ground next to him.



Holy toledo! I'm on dial up and it takes 3 days to load a video so this is gold what you're telling me.

Thank you. And wow just wow.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



 Seriously if you want to think of me as a leftie by all means do so. But try decaff. It's just a message board.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



I don't drink coffee.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...




A police officer can legally shoot a dangerous fleeing felon in the back to prevent their escape in most states.  A citizen has to be in fear for life or grievous bodily at the time of the shooting.  An officer only must feel threatened during the encounter,  and believe that allowing the dangerous individual to escape would put at risk the lives or safety of himself or others.

It's a different standard that that of a citizen.

I've posted it a few times already...the constitutionality of the Fleeing Felon Rule was affirmed in a modified form in Tennessee v Garner. 

This incident absolutely fits that threshold.

IOW,  an officer is justified in using lethal force,  including shooting a fleeing suspect from behind IF the offender has committed a violent felony and the officer believes the offender is a danger to himself or others.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)




----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Call me a leftie and it's fighting words buddy. You can call me a bitch, a douche bag, whatever you want.
> 
> But call me a leftie and I'll never forgive you.




  That's funny.

Truth is,  I agree with you 99.7% of the time.  

Americano too,  and Saveliberty.

P.S.-  Can't Admin fix these never-ending quote strings?

I miss Vbulletin.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Seriously if you want to think of me as a leftie by all means do so. But try decaff. It's just a message board.



Look leftie... LOL, Kiddin'

Dial up? WTF?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...



He is dead because he resisted arrest and ran.

Now his kids will probably get a big settlement.

Most of us have dead dads.

Mine supported me.

There is no right to resist arrest and run away.

I bet the cop gets off, and we get riots.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...


For all you know, the dead guy could have said "I'm going get a gun and come back and kill you".

Nobody here is on any jury in this case.

I will never sympathize with any deadbeat dad running away after resisting arrest.

Tough shit.

When are fools going to learn you cannot outrun a bullet.

Another case of a long string of bad decisions costing a fool his life.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> ...


It's a white cop and dead black person.  To many, that's all that's need to find the cop guilty.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Not by shooting a man dead who was no threat to the cop or anyone else.  The cop will go to prison for life.


Were you there?


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 7, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously if you want to think of me as a leftie by all means do so. But try decaff. It's just a message board.
> ...





Middle of nowhere. Not even cell phone service in my region. This old computer is something out of the Flintstones and if I pedal really fast I can get something to load after I've done the laundry and walked the dog.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 7, 2015)

guno said:


> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> 
> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier*


You lost your argument at cracker unless you want to change man to n*gger.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...


Same here.

I got hughenet, but it is too expensive, and they have a bandwidth limit that really pisses me off.

Moving before too long, and dropping them, and internet altogether.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 7, 2015)

Unkotare said:


> Another racist troll thread from the racist troll.


You never heard of the Constitutional right to resist arrest and run when a cop tries to arrest a person on outstanding warrants?

I think it is in the 14th Amendment.


----------



## JFK_USA (Apr 7, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> The man wasn't supporting his family.
> 
> That is why he is dead.
> 
> ...



And we find why cop supporters should never be taken seriously. They will defend a cop shooting an unarmed black man 8 times in the back.


----------



## bucs90 (Apr 7, 2015)

I defend good cops...which is 99.9% of them. I ppersonally think this shooting is NOT justified...and the charge is appropriate.  Bes entitled to.his day in court. But looks like murder to me.


Sadly...cop.haters will use this as their Area 51 smoking gun case now. PROOF that all past shootings are bad.

They'll smear all cops for this....just like my neighbor who wore a red t shirt should be blamed for all murders committed by the Bloods gang while wearing red.




JFK_USA said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The man wasn't supporting his family.
> ...


----------



## Missourian (Apr 7, 2015)

JFK_USA said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The man wasn't supporting his family.
> ...




I'd defend him if he shot a white man in the back,  as long as it was legal and justifiable.

Unfortunately,  it would never make national news...there would no one to be outraged.


----------



## Chris (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JFK_USA said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...


Bullshit.
It would be big news in any case.
Thank God for the video.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Chris said:


> Bullshit.



This single word defines the sum total of every post you've ever made,  Kirk.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Yes, so much for prolife. Having more kids than you can pay for, 
where you run from a cop to avoid getting jailed for back child support,
and it ends up getting you killed anyway.  Where is the prolife support for 
parents, kids and families where it's needed? Why is this whole system set up to fail?


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

JFK_USA said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The man wasn't supporting his family.
> ...



It can be a case of both sides being equally wrong and responsible for their part.

When Trayvon Martin got killed, don't you think it was both his fault and Zimmerman's for getting into that fight?
Both had backgrounds that clearly led to escalating the conflict into aggression.

Neither person in either case deserved the "death penalty"
But as for blame for the confrontation that went wrong, you can see there were problems on BOTH sides.

Why can't it be mutual responsibility for getting into the mess to begin with?
What is this fantasy that conflicts have to make one side completely right and the other completely wrong? What is wrong with admitting mutual fault?

Does it make the killing any "less wrong" to admit there were faults on both sides
for why these situations arose that ended badly?


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

emilynghiem said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...




It's called TANF...colloquially known as welfare.

The WIFE filed for support.  Men can't force women to have abortions.  They can use protection.  If they don't,  they have an obligation to support the children they father.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 8, 2015)

NO ONE SHOULD BE SHOT IN THE BACK, PERIOD.

no excuses.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

Chris said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JFK_USA said:
> ...



It would not be as publicized or propagandized, as it is with Black or Latino communities the media will back.

Here is a case of Travis Allen, a white young man killed in a controversial case that led to a huge lawsuit:
Two Bullets in the Back Houston Press

Most people, even in Houston where it happened, wouldn't remember Sheryl Seymour, mentioned here:
One in three police shootings involve unarmed people - Houston Chronicle
although her killing led to historic changes in how police involve crisis training and intervention for the mentally ill

More people would remember Joe Campos Torres and Pedro Oregon, due to prolonged public protests
and demand for accountability and answer from the police:
Murder of Joe Campos Torres - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

It draws more publicity in the media when the focus is targeting race to sell the hype.
Even with George Zimmerman, the media played him up as WHITE and played down his Latino roots, because black vs. white sold better in inciting more action, outrage, and public pressure on govt all the way to the White House.

With Latino vs. Black, you can get some hype if one of them is a Cop or Illegal immigrant. But people aren't as sympathetic, similar to Black on Black violence. Take for example the case of Rodney Johnson that people have forgotten by now, although this raised critical issues with illegal immigrants with criminal deportation records:
Rodney Joseph Johnson - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
If this cop had been white, shot seven times in the face by an illegal immigrant, this case would be cited to this day to push for deportation; but because he was Black and the shooter was Latino, the political backers of Black/Latino communities are not in a position to go up in the media against each other.  It's not like Black/White racism that can be used for political points.

Maybe at some point, if the media burns out people's brains from reacting to black/white politics with cops, we'll focus on issues of crime, violence, police and govt abuses IN GENERAL and quit hyping the race card as bait.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Nobody, male or female, "has to have sex" when they can't afford children should pregnancy occur.
Since both Carson and Obama actually AGREE on microlending as more sensible support to help people,
how soon can we see welfare replaced with programs that require recipients to pay back through a business plan, similar to the training that comes with microloan programs.  That way, people can receive counseling with their FIRST child they can't afford, and require educational and financial planning before having any more kids.


----------



## Borillar (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Time for the press conference: "If I had a son..."
> ...


They ain't gonna get much child support out of him now, are they?


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

emilynghiem said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...




Would you mind posting a link to the fundamentals of the microlending proposal?  I am not acquainted with the concept as it pertains to welfare and family planning.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Care4all said:


> NO ONE SHOULD BE SHOT IN THE BACK, PERIOD.
> 
> no excuses.




How about an escaping convicted serial killer?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 8, 2015)

I think referring to whites as crackers is like whites referring to blacks as *******. Kind of racist!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 8, 2015)

And I believe the cop should go down for murdering this man in cold blood.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

JFK_USA said:


> And we find why cop supporters should never be taken seriously. They will defend a cop shooting an unarmed black man 8 times in the back.


With the logic that anyone running away is a danger to police and citizens.

Land of the free.

Edit...We wouldn't be having this discussion if the video didn't exist, I think that's pretty clear.


----------



## J.E.D (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my heavens! I just saw the stills at the Daily Mail. Unfreaking real.
> ...


You're a piece of shit


----------



## J.E.D (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


Where did you get your law degree? The fleeing felon rule clearly does not apply in this case. The suspect has to be a CLEAR danger to the officer or the public to warrant the use of deadly force. He was unarmed and shot in the back.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Apr 8, 2015)

Matthew said:


> I think referring to whites as crackers is like whites referring to blacks as *******. Kind of racist!



Yeah.  I was just thinking about that over coffee at ****** Barrel!


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> JFK_USA said:
> 
> 
> > And we find why cop supporters should never be taken seriously. They will defend a cop shooting an unarmed black man 8 times in the back.
> ...



And that brings up a whole other topic. I was just telling my guys at work on Monday, to please keep in mind that today we have to always remember that the public could be videoing us (workers) and our behavior at any time.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Apr 8, 2015)

Lying in the after-action report makes it impossible to defend this one. Woulda liked to have seen the whole video to understand events leading up to the shooting. But as happened in Ferguson, if the state law says after physically assaulting an officer lethal force is authorized, that could save the officer. Not like he woke up that morning wanting to kill somebody. Events of the traffic stop and fleeing suspect escalated things to their conclusion. 

Charging the officer with murder is ridiculous though. Probably just an overreaction in light of the Ferguson riots. Voluntary manslaughter at worst.


----------



## NoTeaPartyPleez (Apr 8, 2015)

*Hopefully by now you've all seen the video.  Scott was stopped for a broken tail light.  The policeman tazed him and Scott turned and started to run.  Cop shoots him 8 times in the back killing him.  The tazer is at the cop's feet.  Scott did not try to steal it, as the cop later stated.  

The cop then goes up to Scott's dead body, handcuffs his hands and throws the tazer down on the ground next to him.  Then lies in his statement to the police department.

The person who shot the video is the true 2nd Amendment hero.  His weapon of choice to hold government tyranny at bay against its own citizens was not a gun, but a cell phone camera.  *


----------



## xdangerousxdavex (Apr 8, 2015)

another white cop killed another black man is like anecdote
but not funny


----------



## skookerasbil (Apr 8, 2015)

Saw the vid.....definitely legit. Cop needs to go down for murder plain and simple.

But CNN and the other shit-stain media outlets are already having guests on pushing the whole mantra of white cops killing blacks..........and of course linking it to Ferguson with lots of Ferguson pics which have zero to do with anything. Surely all the racist haters are heading to this city to stir up shit. Ghey.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

> *The person who shot the video is the true 2nd Amendment hero. His weapon of choice to hold government tyranny at bay against its own citizens was not a gun, but a cell phone camera.*



Wait,.......... what ?


----------



## Hutch Starskey (Apr 8, 2015)

The comments on this thread are just sickening. What freakin' lowlifes.
How anyone could even try to defend this officer's action is unconsionable.

At least the authorities took it seriously.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Unkotare said:


> Another racist troll thread from the racist troll.



I LOOOOVE when someone sees a video of someone being shot in the back by a police officer and the first thing he thinks is "wadda ya mean...cracker?"


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

NoTeaPartyPleez said:


> *The cop then goes up to Scott's dead body, handcuffs his hands and throws the tazer down on the ground next to him.  Then lies in his statement to the police department. *


The really worrying thing is that the policeman who was there when the taser was dropped apparently didn't say anything. Well I'd be worried.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/statutes/statutelookup.pl?statute=15a-401
*SUBCHAPTER IV. ARREST.*

GS 15A-401

(2)  A law-enforcement officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subdivision (1) of this subsection only when it is or appears to be reasonably necessary thereby:

a.  To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force;

b.  To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay; or

c.  To prevent the escape of a person from custody imposed upon him as a result of conviction for a felony.


----------



## Muhammed (Apr 8, 2015)

The pig got caught lying and then staging the scene.

This is a clear case of murder.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

"the fleeing felon rule as modified by under Tennessee v. Garner is the threshold for justified deadly force in most states" will be ignored by the jury regardless of the judge's instructions


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

The copy will go to prison for a long time.


----------



## Muhammed (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The copy will go to prison for a long time.


I doubt it. I bet the DA will let the cop cop a plea and get a light sentence.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

NoTeaPartyPleez said:


> *Hopefully by now you've all seen the video.  Scott was stopped for a broken tail light.  The policeman tazed him and Scott turned and started to run.  Cop shoots him 8 times in the back killing him.  The tazer is at the cop's feet.  Scott did not try to steal it, as the cop later stated.
> 
> The cop then goes up to Scott's dead body, handcuffs his hands and throws the tazer down on the ground next to him.  Then lies in his statement to the police department.
> 
> The person who shot the video is the true 2nd Amendment hero.  His weapon of choice to hold government tyranny at bay against its own citizens was not a gun, but a cell phone camera.  *


Justice served with an ObamaPhone.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Muhammed said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The copy will go to prison for a long time.
> ...


I hope not.


----------



## blastoff (Apr 8, 2015)

So one might say this cracker cop shooting a black man to death is the opposite of, say, the completely exonerated white cop in Ferguson who shot the criminal thug ****** to death.

Hmmm...cracker but no n-word.  Got it.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

skookerasbil said:


> But CNN and the other shit-stain media outlets are already having guests on pushing the whole mantra of white cops killing blacks..........and of course linking it to Ferguson with lots of Ferguson pics which have zero to do with anything. Surely all the racist haters are heading to this city to stir up shit. Ghey.



Yes despite the growing number of videos, complaints and abuses this shooting has nothing to do with police abuse et al.  

Every incident is an isolated one...over and over....state by state...day by day. uh ok...

Its not a mantra...white cops are killing blacks.  Maybe to you "mantra" means "actual events"


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

He'll get a light sentence and they'll determine there is "no evidence of racism".

They should check under his bed...I'm sure theres some racism there with his finger prints on it because thats how racism works.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

blastoff said:


> So one might say this cracker cop shooting a black man to death is the opposite of, say, the completely exonerated white cop in Ferguson who shot the criminal thug ****** to death.
> 
> Hmmm...cracker but no n-word.  Got it.


Michael Brown was running at the cop full tilt after hurting the officer just moments before.  This one was running away and was no danger to anyone.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 8, 2015)

The cop will walk or get a slap on the wrist for 'putting down' a thug.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> The cop will walk or get a slap on the wrist for 'putting down' a thug.


Oh? And what makes the guy a "thug?" Not being up to date on his child support payments or the broken tail light?


----------



## Hutch Starskey (Apr 8, 2015)

Faun said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > The cop will walk or get a slap on the wrist for 'putting down' a thug.
> ...



I'm sure you know this already but I'll say it for those who may not.

THUG=N****R

The rephrasing allows those so inclined to say what they mean without seeming overt.
Those similarly inclined get the message clearly.

Simply swap the words and it's clear as day.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Pretty much straight kool-aid from what I've seen.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



Not that either.  Now go pucker up and keep eating the Liberal shitburger you've been fed.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



To protect ALL of us police need to be held accountable for discharging their firearms.  Otherwise, unless a camera is present, he resisted is a stay out of jail free card every time.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

emilynghiem said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...




The Great Society was set up to ensure a dependent Democratic Party base.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



For someone who doesn't care about the opinions of others, you get very second grade in a big hurry.  Perhaps you need to actually review the histories of people you automatically label incorrectly.  You might be able to gain credibility with those of us that really matter here.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?


Huh? He shot a clearly unarmed man in the back. What else do you need to know?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...




The system is working.

The guy has been arrested, charged, held without bail, and it will be in the hands of our legal system.

What more can one expect?


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

Some more 'backing up a brother'...?

_*Attorney: North Charleston police officer felt threatened before fatal shooting*

Attorney North Charleston police officer felt threatened before fatal shooting - Post and Courier

 Of the two complaints in his file, one dealt with a resident’s allegation of unnecessary use of force. 

Slager went to the man’s Delaware Avenue home in September 2013 to investigate a burglary. When the resident opened the door for Slager, the burglary victim yelled that he wasn’t the suspect, the documents stated. 
 The man also insisted that he wasn’t the perpetrator, but he later told internal investigators that Slager threatened to use a Taser against him if he didn’t come outside. When the man followed the order and stepped outside, he said Slager “Tased (him) for no reason and ... slammed him and dragged him.” 
 But another officer there said Slager had been forced to use the device during a struggle. The investigators exonerated Slager of wrongdoing. _​


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...


Then why does every white person I know with a kid on medicaid vote Republican?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...


Just not politically correct.  Don't confuse the two as that proves your low level of mentality retard.  

Like I said, if it quacks like a duck . . . 

You don't matter to anyone that matters.  If you do matter to them, they don't.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?
> ...


I need to know whether you actually read my post. Did you?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?
> ...


The laws and procedures concerning a fleeing person who resisted a lawful arrest on lawful warrants, and the results of the grand jury and jury system.

Is that too much to wait for?

Perhaps he should be lynched by a mob?

Would that satisfy you?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...



Your one example is the exception.  Why is the black bastard birth rate over 70%?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Borillar said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


They weren't getting any anyway.

For all you know, his kids might never had even met him.

I taught a lot of kids that had never seen their fathers even one time.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?



Because he didnt shoot anyone and police are expected to lie to protect their own.  Its the blue line and its so widely accepted that no one cares


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> The laws and procedures concerning a fleeing person who resisted a lawful arrest on lawful warrants, and the results of the grand jury and jury system.
> 
> Is that too much to wait for?
> 
> ...


These laws?


_*SUBCHAPTER IV. ARREST.*_

_ GS 15A-401_

_ (2) A law-enforcement officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subdivision (1) of this subsection only when it is or appears to be reasonably necessary thereby:_

_ a. To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force;_

_ b. To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay; or_

_ c. To prevent the escape of a person from custody imposed upon him as a result of conviction for a felony. _​


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...





Better question, why are whites catching up fast?


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Lying in the after-action report makes it impossible to defend this one. Woulda liked to have seen the whole video to understand events leading up to the shooting. But as happened in Ferguson, if the state law says after physically assaulting an officer lethal force is authorized, that could save the officer. Not like he woke up that morning wanting to kill somebody. Events of the traffic stop and fleeing suspect escalated things to their conclusion.
> 
> Charging the officer with murder is ridiculous though. Probably just an overreaction in light of the Ferguson riots. Voluntary manslaughter at worst.


Expect burning and looting.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...



I guess the trashy whites have learned that all they need to do is squirt out bastards to get more money.  Very little difference between the two groups.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Because he didnt shoot anyone and police are expected to lie to protect their own.  Its the blue line and its so widely accepted that no one cares


So it seems.

Rather you than me to put up with such a situation.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> The system is working.
> 
> The guy has been arrested, charged, held without bail, and it will be in the hands of our legal system.
> 
> What more can one expect?



Exactly.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The copy will go to prison for a long time.


How can that be, if the jury ignores the judge's instructions as you just stated above?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Apr 8, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > guno said:
> ...



  That laws only for white folks.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


 oh quit being a drama queen.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> The system is working.
> 
> The guy has been arrested, charged, held without bail, and it will be in the hands of our legal system.
> 
> What more can one expect?


A Grand Jury mockery that will return no true bill.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The laws and procedures concerning a fleeing person who resisted a lawful arrest on lawful warrants, and the results of the grand jury and jury system.
> ...


Well he's black. So that makes him imminently dangerous.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...




A conviction...but we all know how this is going to end.  He wont be convicted and then people will go back to pretending that we have a just legal system


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The system is working.
> ...


I thought he was already charged


----------



## shikaki (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



You at the very least least appear to be a sociopath, at the very most a psychopath.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...




"Huh? He shot a clearly unarmed man in the back. What else do you need to know?"


The Queenship is already taken.


----------



## August West (Apr 8, 2015)

What did we learn here? The best weapon against tyranny is a cell phone camera, not a gun.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 8, 2015)

So this officer pulls his taser first (nonlethal force), obviously the right choice on a child support deadbeat dad.  When it fails he moves to a gun with the dad over fifteen feet away?  Fires eight times?  Backup arrives less than 60 seconds later.  If this is considered reasonable use of force by police, they need to change it.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> I thought he was already charged


You are right, my mistake.


----------



## hangover (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...


He won't get the death penalty, but he WILL be convicted. If not, there will be Rodney King riots in every city in the U.S.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

hangover said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Yeah, then the focus can be on the riots and not that another person was gunned down by a cop.

Trust me, this guy will get a slap on the wrist so people can chant "the system is working" and he'll probably have a legal fund started by fellow bigots to help him out.


----------



## shikaki (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



I guess cops would get their ass kicked if they couldn't shoot people.  Thank god for the 2nd amendment..


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

How do they know the victim was trying to take the cops stungun?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

shikaki said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



“Simply put, white cops are afraid of black men. We don’t talk about it, we pretend it doesn’t exist, we claim “color blindness,” we say white officers treat black men the same way they treat white men. But that’s a lie. In fact, the bigger, the darker the black man the greater the fear. The African-American community knows this. Hell, most whites know it. Yet, even though it’s a central, if not the defining ingredient in the makeup of police racism, white cops won’t admit it to themselves, or to others.”
-Norm Stamper (former Chief of police Seattle)


----------



## hangover (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> hangover said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Granted, it only takes one moron to get a hung jury. But if that happens there will be a retrial. In the mean time most cities will burn like L.A. and Ferguson. Two cops were shot in Ferguson, businesses burned, looted.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

shikaki said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



That's because cops are trained to restrain themselves until otherwise necessary.  Thugs aren't.  That's why they are thugs.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> shikaki said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


There's not one black man that scares me.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > shikaki said:
> ...


Sure.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > shikaki said:
> ...




Then you're an idiot who doesnt have the normal abilities humans use to determine fight or flight.

Which is impossible...so you're lying and I dont know why


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I'm sorry, I should have said BOY.  If you're one of them, you don't scare me.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Its not even that. Think about it. Why would he even respond to my post that way if he was secure? Its obvious he is frightened. Hes is one of those white boys that cant even look a Black man in the eye without turning pink then red with fright.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



How is responding to your false claim that whites are scared of blacks mean I'm frightened?  

I've yet to meet one willing to look me in the eye.  Blacks don't go about that alone.  Remember, three on one is n*gger fun.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Apr 8, 2015)

guno said:


> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*



Irony:   
Mindless partisan bigots such as yourself believe the state should have a monopoly on force.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

M14 Shooter said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> ...



You should stick to what you believe and leave the mind reading to psychics


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.

Right at this moment, it appears this officers actions, has caused grave harm to the credibility of police officers throughout the nation.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.
> 
> Right at this moment, it appears this officers actions, has caused grave harm to the credibility of police officers throughout the nation.



So one reduces credibility for all?


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

Hmmm...not sure what the issue is.....the cop who did the shooting is being held and charged with murder.....so what is the issue....?


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.
> ...




Since his buddy backed up his story it doesnt seem far fetched does it?


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Hmmm...not sure what the issue is.....the cop who did the shooting is being held and charged with murder.....so what is the issue....?




I believe the dead guy being shot by a cop 8 times is the issue.  Before this scum bag officer knew that he was recorded he told a very familiar story. That somebody was wild and reckless and tried to hurt him and therefore his life was in danger and so only in last resort in defense of his own life he reluctantly fired his service weapon.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



So ALL police officers nationwide lose credibility for what one did?

Should I think all black people live in government housing because all I see living in the govnerment housing in my city are black?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...


Wasnt my claim nor was it false. The fact that the police chief said white cops were afraid of Black men most have touched your emotions. You were the only one to react to it. Typical give away when the truth hurts. If white cops are afraid and they have guns and legal authority you must be petrified being just a little white boy with no authority.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Cops already lost credibility long ago. This isnt the first time they have been caught lying.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



If you accept the claim, there is no difference than if you had said it yourself.  

Like a said, no n*gger scares me including you boy.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm...not sure what the issue is.....the cop who did the shooting is being held and charged with murder.....so what is the issue....?
> ...




and he is now under arrest and facing murder charges....the system seems to be working.....right?  But let's not give up an opporotunity to burn out some more businesses...shall we?


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...




And before that criminals lost their credibility......


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> The cop will walk or get a slap on the wrist for 'putting down' a thug.


The cop was the thug, as are those defending his thuggish ways.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> How come there is no outrage for the other police who attended the scene and apparently backed up Slager's story about the taser and CPR?


That will happen.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Of course I accept the police chiefs claim. I just corrected you when you said I made the claim.

Of course you are scared. I intimidate you online with ease. It would be fun to see how redfaced you get around Blacks in real life.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Apr 8, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...




You're right. 

Whites don't get gunned down for non-capital and/or non-violent crimes.

This man had not been tried or convicted of a crime and was running away when he was shot several times - in the back.

If he had been white, he would be in jail, waiting for a trial.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Thats what these cops are. Criminals. So I agree with your statement.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



If you accept it, there is no difference than if you had made it.  

Why don't we test your theory boy?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...




Should you? No

Do you?  Yes


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


There is a difference monkey. I didnt make the claim. The police chief made it.

We dont have to test theories when its already a proven fact.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Since 100% of those I see living in the Section 8 housing in my city are black,  it's not an assumption but proof based on my experience.  Should I think differently than what I see.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

Just like I did in the Zimmerman and Brown cases, I will wait until the facts come out in trial, but this seems to look like a case of excessive force and possibly misconduct.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Seems to be working because a guy is charged with murder for clearly shooting someone in the back?  Thats pretty open and shut and isnt an extraordinary example...but watch this guy get a slap on the wrist and then you can come back and tell me how the system is working again


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



When you accepted it, there is no difference than if you made it yourself.  If I quote someone, what I'm doing is saying this is what I would have said had this person not said it first.  

Proven theories are called laws.  Things that haven't been proven are called theories.  

Scared?  Sounds like it.  I offered you the chance to prove your claim and who refuses to do so?  You coward.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.
> ...




ONE???

Apparently, you have not been reading the news. 

Blacks are constantly illegally shot by cops. And the cops get away with it. It would appear that this time will be different but, even though he's been charged with first degree murder, he'll get a light sentence. 

And of course, if the shooter had been a Black civilian, he'd get the death penalty.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


100%? 
What city do you live in boy? White people work section 8 like its a job.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Luddly Neddite said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...




Remember the report in Fergueson about the police pulling over, arresting and charging blacks with minor crimes?  Just remember the people who said "big deal" and also remember that this guy was pulled over for a tail light.  Sentence?   Death.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



See?  Now tell me again about the unfairness of broad brushing...then present your defense for broad brushing.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



People in Ferguson, MO said Darren Wilson being charged was an open and shut case.  You know, all those witnesses that said Michael Brown had his hands up then later recanted their story.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Ha, but if he doesn't get slapped on the wrist and in fact goes to jail, you won't be admitting you were wrong I guarantee that.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Just because you are too dumb to put what you think in your own words dont assume everyone else is like that especially someone like me thats your intellectual superior. You claimed I made the quote monkey. That means you are claiming that Norm Stamper did not make the quote. He has it in his book which means your flea ridden ass is wrong again.

Offering me a chance to make you piss yourself online is not a challenge. You are safe on the internet. Thats why you only talk to Black people "tough" on the internet. Youre safe.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

PredFan said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



The slap on the wrist will be a light ass sentence...Trust.  If its not, understand that will be the exception and not the rule


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



The broad brush was made by stating that this cop reduced credibility for all cops.  You had no problem with that yet when you claim someone else does it, suddenly it's wrong.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



This one however, has video evidence.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You're the one that quoted someone else then says I'm stupid for quoting someone else.  When you used the quote, you made the claim whether the words are originally yours or not.


----------



## Papageorgio (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> hangover said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



From my understanding the cops original version is full of lies from when the video started onward, my guess is his story has lies before the video started, I don't see a hand slap, I see prison time, however I could be wrong.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Dude did you just join today?  You act like broad brushing blacks is new and unusual.

You're trying to accuse me of doing the same thing you did.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



That's what you progressives tell yourselves in order to maintain your political dogma despite reality. It would be different if you could back it up with something other than left wing blogs.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...


Ferguson, MO supposedly had many witnesses which is the same as a video.  Many of them recanted later saying they weren't there but were expressing what someone else told them.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


No monkey. The issue is not if I agree. You claimed I made a quote someone else made. You got busted lying again like your pink timid type typically do when cornered out of fear.  Thats why youre stupid. Not because I agree you are a pussy and afraid of Black guys.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

Papageorgio said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > hangover said:
> ...



You have to understand too that to the progressives here ANYTHING but life or the death penalty would be concidered a slap on the wrist.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



You act like broad brushing cops is new and unusual.  

When I see 100% of the Section 8 housing filled with blacks, am I supposed to say it's not 100% in order to appease those who get their feelings hurt with the experience I have.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

PredFan said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Oh so here is where you link up to the "reality" that I'm ignoring that shows cops are routinly jailed for their crimes.

Go ahead...I'll wait.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Borillar said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...




Oh.


saveliberty said:


> So this officer pulls his taser first (nonlethal force), obviously the right choice on a child support deadbeat dad.  When it fails he moves to a gun with the dad over fifteen feet away?  Fires eight times?  Backup arrives less than 60 seconds later.  If this is considered reasonable use of force by police, they need to change it.


Its only reasonable to use a taser with a noncompliant citizen. I don't know if that was the case or not, its hardly relevant here as the man was clearly not a threat when murdered.

I know a so called " deadbeat" dad. His son had been living with him for two years when his ex had a warrant out out for failure to pay child support for those same two years for the very same son. The child support order was still active from when the son was living was his mother. The father was up to date on all payments up till when his son moved in with him, but lacked the money to get a lawyer to have the child support order ended. Plus his ex was a horrible person obviously


----------



## shikaki (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Does society hold criminals and cops to the same


Papageorgio said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > hangover said:
> ...




With all the recent incidents, the jury may make an example of him and provide the death sentence.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I've offered you a chance to prove your claim about my fear of blacks.  YOU refused.  That makes you the pussy.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



So let me understand...Are you back to defending broad brushing everyone or is this you opposing it again?


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



No, it's not the same, not at all. A video cannot recant.


----------



## Hutch Starskey (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.
> ...


That can't be as we all know that standard 
only applies to blacks.


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



No dumbass, YOU claim it will be the exception and not the rule. YOU need to back it up. I cannot prove a negative.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



It's not broadbrushing when my experience supports what I claim.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Being tough online doesnt prove anything. You are a pussy that would piss yourself in person. We all know in person you just turn red if you met me. That explains why you lied and said I made the claim the police chief made. Why did you lie pussy?


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



In practical reality it does reduce their credibility, like it or not. If he is convicted, the judge can help restore credibility in the system with a fair sentence of 25 to life


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


The only experience you have is getting your ass kicked by Black guys. Give us a break!


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...




Ironic aint it


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

PredFan said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...




Yeah but you can prove that cops go to jail all the time for their crimes.,,,now you're looking for a way out


----------



## PredFan (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



I never made that claim dumbass, I'm waiting for you to stop dodging and prove YOUR claim.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

PredFan said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...




So lets look at it again....Heres the quote:



PredFan said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



What is the reality that Im ignoring?


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> So one reduces credibility for all?


More the story the police produced before the video appeared reduces credibility for all where police word is the only evidence.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Why do you have to be such a....., well I won't say it, everyone knows you are what you are.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Dominant Black man?  Genes boy. Its all in the genes.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This certainly appears to be an open and shut case, unless some new evidence comes forward.
> ...



It shouldn't, but unfortunately due to the mass media's distribution everywhere of this story, officers everywhere will be affected.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Hmmm...not sure what the issue is.....the cop who did the shooting is being held and charged with murder.....so what is the issue....?



That's a good point. Earlier I already heard a group yelling the inevitable "No-Justice-N-Peace-!!" cliche chant.
He's been arrested, and charged. The process will now move forward in the normal fashion. That's all that can be done at this point.


----------



## guno (Apr 8, 2015)

Unkotare said:


> Another racist troll thread from the racist troll.




And you never fail to show up dripping poo


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm...not sure what the issue is.....the cop who did the shooting is being held and charged with murder.....so what is the issue....?
> ...



You DO know what the "normal fashion" is when it comes to convicting cops dont you?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I'm referring to the legal process. This being the system where we grant a charged individual their day in court.
Hopefully these people and you are not calling for the man to be dragged from his cell and lynched in the public square.


----------



## TyroneSlothrop (Apr 8, 2015)




----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...


That would be pretty cool.  We have it on video that he shot the guy. Why waste taxpayers money with a trial?


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



I asked you if you know what the normal fashion is when it comes to convicting cops?

Because you seem to believe that people should wait and see...but if you know what the "normal fashion" is we can predict it pretty easily


----------



## guno (Apr 8, 2015)

The good thing he won't get out of prison  alive, he was filmed red handed and then trying to plant something near the victim, shooting someone in the back 8 times just won't cut it as self defense, the police department did the right thing after they witnessed the tape. Before the tape they were defending him. Wonder how many times out of control pigs do it and get away with it who aren't being filmed


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

guno said:


> The good thing he won't get out of prison  alive, he was filmed red handed and then trying to plant something near the victim, shooting someone in the back 8 times just won't cut it as self defense, the police department did the right thing after they witnessed the tape. Before the tape they were defending him. Wonder how many times out of control pigs do it and get away with it who aren't being filmed


Imagine how many times they get away with simple abuse of power that doesnt end in fatalities. Then you have your answer as to why a lot of Black/Mexican guys resist arrest.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative5's attempted intimidation makes the reader laugh.  The fool believes himself to be bad ass.

I would love to see him try this in certain places in East Texas.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Conservative5's attempted intimidation makes the reader laugh.  The fool believes himself to be bad ass.
> 
> I would love to see him try this in certain places in East Texas.


Conservative is softer than womans ass after a month on a ice cream diet and no exercise. He does make me laugh with his insecurities.


----------



## Meathead (Apr 8, 2015)

Yeah, pretty sure the cop murdered the guy, but Big Mike Brown had it coming. Brown got justice and so should this cop.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Way off base as you usually are, boy!


----------



## bucs90 (Apr 8, 2015)

Im struggling to see why this is STILL a story. A man murdered someone...and got arrested.

People are saying he would've gone free without video. Not so sure. I live in Charleston.  Rumors were already swirling BEFORE the video that something wasnt right.

The state police had 8 bullet wounds in the back. And shell casings 20-30 yards away from the body...far out of a tazers range even with the false allegations of him having the tazer. 

Unlike Mike Brown...the forensics of this would've come back WAY different.  All wounds in the back. Blood splatter showing flight away...not towards...the officer. Distance being large and growing.

This cop.may have been arrested even without it.

But...he is now among the 0.1% of cops who will shoot someone....and part of an even smaller group who did it as a murder...which it appears clearly it was.

I.feel worst for the dead man and his family. And for the other Charleston area cops who will be smeared as a result...even though they did nothing wrong.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

cnm said:


> These laws?
> 
> 
> _*SUBCHAPTER IV. ARREST.*_
> ...



Yes,  those laws.

Did you read them?

Specifically subsection b.

_b. To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, *or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay; *_​
Sounds exactly like what I posted in post #4 of this thread.

"A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."

—Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Youre just another timid white boy that feels threatened. Its ok but just know I know.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

White's opinion will not hold in this case, Missourian.

The reasons have been explained clearly and competently why that is so.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

bucs90 said:


> Im struggling to see why this is STILL a story. A man murdered someone...and got arrested.



A man...yes..who is a cop...

And the reason its news is because of how often this has been coming up.

Plus it was released last night....what do you mean "Still" a story?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> > Im struggling to see why this is STILL a story. A man murdered someone...and got arrested.
> ...


Buc has personal reasons to put this behind us as quickly as possible.  Move along. Nothing to see here.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Way off base again. I haven't felt threatened since retiring from Prison System as a officer. Remember guys like you, usually didn't go well for them.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Hi Missourian
The general concepts of successful programs that have also won awards
are to microlend in increments, and require a business plan for paying back the first loan
before moving up to higher amounts to grow the business.

It's not DIRECTLY applied to "family planning" but indirectly, if people are receiving structured Mentorship help to plan financially on a stable sustainable basis, then that would also include what they are doing in their personal life and finances, with transportation, utilities, living expenses etc.

Grameen America
Grameen Foundation Connecting the World s Poor to Their Potential

Grameen Foundation is the most well known program,
where the founder Muhammad Yunus won the Nobel Prize in 2006
for his work to rebuild poverty stricken regions of Bangledesh by
investing in the heads of households and businesses, mostly women.

Another MODEL I recommend for building schools, daycare community centers and jobs in poor areas
is PACE Universal run by Deepa Willingham: PACE Universal - Teach a girl feed a village

Again, this isn't DIRECTLY trying to spell out or "micromanage" social engineering and how to run families.
But the organization and planning it takes to build businesses and schools in areas "indirectly" enforces values of paying for the current needs and planning ahead for the true costs of educating and caring for children, families and communities.

Those issues would automatically HAVE to be addressed in the process of setting up sustainable financial plans for families to take charge of their own economy and communities.

Here is another key model I recommend for community building and business planning:
Home started by Paul Glover of the Greens Paul Glover social entrepreneur
Independent currency that promotes and grows local businesses toward an equalizing self-supportive cooperative economy


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


My neighbor is an ex CO. Now he is a sheriff and he told me pussies like you flock to the prison system to prove your toughness but somehow you alway end up calling for backup after getting your ass kicked.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > These laws?
> ...


I've seen no indication the man shot and killed committed a felony.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> > Im struggling to see why this is STILL a story. A man murdered someone...and got arrested.
> ...




How often it has been coming up.....but in all those other cases the attacker attacked the cop or resisted arrest and brought on their own death....then the left went nuts about the criminal bringing about his own death...........and blamed the cops....

In this case it looks like the cop lost control and killed this guy....he has been arrested, fired, and now faces murder charges....end of story......


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > bucs90 said:
> ...



"bringing on his own death" as if the cops werent even there.  The cop didnt lose control he aim and controlled well enough to shoot him in the back then had enough control to plant the evidence.

Before the video came out the police were defending him the same way.  Until the vid came out then they were caught red handed


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...




When a  cop tells you to stop hitting him in the face and then you charge that same cop....if you get shot...you brought it on yourself.....if you are told you are under arrest and then refuse to comply and the officers have to bring you to the ground to cuff you....and then because you are over weight, have diabetes complications and have a heart attack...you brought that on yourself.....

Congratulations on this latest case....you might actually have one where the criminal didn't bring on his own death by attacking the officer or resisting arrest....this looks very much like murder....and the cop was arrested, was fired and now is charged with murder.....you guys finally got one......


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...




I would have to see where they said he didn't do it because they were covering up the evidence....or did they simply stand by his testimony until the investigation showed otherwise....you guys really need to learn what "reality," "the truth," and "thinking" are.......and once the evidence came back......considering the ballistics are all bad for the cop...
they arrested him didn't they....


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


So you felt threatened, did you?


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



What? And the fact that someone shoots someone in the back on video and gets arrested is something to be applauded?  That should be the norm..

Would you applaud the arrest of someone caught with a bloody knife in their hand?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I've offered you twice to prove your claim about my fear of blacks.  TWICE you've refused.  Easy to see who is timid and runs like a coward.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...




I get it....you are a lefty and rationality is beyond you....it just isn't in your DNA....did  I say it was a good thing...no....did I say it should be the norm...no.....and yes if someone was caught at the scene of a murder with the murder weapon and had done the murder I would applaud the arrest....

Now.......to repeat the simple truth...the cop shot a fleeing suspect in the back 8 times...this is wrong and because of that he was arrested, fired and now faces murder charges.....please try to overcome your leftiness and see that I have simply stated facts......as a conservative/libertarian/tea party supporter, I support arresting cops who commit murder.....and I also believe if they are convicted of murder they should get the death penalty...not life in prison....

So please, take your left wing emotionality somewhere else.......


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




Enough of the insults.  Enough about what you arent saying.  You said "they arrested him didnt they" for a reason.  What was that reason?



> Now.......to repeat the simple truth...the cop shot a fleeing suspect in the back 8 times...this is wrong and because of that he was arrested, fired and now faces murder charges.....please try to overcome your leftiness and see that I have simply stated facts......as a conservative/libertarian/tea party supporter, I support arresting cops who commit murder.....and I also believe if they are convicted of murder they should get the death penalty...not life in prison....



What is my leftiness?  LMAO...You said "they arrested him didnt they" for a reason...what was that reason?



> So please, take your left wing emotionality somewhere else.......



Thats cute...you gonna type another book and tell me about how I"M emotional?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> I've offered you twice to prove your claim about my fear of blacks.  TWICE you've refused.  Easy to see who is timid and runs like a coward.


Your fear of blacks screams loudly and clearly.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > I've offered you twice to prove your claim about my fear of blacks.  TWICE you've refused.  Easy to see who is timid and runs like a coward.
> ...



I bet you think his failure to prove his claim is a sign of strength.  That damn n*gger doesn't scare me nor do you you piece of white trash.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> [I bet you think his failure to prove his claim is a sign of strength.  That damn n*gger doesn't scare me nor do you you piece of white trash.


Yep, you are terrified of your betters, always have been.  We're you allowed to retire or forced to resign?  It's one of the two for sure.  We had a former correctional officer on the Board from North Carolina who outed himself on the issue.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



There have been countless times in the past that I would have loved to have seen a perp dragged kicking and screaming to the nearest public square and have the persons head  hopped off and placed on a pike and paraded through the streets.

We both know that that's not how it works, the guy will get his day in court.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Go back to sleep monkey. You know what would happen if the internet suddenly transported you next to me.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...




You've inspected the racial make up of every single Section 8 housing tenant in the nation?

Wow. That's incredible. How long did it take you?


BTW - you failed.

https://hudapps.hud.gov/public/picj2ee/Mtcsrcr?category=rcr_familystatus&download=false&count=0


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...


If it wasnt on video I would agree. However, it is on video.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

I watched the video, the officer clearly used the skills he was trained for.  After the initial confrontation the officer felt he had legal justification to act, he quite naturally fell back on his training in a situation that had already escalated beyond the legal threshold for employing force.   The officer then very calmly and professionally took careful aim and shot the suspect......in effect, executing him.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Your fear is obvious Conservative. Practically everyone can see it.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Regardless of outcomes in the past, this guy will still get his day to defend himself, and right now he's in jail and has been properly charged. That's the most we can do for now, unless you are calling for a new system that allows instantaneous punishments.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...


For cases like this and pedophiles I dont see a problem.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Y


Asclepias said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...


You referring to the deadbeat dad, or the cop?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> I watched the video, the officer clearly used the skills he was trained for.  After the initial confrontation the officer felt he had legal justification to act, he quite naturally fell back on his training in a situation that had already escalated beyond the legal threshold for employing force.   The officer then very calmly and professionally took careful aim and shot the suspect......in effect, executing him.



Perhaps there needs to be new training, training that teaches officers that unless the perp is about to put you in grave and immediate danger, that you don't gun them down while they are running AWAY from you.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



I don't necessarily either, but legally they've already done as much as they can in this case.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > I watched the video, the officer clearly used the skills he was trained for.  After the initial confrontation the officer felt he had legal justification to act, he quite naturally fell back on his training in a situation that had already escalated beyond the legal threshold for employing force.   The officer then very calmly and professionally took careful aim and shot the suspect......in effect, executing him.
> ...



LOL! New "training" ? 

This cop knew what he was doing was wrong. Why else would he move the tazer over to the vicinity of the victim? He wanted to cover up his crime. He hates blacks and thought he could get away with killing him one.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Y
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> ...


What deadbeat dad? The cop was a deadbeat dad?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Follow along retard.  I clearly stated above that 100% of those I see where I live are.   

Since you can't read and have to ask a question that wouldn't have been asked if you did, you failed at this and at life.  You're probably the kind that lives in those shitholes.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Y
> ...



The one that had a warrant out for failure to pay his child support.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...


You must not have heard the warrant was old. He had custody of his son.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...




Well thats the only way you can avoid answering what the "normal fashion" is when it comes to killer cops.  Ignore the past.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Says the one that has now been offered three opportunities to prove your claim.  Make it four n*gger.   I could make a hundred offers and you'll still hide.  I'm here.  Where are you?  I wouldn't expect anything more from someone that's the byproduct of two monkeys butt fucking.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Youre here? Where is here? Youre a pink timid little monkey conservative.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Nothing, you would run like a scared little that you are.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Where you're afraid to come boy.  You call me timid but have already said you won't prove what you say is true.  You're not timid, you're just a plain old pussy.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


We all know both you pink pig skinned monkeys together wouldnt be brave enough to look me in the eye. You would ten of you monkeys with guns before you would even give me a stern look.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Figures you wont step up. I told you that you were a timid little stringy haired monkey.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...


Comprehensive understanding is beyond you libtards.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Keep dreaming ape.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Since you head is up your ass, we wouldn't be able to see your eyes.  

All I would need to do is say "boo" and you'd run faster than a black person during a watermelon shortage.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

And the white cave chimps are chattering nervously.  Rightfully so.  They are scared.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Typical that a monkey like you would want to say "boo". Thats why cowards like you dress up in white sheets. You really think youre a ghost. Funny how you always mentally give yourself away. Monkeys like you typically cant outsmart humans lilke me.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Why would I dream ape? I'm Black and not a cave monkey like you are.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Don't own white sheets.  Funny how I struck a nerve calling out how you'd move faster when there are less watermelons available than n*ggers that want them than you'd move for a job.  

You're subhuman.  It's the best you can do.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


You are not smart and you are not human. Go back to the jungle ape.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You're not black.  You're a greasy n*gger and there's a difference.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


No, you are a tree ape, retard.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You're not black.  You're a greasy n*gger and there's a difference.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



Actually, the correct term is yard ape.


----------



## shikaki (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



Wow.  Your true colors are shining through...  Thank god for the anonimity of the internet..


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Sure you own white sheets. They may not be white anymore because you are so dirty from your fleas but they were white once upon a time. Funny how you think me loving watermelon is striking a nerve. You must have been deprived of your banana allotment today.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Apr 8, 2015)

Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

shikaki said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



My true color is white.  How about yours?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Oh I'm definitely Black. You on the other hand are a pink monkey.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


Your a cave ape white monkey.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> shikaki said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Your true color is pinkish white. Red when a Black man slaps you.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?


Its obvious you dont get its not just this incident. When are you going to get more than a single digit IQ?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > shikaki said:
> ...



Haven't met a n*gger yet with the guts to slap me including you.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Thats because you have learned to run and hide. You cave chimps are known for hiding.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Says the one that has now been offered 5x to prove his theory about my fear of blacks but is yet to show.  Where are you hiding Buckwheat?


----------



## bucs90 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> > Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?
> ...



Um...you idiots dont understand that law enforcement doesnt charge people just to be fair or because someones feelings are hurt.

EVERY detective is taught "Go where the evidence takes you, then see if it fits probable cause for a crime". No more no less.

SC cop (ex cop) there was obvious evidence.
NY Garner...a bit grey area. 
Ferguson. ...no crime.

Like it or not...the system is working.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Where are you hiding monkey? Come out and be a red monkey.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> > Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?
> ...


When are you going to stop being the biggest dumbest racist here?


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Cowardly ape.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AvgGuyIA said:
> ...


When are you and the rest of your monkey friends going to stop making monkey noise?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I'm not hiding.  You're the one that said you wouldn't show.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Tough to do over the internet.  You probably just meant that in a metaphorical sense.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AvgGuyIA said:
> ...


When are you and the rest of your monkey friends going to stop making monkey noises?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Not when an offer has been made not involving the internet.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


When are you going to stop being the biggest retard here? Ape.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


You cant show on the internet. You know this and this is why you are brave on the internet you monkey.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


When are you going to stop being the biggest cave chimp on here? Monkey.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...





Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I've offered now 6x and none of them involve the internet.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Tough to do over the internet.  You probably just meant that in a metaphorical sense.


Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



I'm sure you're even more formidable in person.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



When are you going to stop being a n*gger?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


You never showed up. You claimed you had to work monkey. I knew you were faking after that.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Seems Ass Lips isn't man enough to find out.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


She proves herself a cowardly racist every time she opens her mouth and farts.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Dont talk about yourself like that.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



No offer was made to me.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Seems more like you monkeys are afraid to show up when challenged in real life like you faked on me last time.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



Actually I did and you weren't there.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Sure monkey. Practically no one believes that. You just punked out.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


I am talking about you retard.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



I was there.  You weren't.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Apr 8, 2015)

Mr. H. said:


> He did initially run from the officer. Still, no reason to shoot him in the back 8 times. That's fucked up.


Blacks need to stop running from our police officers.  They are under the control of the police u til released.  What is it about black men doing this?  It's getting all too often.  STOP!!!


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



The difference is that he's not afraid of the word, he owns it.    When are you going to stop being so stupid?  Shouldn't you own that?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Those of you that don't matter don't believe it.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


No, no one believes you.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Well which one was it? First you claimed there was no offer. Just got caught lying to hide your fear. You just knew that ass would get beat.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



He shouldn't be afraid of it, he is one. 

I can't stop doing something I haven't been doing.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


As long as Conservatives knows I'm good you monkey.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> > He did initially run from the officer. Still, no reason to shoot him in the back 8 times. That's fucked up.
> ...



That explains the need for eight shots to subdue the suspect.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You couldn't beat your own ass.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



You're doing it right now.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No one that matters thinks you're good for anything but nothing.  Got it.  Good for nothing.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



That is your worthless opinion.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Not into self mutilation. Just knocking out pink monkeys such as yourself if you ever got brave.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



What is the "normal" fashion to you ? Cops NEVER getting convicted ? Not that it has anything to do with this case.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...


You dont matter monkey. I'm glad you know and understand that.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You're the one saying I feared you and have been offered 7x the chance to prove it.  Sound like a pussy to me.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


How did you offer it? You already faked on the real deal. Youre safe on the internet.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Well no, it's pretty obvious that you are a very stupid man.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Says the descendant of slaves.  If your people were so good, how were white people you consider inferior able to hold you ancestors for so long?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I offered the real deal.  You said you didn't need to show to know I feared you.  Big mouth with little balls that won't back up his claim.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Monkeys are great at violence. Especially when they outnumber the people they enslave. Once they become aware the ratio is not 100 to 1 they become fearful like you when you punked out. Remember?


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Faun said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...




He attacked the police officer after the officers tazer either misfired or failed to make adequate contact with the offender.  The offender is grappling with the officer at the beginning of the video,  and the tazer that the officer said the offender stripped from him is laying on the ground.  When the officer breaks away from the offender grip,  the officer reaches for his service weapon.  When the offender realize the officers gun hand was free of his restraint,  he attempts to flea a second time.

I said it earlier...what was the offenders plan attacking the officer?  He could jst hold him waiting for help to arrive,  and he couldn't release him while the officer was in possession of his sidearm.  That only leaves three alternatives,  one of which we can dismiss out of hand...which is surrender.  The two others are to incapacitate the officer or kill him.  That is the definition of grievous bodily harm or death.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Apr 8, 2015)

tinydancer said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...


Anybody who watches the COPS TV program knows even the most out of shape officer give foot chase of fleeing suspects.  This cop was 33 years old and should have no problem chasing down and tackling a 50 year old.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


You offered but then you claimed you had to work. You punked out monkey. Its ok but just know I know.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



Well no, it's obvious you're either one like Ass Lips or a lover of his kind.  You tell me.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



I'm pretty sure my ancestors would have given your ancestors the opportunity to clean stables.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


You said he attacked the police officer. Who's account is this?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I offered and you said you didn't have to prove what you claimed.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Well,  it seems this thread has descended to crap.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


You said he attacked the police officer. Is this the officers account?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



The officer was no longer in any kind of danger while the suspect was running away.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Sure monkey. Go back to sleep. No one believes you.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Odium said:


> Road wouldn't be defending a cold blooded murderer if the victim wasn't black.


Liar. 






I have not defending the cop, but I have defended due process of law.

Had this guy followed due process of law, and submitted to a lawful arrest based on lawful warrants he would be alive today.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



That assumes every white person owned slaves.  

If your people are so superior, why would the ratio matter?


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Now, you're a liar.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> > Road wouldn't be defending a cold blooded murderer if the victim wasn't black.
> ...



Due process of the law doesn't give police officers the option of killing suspects because they run away.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



The officer has also been arrested and charged.

The system is working.

Where's the beef?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


No actually it doesnt. I know english is hard for you as a monkey.

Our people are not superior at violence. Your people are when they outnumber my people 100 to 1.


----------



## Roadrunner (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Odium said:
> ...




Well, yes, in some cases it does.

That is for a jury, not for internet vigilantes.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Youre still a monkey that no one believes. Go back to sleep.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Your ancestors were white trash that had nothing to offer. It's easy to see based on the low class descendants they produced.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



No beef with the law, only with ignorant people.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


Who said there was a beef? The post is talking about whether or not the cop was justified.


----------



## ClosedCaption (Apr 8, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Its not about what I THINK is normal fashion all you have to do is look at the past as an indicator.


----------



## cnm (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Yes,  those laws.
> 
> Did you read them? [...]
> ​


Yes. They don't apply here.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Now that the monkey Conservative has left, can someone please explain why the victim is being accused of grabbing the taser or even resisting arrest? Are we taking this off the officers original report?


----------



## guno (Apr 8, 2015)

Looks like my original title was changed on this thread


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> You said he attacked the police officer. Who's account is this?




It's on the video.  You can see the end of the attack and with the tazer being knocked out of the officers hand at around the 17 second point...you can infer that the struggle has been protracted...what else would have attracted the attention of the videographer?

Initially,  I thought that the officer moved the tazer closer to the victem,  but that is clearly not the case after multiple viewings of the recording.  The tazer goes flying behind the officer...I have no idea what that was on the ground that he picked up,  but it wasn't the tazer.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You said he attacked the police officer. Who's account is this?
> ...


You can also infer that the office attacked for no reason and the victim was defending himself. That would attract my attention and has in the past.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Now that the monkey Conservative has left, can someone please explain why the victim is being accused of grabbing the taser or even resisting arrest? Are we taking this off the officers original report?



Watch the video,  just as the camera is put on the fence.  I had to really slow it down to see it...pause,  play,  pause,  play,  rewind and do it again.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



Problem is unless someone thinks like you, they're ignorant to you.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




No,  you can't.  The officer was in pursuit of a person illegally fleeing a traffic stop...therefore he cannot "attack for no reason".   Scott attacking the officer and stripping away his less-than-legal device was a felony.

What Wilson Scott SHOULD have done is surrender...not attack the officer.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


How do we know the stop wasn't illegal?


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Now that the monkey Conservative has left, can someone please explain why the victim is being accused of grabbing the taser or even resisting arrest? Are we taking this off the officers original report?
> ...


I saw that but what I'm wondering is if the cop lied about killing the guy what makes the rest of his story any more believable if that video can be interpreted in many different ways? You see him resisting arrest I see someone trying to protect themselves.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Do you have any evidence that it was?  And I'm not crappin' on the idea,  I've been stopped illegally more than once.  "You veered onto the yellow line."  Bullcrap,  you just wanted to stop me an see what I was doing at 2am.


----------



## initforme (Apr 8, 2015)

Why 8 times?  8 shots?  I totally don't understand that.  And can't the cop subdue the guy without lethal force?  Is he that out of shape?  Well it is south Carolina.  That does say ALOT.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




That might me a valid argument if Scott didn't have an outstanding warrant.  When you have an outstanding warrant,  there is nothing to defend yourself from.  The officer is lawfully apprehending Scott.  

I


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> I saw that but what I'm wondering is if the cop lied about killing the guy what makes the rest of his story any more believable if that video can be interpreted in many different ways? You see him resisting arrest I see someone trying to protect themselves.



Also,  I'm wondering what you contend the officer lied about?

He could have very easily been in fear for his life if Scott was attempting to take his tazer.

I'm not sure how many separate tazer deployments are available in a police issue tazer without reloading...but if it is more than one,  there was a very real threat.

It's very possible the officer didn't know where the tazer ended up,  and that Scott had taken it.  The tazer ends up behind the officer and outside his field of view.  It took several viewing of the video for me to locate it...imagine how quick it was real time.

This is what I mean by Monday Morning Quarterbacking.  We have all of infinity to second guess this officers decisions,  he had a split second.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

initforme said:


> Why 8 times?  8 shots?  I totally don't understand that.  And can't the cop subdue the guy without lethal force?  Is he that out of shape?  Well it is south Carolina.  That does say ALOT.




It appears in the video that the officer believes that Scott is in possession of his tazer.  When a criminal possesses a stun gun,  it can be considered under law a dangerous or deadly weapon.  


Court of Appeals rules stun guns are deadly weapons


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Please stop claiming to be white, you are an embarrassment to your race.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> shikaki said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Why is it that virtually every racist like you on this website is conservative?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I saw that but what I'm wondering is if the cop lied about killing the guy what makes the rest of his story any more believable if that video can be interpreted in many different ways? You see him resisting arrest I see someone trying to protect themselves.
> ...



It's more than clear from the video that the officer had plenty of options, none of which required split second decisions.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

I would bet my last dollar, my right eye, my first born, that had there not been video......this murderer would have faked being attacked, backed by a few bruises and witnesses out of no where and got off scott free. If I had footage of this, I would have waited until this cop gave his side of the story and then I would have presented the footage just to let people know, this shttt happens and it happens a lot. Who ever the person is that provided this footage....GOD BLESS YOU.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Which is why the Civl War wasn't fought because of Slavery.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> I would bet my last dollar, my right eye, my first born, that had there not been video......this murderer would have faked being attacked, backed by a few bruises and witnesses out of no where and got off scott free. If I had footage of this, I would have waited until this cop gave his side of the story and then I would have presented the footage just to let people know, this shttt happens and it happens a lot.
> What is most appalling is these murdering bastards have the audasity to continue to hand cuff and speak to the dead.......just sad!~!
> Who ever the person is that provided this footage....GOD BLESS YOU.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Sounds like the officer was justified in stopping you, DUI is a crime you know.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> ...



The footage is the facts, pal....one more time, get with reality and stop protecting murderers of unarmed blacks.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

Godboy said:


> Shoot him in the back, shoot him in the front... who cares? As long as hes dead and never going to bother anyone again, its a win.



I agree, I just wish they would start targeting racist conservatives like you....shoot shoot and then shoot some more.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


What evidence is there he attacked the officer?


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

Papageorgio said:


> Disgusting, the cop, needs to be tried by his peers and face his punishment. My heart goes out to man's family.  This guy is another the reason that police officers get a bad name.
> 
> I should wait until a jury hears the case, however this is very disturbing.



This is the reality for minorities in this country...and reality about law enforcement......and this country....we house cowards. end of story.


----------



## Borillar (Apr 8, 2015)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Borillar said:
> ...


I was in a similar situation. Daughter was living with me, but my ex was still getting child support. Had to go all the way to the Governor's office to get the damned CS ended. Of course, she never had to pay me a fucking penny or provide any support.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

whitehall said:


> Despite the assumption that the Police Officer is guilty it seems that he was charged with a crime and the system works. So what the hell have anarchists been whining about?




A MAN IS DEAD...NEXT STUPID QUESTION?


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > Black racists will riot anyway.
> ...



The question should be, HOW WILL FOX NEWS SPIN THIS?


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Black racists will riot anyway.



A man is dead, a human being got 8 motherfkkken bullets in his back, because some coward racist white mf got gun crazy........riot????? How about morning a loss, you (&(&(^*&%%%*((*))))^^^$%$*&^))))_*(*


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I'm glad at least two of us understand that.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



Lets talk someday, when you white mother****** began getting the same treatment minorities get in this effin country......trust me, yaw do the same exact shttt, you just live to talk about it, we don't!!


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Except I know for a fact I didn't veer onto the yellow line,  and I hadn't been drinking,  I was on my way home from work.  I could afford much by way of a vehicle at the time and was driving a beat up,  rusted jalopy.  The officer more or copped to the fact the stop was bogus...he said drug dealers were running drugs to the lake in old,  beat up vehicles like the one I was driving.

I traded that beat up car for a beat up rusted truck...been drivin' em ever since.  I'm pretty sure today I could rebuild a 300 inline six in my sleep.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



The question should be how long before Al Sharpton benefits financially from this and Obama say if I had another brother, he'd look like this.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...



I live for the day, you people find a new way to attack dead black men, this bs line is getting old.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



So you're psychic? You sound more like another big mouth n*gger to me.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...



What's getting old is the contradictory way things are treated when it's white on black vs. black on white.


----------



## Faun (Apr 8, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


The "beef" is wondering just how prevalent this really is. We hear about incidents like this and typically, following an investigation, the officer is found to have done nothing outside of regulations and goes on with his life, though a family is destroyed. And while such shootings are in most cases, most likely justifiable, many must wonder how many cops got away with murder because unlike this case, their crime wasn't captured on video. My instinct informs me this would have ended up swept under the rug, like so many other times, had there been no video proof of what actually transpired.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Disgusting, the cop, needs to be tried by his peers and face his punishment. My heart goes out to man's family.  This guy is another the reason that police officers get a bad name.
> ...


The thing is we see the response to the claims that for a long time were called imagination. We see it makes no difference even on video. Time to wake up and realize that complaining to the doer of the deed is not working.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Take today for instance. The Boston Marathon bombing was almost two years ago, but the verdict to the trial just came today.
If ever there was a guy that deserved to be dragged from his cell right after the murders, it was this dirtbag.
Look how long the families of the victim had to wait for justice, and of course keep in mind even if the creep gets the death penalty it will be years before the families truly see justice.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...




I've been pulled over with an outstanding warrant.  My "survival" had nothing to do with my skin color.  I turned the vehicle off,  rolled down the window,  placed the keys on the roof and put both hands out the window.  

I didn't run away,  I didn't fight with the police,  I knew I was wrong and I took my medicine...I'd like to say "like a man" but that's not true...a man wouldn't have gotten himself in that position in the first place.

So,  I walked away not because of my skin color,  but because I understood the process of being arrested.


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Odium said:


> Video captures police killing of unarmed black man TheHill
> 
> Enjoy prison asshole! That badge won't protect your ass now!


Actually, the badge probably WILL protect him, to the extent that prison staff do not usually endanger ex-cops by putting them into the general population.

A courtesy they extent their fallen brothers and sisters, so long as they have not betrayed The Brotherhood or committed Treason or Sexual Assault of a Child, etc.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Holy shit, how many felons frequent this forum.  No wonder it is a hate site...all of the members are convicts!


----------



## Papageorgio (Apr 8, 2015)

Anytime I am pulled, usually speeding, I get my insurance card and DL out of my wallet. Place my wallet and the insurance card and DL on the dash in front of me and put my hands on the the dash also. 

I am polite, give them what the need and keep my hands in sight. 

It is puts him at ease, which makes things go faster, he has a job to do and I have my life to lead.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Faun said:


> What evidence is there he attacked the officer?



The video catches the very end of it,  you see the tazer go flying behind the officer.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Bingo, we have a winner.   

I've been pulled over for traffic violations.  My survival had to do with the officer asking for my license, registration, and proof of insurance.  I didn't make sudden moves or give him any reason to think I was doing anything except complying.  While the tickets weren't any fun, I went away realizing that I was wrong but acted in a way that common sense dictates one act.


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


That much is true.

Want to survive the 'arrest encounter'?

Don't fight, and don't run.

Problem solved.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Papageorgio said:


> Anytime I am pulled, usually speeding, I get my insurance card and DL out of my wallet. Place my wallet and the insurance card and DL on the dash in front of me and put my hands on the the dash also.
> 
> I am polite, give them what the need and keep my hands in sight.
> 
> It is puts him at ease, which makes things go faster, he has a job to do and I have my life to lead.




Same here.  I carry a pistol in my glovebox and do so according to all laws.  I include my CWP with those other things.  I've been asked why.  I state that I have a gun in the glove box.  Since it's carried according to the laws of my State, no problem.


----------



## tinydancer (Apr 8, 2015)

Faun said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



I hope that some one gives the person who had the where with all to hang in there and keep filming while this nightmare was unfolding before their very eyes a hero's parade/reward/keys to the city/ fill in the blank.

It took a lot of testicular fortitude to hang in there and capture it all on film. And BRAVO! to whoever it is. 

And you are right. The police version that was out there in advance of the video coming out was a complete fairy tale based on the Officer's lies.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...



There's a time and place to fight what you think is wrong.  While the situation is occurring may not be it.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



So you say.  Do you have it on video?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...



When in doubt, just shoot.....problem solved.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...



Why do you assume a felony?


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > guno said:
> ...


The video didn't show what happened right before the footage started. Much like the Rodney King case, making a judgment on less then the whole truth.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



Does the cop have one of him veering?


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> ...There's a time and place to fight what you think is wrong.  While the situation is occurring may not be it.








True enough.

Nature has de-selected him.

Damned tough break for the family, and damned heartless and cruel of the cop.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

AmericanFirst said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



Rodney King was asked on more than one occasion to stay down.  When he didn't, I guess the cops were supposed to let him up because he wanted to get up.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> Holy shit, how many felons frequent this forum.  No wonder it is a hate site...all of the members are convicts!



Driving without license/insurance isn't a felony,  it is a misdemeanor.

Got into a lot of fights too,  spent more than a few nights in the clink.  

Believe me,  I was no angel in my youth.  I was very,  very lucky not to get a felony.  Did some really stupid stuff.

I'd say 70% of my oldest good friends have felonies...drug possession,  theft,  fighting (he kicked a guy in the face when he was down on the ground..while drunk).

It's amazing how easy it is to get a felony when you get on the wrong path.

I'm not ashamed to tell folks,  I've seen things from both sides,  I'm not some soft palm suburbanite living in a bubble.

I suppose that you are perfect,  and have never broken a single law.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Nutz said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


I have seen the guys posts...it is a plausible assumption.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Nutz said:
> 
> 
> > Holy shit, how many felons frequent this forum.  No wonder it is a hate site...all of the members are convicts!
> ...


If you were arrested for violence (fighting) you should have received a felony.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Personal example.  My daughter was in a wreck a few months ago.  She was charged with running a traffic light.  After going to the intersection where it occurred and talking to friends in the insurance business that had no stake in it, they said there is no way based on what the cop said that she caused it.  I felt that way the night it happened.  I could have ripped him a new one but I waited until it went to court.  We had an opportunity to talk with him before and he offered to reduce the fine.  Based on his arrogant attitude, I preferred to have a bench trial with the judge.  It took about 5 minutes for the judge to figure out that the other driver was at fault and basically implied that the officer took the easy way out in charging an upset teenager the night of the wreck.  There was a time and a place to fight the charge and I took the place that won it while making an arrogant asshole look bad in the process.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



Nice to have the "funny" thank you back.  Point taken.  Now I have a dash cam.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Nutz said:
> ...



It's an ASSumption.  How plausible is a matter of pure opinion.


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> ...Whom are you suggesting should shoot?


Whom are you suggesting should shoot when in doubt?


----------



## MaryL (Apr 8, 2015)

This cop over- reacted, and he isn't going to get any help from anyone here. Shooting  a man in the back , that was no threat, why?  But on the other hand, if the victim had been white, I doubt this would be an issue. Black males clearly are a larger threat to each other and society at large than bad cops.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Nutz said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


He is a thug.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



That's the point stupid.   If it isn't on video then it's just your word against the officer's word, and the officer's word always wins.  If this shooting hadn't been captured on video the officer in question would still have his job.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > ...Whom are you suggesting should shoot?
> ...



Yourself if you keep asking stupid questions.


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...


How rude. And unprovoked, no less. OK. Fine. Your choice. What stupid question did I ask of you, my little asswipe? And this time, answer the phukking question.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Oh I see, I take it back then, my mistake, it was really a very intelligent question.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



The officer does always win?  Wrong.  My daughter was in a wreck and charged by one of those officers you say always wins.  Rather than proving him a retard that night, I waited to court.  He was willing to drop the fine and I was willing to have a bench trial to embarrass him.  Neither one of us had a video of the situation so it was my daughter's word against his.   Since the ticket was dropped and the judge all but called him an idiot, seems he lost.


----------



## squeeze berry (Apr 8, 2015)

black on white crime rate.......

oops

wrong thread


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> If you were arrested for violence (fighting) you should have received a felony.



Not so cut and dry.  This was over twenty years ago.  Back then it was very common for two fellas who took exception to the others taking exception could settle the matter by stepping outside and duke it out.  Today that might be a felony,  but back then no charges were ever filed if both parties were "at fault"...meaning they both wanted to fight.  Nine times out of ten,  you ended up friends after.  The olden days,  before we all got "civilized".

I've always said that hillbillies and innercity blacks have a lot more in common than we have differences.  I think that's why the powers that be work so hard to keep us at odds with one another.  Society thinks they are our betters,  we're both general poor,  neither are afraid of a fight,  tough,  learn to get by with our wits and what's available at our disposal.  With blacks it's drug,  with hillbillies it was bootlegging moonshine....and today the old ridgerunners are folk heroes.  Drug dealers the same in the innercity black community.

Somehow folks never key into these similarities...focusing only on the differences,  of which there are very few.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The video clearly shows the officer had no fear for his life or others.  Yup, the video is a just view of the event.


The video doesn't show the whole episode. The video only begins after the physical confrontation between the cop and Scott, if there was one. The cop says there was.


----------



## Godboy (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > Shoot him in the back, shoot him in the front... who cares? As long as hes dead and never going to bother anyone again, its a win.
> ...


If there are conservatives committing violent crimes, i hope they get shot too. I will shed no tears for shit bags of any color.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Not by shooting a man dead who was no threat to the cop or anyone else.  The cop will go to prison for life.


Got a single shred of evidence that the guy was _"no threat to the cop or anyone else"_ ?  If so, let's hear it.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> I have seen the guys posts...it is a plausible assumption.




You must be thinking of someone else.  I try to be respectful to everyone,  regardless of race, sex, religion,  sexual orientation or political position.  I ain't perfect,  but I do my best.

Although I do seem to remember saying that your screen name complied with all known truth-in-packaging laws.


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...


You facetiously opine that (someone) should shoot, when in doubt - problem solved - without specifying which party you're referring to, and then somebody else asks whom you are referring to - the cops or the suspects - and then you get your panties in a twist, when somebody asks you to be more specific. Lighten up, Francis.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The video clearly shows the officer had no fear for his life or others.  Yup, the video is a just view of the event.
> ...



I do wonder though what the law is in South Carolina.  But even if that state has no Fleeing felon rule, the cop's attorney can still go to the SCOTUS decison in Tennesse vs Garner, and claim justifiable homicide.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > These laws?
> ...




How is running away from a cop being a threat to anyone?

The man was stopped for a broken tail light. Not because he robbed a bank or was a serial killer. 

A broken tail light isn't the same thing as being a threat to anyone.

I don't know how you come to your conclusions but please tell me this, if you're right then why did the cop lie on his report? Why did the cop plant evidence to frame that man?


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 8, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?







Justice won't be served until the cop is found guilty and sent to prison where he belongs.

That has not happened yet.

His arrest isn't justice. It's the beginning of the process for justice.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



He didn't plant evidence...or I should say he didn't plant the tazer.  I have no idea what that was,  but it wasn't the tazer.

The tazer is knocked out of the officers hand by the offender.  I believe that the officer will argue that he believed that Scott had the tazer in his possession.

Having a broken tail light is a crime.  Defective equipment.  Your issue is with the law,  not the officer.

Then the guy ran from the officer...for all the officer knows the guy IS a bank robber or serial killer.  Fleeing from the scene of a traffic stop is also a crime.

I am unsure what lie the officer is accused of telling.

If the tazer was capable of firing a second shot without reloading,  the officer wasn't lying when he claimed to be in fear for his life.

That right there is going to be the crux of his defense...and if the tazer COULD fire again without reloading,  this officer is going to walk...that's my cast iron guaranty.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Nutz said:
> 
> 
> > I have seen the guys posts...it is a plausible assumption.
> ...


Yeah...I probably do have you confused with someone else.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

protectionist said:


> I do wonder though what the law is in South Carolina.  But even if that state has no Fleeing felon rule, the cop's attorney can still go to the SCOTUS decison in Tennesse vs Garner, and claim justifiable homicide.


And, undoubtedly, the judge will not allow the defense to use it.

The video clearly shows that the defendant does not meet the criteria.

Missourian's tazer defense is a possibility, not a probability.  Not very likely at all.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


NBC just showed the whole video in slow motion, the officer clearly attempts to plant evidence.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Still playing dumb?  Maybe you aren't playing.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

The witness who saw the incident will fill in the beginning of the actions.  That and the vid will fry the cop.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 8, 2015)

White cop shoots black man and it's all over national news.

However, news like this will pass by as something normal today... *Philly Teens Charged in Shooting of Man Walking Dog*

They don't even mention black teens and white victim. It's not important.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The witness who saw the incident will fill in the beginning of the actions.  That and the vid will fry the cop.



It's more than clear that the officer is guilty of first degree murder, he made a very deliberate decision.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> White cop shoots black man and it's all over national news.
> 
> However, news like this will pass by as something normal today... *Philly Teens Charged in Shooting of Man Walking Dog*
> 
> They don't even mention black teens and white victim. It's not important.



With regards to this incident, no it isn't, it isn't important at all.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




CMN posted it,  it does include a modified fleeing felon rule.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Nutz said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Nutz said:
> ...



  No sweat...it happens.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 8, 2015)

I watched shooting video again few times.

Did cop said that Walter Scott tazed him? What if he did? Maybe we don't know all that happen.

Here is the screenshot... to me, it looks like tazer wires hanging from his arm...


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> NBC just showed the whole video in slow motion, the officer clearly attempts to plant evidence.



I thought he was too,  when I first saw the video.  I don't know what that is that he runs back and picks up...but what it ISN'T is the tazer.  The tazer flies back behind the officer and rolls end over end in the grass 10-15 feet straight back.  Whatever that is that he picks up is already on the ground when the tazer is knocked out of the officers hand.

Watch at second 17-18,  just as the camera is turned and set on the fence...watch behind the officer.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Won't work, Missourian.  You can game play all the defense tricks, and they won't work.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> I watched shooting video again few times.
> 
> Did cop said that Walter Scott tazed him? What if he did? Maybe we don't know all that happen.
> 
> Here is the screenshot... to me, it looks like tazer wires hanging from his arm...



Those wires could also be evidence in the officers mind that the suspect has the tazer gun in his possession.  The tazer is actual behind the officer,  outside of his field of vision (circled in red)...the object the red arrow is pointing to is what the officer ran back to get...I have no idea what it is,  but it is definitely not the tazer.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > NBC just showed the whole video in slow motion, the officer clearly attempts to plant evidence.
> ...



What do you suppose that object is the officer tosses on the ground next to the suspect?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Won't work, Missourian.  You can game play all the defense tricks, and they won't work.



The officer in question had plenty of time to consider his decision, took his time, aimed carefully, and shot a man who obviously couldn't even run away.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Apr 8, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > Black racists will riot anyway.
> ...


Go ahead and mourn. Spell it correctly.
Doesn't have anything to do with psychopathic political opportunists like sharpton and obama getting involved.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Apr 8, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


Or black on black.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Won't work, Missourian.  You can game play all the defense tricks, and they won't work.




The more I watch the video,  the more positive I am that the officer will be acquitted.

Like I said,  the crux of the defense will be if the tazer had been discharged,  and if so is it capable of firing a second time without reloading.

Here the defense case:

The officer attempted to use non-lethal force to subdue suspect Scott.  Suspect Scott turned on the officer and grabbed for the tazer gun,  the tazer gun was,  unbeknownst to the officer,  knocked from his grasp outside of his field of vision.

The officer believed that suspect Scott was in possession of the officers unfired tazer (or second shot capable tazer).  That belief made suspect Scott a danger to the officer,  and other officers pursuing suspect Scott.  Pursuant to the fleeing dangerous felon portion of South Carolina revised statute Blankity-blank point blank blank,  the officer used deadly force to end the threat and the pursuit.

You may not like it,  but it's the law.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Won't work, Missourian.  You can game play all the defense tricks, and they won't work.
> ...


Your version of the law, and it won't work.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Won't work, Missourian.  You can game play all the defense tricks, and they won't work.
> ...



If he is acquitted, I truly hope he is snatched off the street and tortured to death.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 8, 2015)

Jarlaxle said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Why don't you be the one to try it?


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...




I have no idea.  When I first saw the video,  I thought it was the tazer too...and I also said that moving that tazer was going to sink any defense he was attempted,  as moving the tazer was a defacto admission that,  at a minimum,  he felt the need to bolster his justification for the use of deadly force.

Now,  i just don't know...it will definitely be an important fact that hopefully will be released in the coming days.

But like Michael Brown and "Hands up,  don't shoot",  the "Planted tazer" will be the tagline for this story in the MSM.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




That's a very compelling argument.  [/sarcasm]


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 8, 2015)

The guy was not armed and was running away with his back turned. Cop is a guilty as hell.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



So then the officer tossing an unidentified object on the ground next to the suspect doesn't pique your interest.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > I watched shooting video again few times.
> ...



I kept running this in a loop, there are wires hanging, from cop's hand.

View My Video


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Yup and Missourian thinks Whizzer White is going to get him off scot free.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...




Sure it does.  But I can't speculate one way or the other until I know what exactly the object is. 

That the MSM is reporting something that a hillbilly in the backwoods of Missouri with nothing but a 10 year old laptop positively identified as patently false doesn't pique yours?


----------



## Dot Com (Apr 8, 2015)

not only did he shoot him in the back but he shot him in the back 8- TIMES


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...


I have no idea what you're babbling about, but, then again, neither do you, so, it's a wash.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 8, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...



Hi ClosedCaption
What I'd like to see as the norm
is that people do not glamourize either thug culture or rogue cops gone wrong.

If all the people and officers who CAN help themselves and NOT go rogue, acted uniformly as law abiding; then the few who DO have criminal issues they can't help would stand out.
Those would be the exception, and could be more easily identified earlier in order to get help
and prevent from becoming a criminal statistic.

Why not make it the norm for citizens and police and teachers to have open, good faith, working relations. And not ANY of this one-upmanship of trying to rebel against authority, commit crimes and get people jailed or killed.

Why don't we strive to help each other to SUCCEED
instead of competing to make people wrong or fail?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



You can't speculate?  Seems you've indulged in more than a little speculation already.   Why is this different?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Don't play dumb, you know exactly what you're babbling about.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Yup and Missourian thinks Whizzer White is going to get him off scot free.




Yeah,  those pesky laws, trials and juries...irritating how they tend to undermine good old fashion knee-jerk mob justice.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...




There's no evidence to speculate on.  I literally have no clue what that is.  Do you have a theory?

It didn't go unnoticed that you skipped this question...

That the MSM is reporting something that a hillbilly in the backwoods of Missouri with nothing but a 10 year old laptop positively identified as patently false doesn't pique yours?​


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


I have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Here you go Jake...try a rebuttal.  "Because I don't like it" just isn't going to cut it.

The more I watch the video, the more positive I am that the officer will be acquitted.

Like I said, the crux of the defense will be if the tazer had been discharged, and if so is it capable of firing a second time without reloading.

Here the defense case:

The officer attempted to use non-lethal force to subdue suspect Scott. Suspect Scott turned on the officer and grabbed for the tazer gun, the tazer gun was, unbeknownst to the officer, knocked from his grasp outside of his field of vision.

The officer believed that suspect Scott was in possession of the officers unfired tazer (or second shot capable tazer). That belief made suspect Scott a danger to the officer, and other officers pursuing suspect Scott. Pursuant to the fleeing dangerous felon portion of South Carolina revised statute Blankity-blank point blank blank, the officer used deadly force to end the threat and the pursuit.

You may not like it, but it's the law.​


----------



## Liminal (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Here you go Jake...try a rebuttal.  "Because I don't like it" just isn't going to cut it.
> 
> The more I watch the video, the more positive I am that the officer will be acquitted.
> 
> ...



No you're wrong.  The officer had no justification to discharge his weapon, that's why he out of a job and being charged with murder.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> missourian said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




"The video appears to show the officer planting a weapon on the victim."

Officer Will Be Charged With Murder After Video Shows Him Killing Black Man Who Was Fleeing ThinkProgress​"Stewart also accused the officer of trying to plant evidence by moving the Taser and placing it close to Walter Scott's body."

South Carolina cop shoots unarmed man A timeline - CNN.com​*"How white South Carolina cop 'tried to plant a taser' next to the lifeless body of unarmed black man he'd shot FIVE times in the back and then claimed victim had stolen it off him"*

Read more: Walter Scott shot in the back FIVE TIMES by cop Michael Slager in Charleston Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook​

"Officer tells Walter Scott to put his hands behind his back - after shooting him. Then plants taser next to his body"

Shocking video shows S.C. cop fatally shooting black man in back www.wpxi.com​


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> No you're wrong.  The officer had no justification to discharge his weapon, that's why he out of a job and being charged with murder.




Except the law says different.

Note the caveat "reasonably believes".

_*SUBCHAPTER IV. ARREST.*_

_ GS 15A-401_

_ (2) A law-enforcement officer is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person for a purpose specified in subdivision (1) of this subsection only when it is or appears to be reasonably necessary thereby:_

_ a. To defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force;_

_ b. *To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay*; or_

_ c. To prevent the escape of a person from custody imposed upon him as a result of conviction for a felony. _

​-------------------------------------------

A legal definitions from South Carolina:


SECTION 16-23-10. Definitions.

When used in this article:

(4) *"Fugitive from justice" means any person who has fled from or is fleeing from any law enforcement officer to avoid prosecution or imprisonment for a crime of violence*.​

An appeals court ruling:

November 02, 2011
Is a stun gun a dangerous weapon capable of inflicting deadly force? That is a question we have raised  here  on several occasions and suggested that they should be treated as deadly weapons.

Yesterday (11-1-11) the N. C. Court of Appeals, in a unanimous decision, agreed with our reasoning.

*In the case of the State v. Riveria the court ruled that a stun gun (an X26 Taser) "is a dangerous weapon that endangered or threatened Scott's (victim) life."* You can read the actual decision by clicking here.

Court of Appeals rules stun guns are deadly weapons​-------------------------------------

And a South Carolina Law:


SECTION 16-23-415. Taking firearm or other weapon from law enforcement officer.

*An individual who takes a firearm, stun gun, or taser device from the person of a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer is guilty of a felony* and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than five years, or fined not more than five thousand dollars, or both, if all of the following circumstances exist at the time the firearm is taken:

(1) the individual knows or has reason to believe the person from whom the weapon is taken is a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer;

(2) the law enforcement officer or corrections officer is performing his duties as a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer, or the individual's taking of the weapon is directly related to the law enforcement officer's or corrections officer's professional responsibilities;

(3) the individual takes the weapon without consent of the law enforcement officer or corrections officer;

(4) the law enforcement officer is authorized by his employer to carry the weapon in the line of duty; and

(5) the law enforcement officer or corrections officer is authorized by his employer to carry the weapon while off duty and has identified himself as a law enforcement officer.

HISTORY: 2006 Act No. 379, Section 3, eff June 9, 2006.​


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


He also had a warrant.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Apr 8, 2015)

Liminal said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The witness who saw the incident will fill in the beginning of the actions.  That and the vid will fry the cop.
> ...


I doubt it.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 8, 2015)

*Witness Who Recorded Shooting Of Walter Scott Speaks Out
*
Watch what he said.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> To effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person who he reasonably believes is attempting to escape by means of a deadly weapon, or who by his conduct or any other means indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended without delay



Wasn't he unarmed? How does he present an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to anyone? What was he going to do? Turn green and scream "HULK SMASH!?" 



Missourian said:


> *Fugitive from justice" means any person who has fled from or is fleeing from any law enforcement officer to avoid prosecution or imprisonment for a crime of violence*.



Interesting.  But how does this warrant deadly force?

Tennessee v Garner (1985)  held that the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer or others in the community.

The cop broke the law. He committed murder. The man was so far away from him that he presented no immediate threat. 

I can't believe you're trying to justify this by the law!


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 8, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> *Witness Who Recorded Shooting Of Walter Scott Speaks Out
> *
> Watch what he said.



Ahh, thank you for this.

From your article:

"I remember the police had control of the situation," Santana said during the interview (above). "You can hear the sound of a Taser... I believe [Scott] was just trying to get away from the Taser."

Now if this is true, the black man did not have the Taser, nor did he attempt to take the Taser. He was un.armed. 

The author of this thread would be wise to drop this subject.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead



Ahh, I like how you tried to twist this ruling.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 8, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > *Witness Who Recorded Shooting Of Walter Scott Speaks Out
> ...



Apparently there was some struggle before the shooting. 

In video from the link witness said "they were down on the floor"...


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead
> ...




I twisted nothing,  watch the video.  The officer only has to BELIEVE that Scott was in possession of his Taser.  Watch the video.  You can see Scott and the officer struggle over the Taser,  then the Taser goes flying BEHIND the officer.

The Tazer wires are wrapped around the officers hand,  and it appears that they have detached from the Tazer itself.  The only place the wires seam to lead is to Scott.  

So,  the officer believes that the suspect is now armed with his Taser,  and that it could be used against himself,  or another officer.  He has NO IDEA what this guy has done has done that he is running,  how desperate he is to escape,  or what he is willing to do to escape.  

We get to play a video,  rewind it,  play it again,  and have a panoramic view of the whole scene.  We have a pile of facts at our disposal.  The officer doesn't have that luxury.  He must make a decision with the facts he has on the spot.

Let's speculate.  What is Scott is a murderer (for all the officer knew,  he was).  What if Scott did have the Taser in his hand,  the officer didn't shoot him,  and Scott ran around the corner Tased a different officer and took his or her sidearm?

Could you make that decision in that span of time?   I'm glad I don't have too,  and I am willing to give those who do every benefit of every doubt,  especially when they are put in that position by a criminal (fugitive from justice).


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead
> ...




And,  speaking of twisting,  you should at least have the common courtesy to quote the relevant passage. 

however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."

—Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]
​


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 8, 2015)

Watch the witness on the TV shows tomorrow morning.

I think you will find him quiet, articulate, sad for both families, and convincing.

Additionally the other officers knowing there is a video out there plus what else may exist without their knowledge probably will not defend Mr. Scott.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 8, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Watch the witness on the TV shows tomorrow morning.
> 
> I think you will find him quiet, articulate, sad for both families, and convincing.




That seems like a good post to end on.  Let's see what the witness says,  and I'll be interested to find out what the object was that the officer moved.

Good night all.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...




we will have to see what the evidence produces


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 8, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...



But if the man running never gained control of the taser, he was in fact unarmed. No threat to the public. If the cop used the taser as Santana claims, it would be useless to Scott. There is no way to justify this. None.



Missourian said:


> The officer only has to BELIEVE that Scott was in possession of his Taser.



But he didn't. In Americano's article, Santana claims Slager had already deployed his taser. So what if he tried to take it? He failed.



Missourian said:


> I twisted nothing, watch the video.



At the 20 second mark, as Slager draws his firearm you can see something on the ground at his feet. Was that the taser? Might or might not have been.

At the 1:30 mark Slager drops what appears to be the taser next to Scott. This immediately could disprove the idea that Scott presented an imminent threat to the officer or that he had the taser in his possession. He didn't have the taser when he was shot. He was unarmed.

Moreover, in the Garner ruling the language is explicit:

"A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead..."

Scott was unarmed when he ran, making him a nondangerous suspect. This case is open and shut. Your interpretation of the law is flawed.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 8, 2015)

Missourian said:


> So, the officer believes that the suspect is now armed with his Taser, and that it could be used against himself, or another officer.



A claim the witness contradicts.



Missourian said:


> He has NO IDEA what this guy has done has done that he is running, how desperate he is to escape, or what he is willing to do to escape.



Slager first tells authorities that he used his taser in an attempt to subdue Scott. Then tells the dispatcher that Scott took his taser. That is a fatal contradiction.

But it appears he ran after he failed to gain possession of it. If he had gained possession of the stun gun and tried to use it on the officer, he had every right to shoot him. That video does not show anything in Scott's hands while he was running from the officer.



Missourian said:


> What if Scott did have the Taser in his hand, the officer didn't shoot him, and Scott ran around the corner Tased a different officer and took his or her sidearm?



What if Scott didn't have the taser? If you watch closely you can see what appears wires coming from Scott as he was trying to escape. That would clearly show he was not in possession of the stun gun. In law, speculation is not a defense.




Missourian said:


> We get to play a video, rewind it, play it again, and have a panoramic view of the whole scene. We have a pile of facts at our disposal. The officer doesn't have that luxury. He must make a decision with the facts he has on the spot.



The fact is, neither one of us are police officers and we can't even presume to know what went through his head at that moment. The suspect was fleeing. He didn't have the taser. It would either tell that me that Slager resorted to the least deadly way to apprehend Scott first, and when he fled he drew his firearm and killed Scott, or he never used his stun gun to apprehend Scott and simply shot an unarmed suspect. 

Like so:

"Slager pursued Scott into a grassy lot and *claimed that he fired his Taser to subdue him.*

Moments later, Slager reported on his radio, “Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser,” according to the Times."

Video Shows Officer Michael Slager Shooting Unarmed Black Man In The Back In South Carolina


----------



## Missourian (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac

I'm just getting ready to hit the sack,  but a couple of things.

First,  that object is not the taser...Americano posted this pic,  and I circled the taser in red...if you watch the very first frames of the video,  you see it bounce away behind the officer.

I don't know what that object is that the red arrow is pointing at,  but what it ISN'T is the taser.








Second,  the Taser police model X3 can fire three times without a reload.
Only civilian models X2 and earlier are restricted to single fire configurations.

Lastly,  there is no fatal contradiction...in fact,  that statement that was in video,  broadcast right after the shots were fired REINFORCES the officers belief that Scott had possession of the taser.  It is obvious in the video that the officer doesn't see the taser bouncing behind him...and it is equally easy to believe that the officer thought Scott had gained control of the weapon in the struggle.

Now I'm going to bed,  for real.  We'll pick this up tomorrow.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 9, 2015)




----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> TemplarKormac
> 
> I'm just getting ready to hit the sack,  but a couple of things.
> 
> ...



The why does the police report say Slager deployed his taser before shooting Scott? I've watched the video five times before you posted your response. And since the taser was flung away behind Slager, it's possible he fired the first round only before Scott allegedly gained possession of the taser. However, it appears he dropped it to run. Meaning he was unarmed when he was shot dead.

(EDIT: The model Slager used was an X26, not an X3. This model can only be fired once.)

One taser round in some cases (given how robust Scott appears to be) would not be sufficient to subdue someone. This is further buttressed by the fact _Scott was still standing_, indicating to me that the taser round was ineffective in its function to disable the suspect.






Watch Scott as he is running, his left hand is fully visible to the viewer. There's more. Watch Scott as he drops to his knees after the fatal shot strikes at the 0:20 second mark near the tree. Both his left and right hands are now visible. Now, his right hand hits the ground first, you can see it in midair near his thigh area as he is falling to the ground, his left arm and hand bent in the air at shoulder proximity. That precise instance shows me Scott was unarmed as he fled.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

I love video analysis. Whether I'm wrong or right doesn't matter. This is fascinating, but this issue is tragic. There's always a downside with fascination.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> It is obvious in the video that the officer doesn't see the taser bouncing behind him...and it is equally easy to believe that the officer thought Scott had gained control of the weapon in the struggle.



Ahh, but Scott was in full view of Officer Slager. Surely he saw Scott throw away the taser before he ran?


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Running away from a cop is a threat to everyone if the suspect is a violent criminal, and he escapes.  His escape puts him in position to attack anyone and everyone, after this event.  That is where/how he is a threat.

As for the cop lying on a report, IF he did, then he could be prosecuted for THAT, not capital murder.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Second, the Taser police model X3 can fire three times without a reload. Only civilian models X2 and earlier are restricted to single fire configurations.



Also, after further research, Missourian, the taser Slager used was not an X3, but an earlier model X26, X26a or X26c. Those tasers can only be fired once. The North Charleston PD had only the X26 models.









According to the Post Courier and the police reports, he was trained to use the X26:

"He passed courses on how to use the Taser X26 when he was hired in North Charleston and performed well on shooting tests with his .45-caliber Glock 21. Supervisors indicated in performance reviews that he met expectations as an officer and kept a tidy patrol car."

Attorney North Charleston police officer felt threatened before fatal shooting - Post and Courier

It was incorrect to assume the NCPD had the X3's at the time of this shooting. Not all police departments have the X3 model as of yet. In fact the X26 started being issued to police beginning in 2003. It wasn't until 2009 that Taser released the X3 six full years after the release of the X26. It is safe to assume that smaller police departments like the NCPD have yet to modernize their taser arsenals.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The witness who saw the incident will fill in the beginning of the actions.  That and the vid will fry the cop.


We saw how "reliable"so-called  "witnesses" are, with the Michael Brown case.  When pressed in court, under oath, and worried they could be prosecuted for perjury, they recanted, and admitted they didn't see the shooting.  I want to see a video of what happened at the traffic stop, and the confrontation between the 2 guys. 

So far, I haven't seen a shred of evidence to show that the cop's story of the suspect fighting with him and trying to get his taser, isn't true.  If anybody has a video of THAT, show it.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...



Did they show the fight between the 2 guys, that Slager claims occured ?


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Running away from a cop is a threat to everyone if the suspect is a violent criminal, and he escapes.



He wasn't a violent criminal.  Failing to pay child support is hardly warrant to label him a violent criminal.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


1.  The officer could be referring to the fight before the suspect ran, when he says he was in fear for his life.

2.  Do you have ANY evidence that the 2 guys fought with each other ? Or that _"The tazer is knocked out of the officers hand by the offender.", _as you claimed ?  The video I saw didn't show anything but the suspect running away and being shot, and the aftermath of that.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Running away from a cop is a threat to everyone if the suspect is a violent criminal, and he escapes.
> ...


I said IF the suspect was a violent criminal.  The cop says he was, and that the 2 of them fought before the suspect ran away.  If that is true, then he certainly would have been a violent criminal.  Do you have some* proof* *to refute* the officer's claim ?


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Do you have some* proof* *to refute* the officer's claim ?



I just posted it. Please, feel free to read the last two pages.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> > Stupid citizens!  Everyone can agree that the officer was in the wrong.  In fact, he is in jail charged with murder.  So what do the idiots do after the Chief of Police has a meeting to talk about the crime?  The dumb-assed citizens start chanting " no justice, no peace".  Are they so fucking stupid they don't realize justice is being served?  The cop is in jail..charged with murder.  I can't understand such stupidity from a group of people.  When are they going to get an IQ over room temperature?
> ...


You have convicted this cop of murder.  Based on WHAT ?  Just like I asked TemplarKormac  (and everyone here) >>  Do you have some* proof to refute* the officer's claim that the suspect attacked him and fought with him, and tried to grab his tazer ?  THAT is the crux of this case, and only that.  I'm still waiting for someone to present evidence that that did or did not happen.  If there is evidence to corroberate the cop's story, then his shooting would have been justified under the Fleeing Felon Rule, established by the Supreme Court in the Tennessee vs Garner case.  If there is no evidence, then the cop is not guilty, based on insufficient evidence (innocent until proven guilty)


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Do you have some* proof* *to refute* the officer's claim ?
> ...


OK. I just spent 10 worthless minutes tracking down your worthless posts, none of which show one shred of evidence that the officer's story of the suspect attacking and fighting him is untrue.  When you have some of THAT, let me know.  And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Just notice that Missourian missed the fact that Slager was using an X26 model taser, not an X23. Therefore it was impossible for the taser to be useful to Scott at the time he gained possession of it, because Slager had already used its one and only shot. 

I also pointed out in my posts key parts of the video with specific citations of the time. Go watch it if you like.

Ok?


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?



This wasn't anything of the sort. My knowledge of the incident clearly surpasses your own.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...


Watch WHAT ?  WHERE ?  And what kind of tazer it was, has nothing to do with this.  All that matters is whether Scott attacked Slager or not.  You have proof of that, or not ?  If you do, present video of that here/now, and stop referring me back to other parts of the thread.  You got something ?   POST IT.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?
> ...


You have not shown that, one iota.  Show the incident from the traffic stop to the shooting, or take your football and go home.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Read this, from post #543, I stated:

"Watch Scott as he is running, his left hand is fully visible to the viewer. There's more. Watch Scott as he drops to his knees after the fatal shot strikes at the 0:20 second mark near the tree. Both his left and right hands are now visible. Now, his right hand hits the ground first, you can see it in midair near his thigh area as he is falling to the ground, his left arm and hand is bent in the air at shoulder proximity. That precise instance shows me Scott was unarmed as he fled."


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Watch WHAT ? WHERE ? And what kind of tazer it was, has nothing to do with this




And what kind of tazer he used has plenty to do with it. If it had 3 charges as the X3 does, Slager would have a more solid case. But using an X26 which he already deployed, means that what Scott had was a paperweight. Scott was unarmed. 

It is useless to deny it. Slager committed murder.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



There is no footage of the traffic stop, only footage showing the altercation. Consider that this footage was shot FROM A CELL PHONE.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> I have not defending the cop, but I have defended due process of law.



With all due respect, due process of law does not involve summary execution.


----------



## cnm (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You said he attacked the police officer. Who's account is this?
> ...


_'what else would have attracted the attention of the videographer?'_

A chase.


----------



## cnm (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> We have all of infinity to second guess this officers decisions,  he had a split second.


After the guy started running away? What is going on here?


----------



## Politico (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...


From the cellphone of a Millennial who doesn't know how to keep a camera still. Seriously are you folks all suffering from Parkinsons or are you just retarded?


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 9, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...


Hmmmmm.... are you one of those silly twits who won't answer a straight question when backed into a corner?

When you served-up your facetious remark, to the effect: "When in doubt, shoot. Problem solved."... whom were you talking about, as the shooter?

The Cops or the Suspects?

I have no idea why you're dragging your feet and trying to weasel-out of answering a straightforward question; consequently, I have no idea why you are carrying-out and resisting the simple courtesy of a straightforward answer, and resorting to unprovoked insult; in effect, I have no idea what you're babbling about.

Are you really one of those gutless, nutless types who won't serve-up a direct and straightforward answer, to a direct and straightforward question?

You seem to be really big on throwing rocks at other people, but your deer-in-the-headlights reaction to simple questions - when pressed - your obtuse approach - doesn't speak very well of your own ability to interact and play well with others.

Ah, well, I tried... no great loss.

Next time, be sure you can finish what you start, eh?


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 9, 2015)

Politico said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


Yeah, I'll say that much... some of these fools don't understand the need to minimize movement while filming... something most folks with even an average IQ figure out the very first time they handle a video camera and look at the results of their filming of a moving or action sequence. I understand that the shock and excitement of the moment, and that a need to re-position during the course of an ongoing filming, can play a part in this, but, once you've planted both feet firmly on the ground for your next sequence, point, zoom, focus and stay-the-phukk still and just record. Jesus-H-Tap-Dancing-Christ but some of these twits lose soooooooo much precious (and oftentimes important) footage due to such twitching.

What a damned shame.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



* draws his firearm you can see something on the ground at his feet.*

it might have been the holster for the taser  or the taser hard to tell


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 9, 2015)

Dot Com said:


> not only did he shoot him in the back but he shot him in the back 8- TIMES


The cop shot eight rounds. Four hit the deceased in the back.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 9, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



*Therefore it was impossible for the taser to be useful to Scott at the time he gained possession of it*

in one of the pictures it shows the wires for the taz in the cops  hands or hooked to his hands  i dont know which 

however could the person holding the taz pull the trigger more then once sending a jolt or another jolt into the officer 

which would make it a useful tool


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You said he attacked the police officer. Who's account is this?
> ...


There is no evidence in that video that Scott attacked the cop.

What you're seeing in that initial frame where the two can first be seen is the cop holding Scott's arm with his left hand...






... the taser goes flying from Slager's grip, not because Scott _"knocked"_ it out of the cop's hand but because the taser's wires were still attached to Scott as he began to flee...


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 9, 2015)

The witness told the reporter he saw the "two" men on the ground".
Obviously they were fighting each other.
I'm not ready to pass judgement against the cop like all the fuck-wits at MSNBC have already done.
Wait for the trial.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 9, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> The witness told the reporter he saw the "two" men on the ground".
> Obviously they were fighting each other.
> I'm not ready to pass judgement against the cop like all the fuck-wits at MSNBC have already done.
> Wait for the trial.




exactly


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Here you go Jake...try a rebuttal.  "Because I don't like it" just isn't going to cut it.
> 
> The more I watch the video, the more positive I am that the officer will be acquitted.
> 
> ...


It appears the cop lied....

_“Shots fired, and the subject is down,” he said into his radio, according to an incident report. *“He took my Taser.”*_

The video does not show Scott taking the taser from the officer, unless by _"took my taser,"_ he meant Scott began to flee with his taser still attached to his leg.

Also in that article, Slager claims he got into a _"foot chase."_ The video doesn't show that unless by "foot chase," he meant he "chased" after Scott to handcuff him while he lied dying on the ground. 

And lastly, Slager is also seen on the video tampering with evidence at the crime seen.​


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > No you're wrong.  The officer had no justification to discharge his weapon, that's why he out of a job and being charged with murder.
> ...


Other than the officer's claim, there is no evidence Scott committed any "crime of violence." He was pulled over for a traffic violation (non-violent) and was purportedly being arrested for not being up to date on child support payments (non-violent).

Other than the officer's claim, there is no evidence he took the taser from the cop.

Other than the officer's claim, there is no evidence his own safety was in danger from the taser.

Basically, nothing you highlighted above seems to apply here.


----------



## Bush92 (Apr 9, 2015)

Whats being from the South have to do with anything? It's 2015 not 1935. Wake up.


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> The witness told the reporter he saw the "two" men on the ground".
> Obviously they were fighting each other.
> I'm not ready to pass judgement against the cop like all the fuck-wits at MSNBC have already done.
> Wait for the trial.


No, not so obvious. That witness said, _"they were down on the floor. I remember the police had control."_

That does not sound like they were "wrestling" to me. Sounds like Slager was attempting to subdue Scott.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 9, 2015)

ClosedCaption said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > ClosedCaption said:
> ...




You do realize there was an investigation going on.....that they have to follow something called procedure...and considering how wrong you lefties have been in most of the other famous cases it is nice to know they were investigating the case...as per normal procedure, when the video came out.....once they saw the video it sped up the arrest ....but with 8 shots in the back, with eyewitnesses, this time going against the cops testimony, that he was going to be in the same place as he is now.....

I know.....you guys keep getting stung by your martyrs turining out to be nothing more than thugs....but this time the cop was in the wrong...and he is being punished for it.......



> what was that reason?



They arrested him because the evidence shows he shot the guy when he was running away....of course it was after he resisted arrest in the beginning, but the cop was arrested for shooting him while there was no threat.....and again the ballistics and eyewitness testimony....you know, the guy who filmed the incident even without the camera, would have had this guy arrested and charged eventually as well......


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 9, 2015)

Faun said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




The witness who took the video said they were on the ground when he walked up...........


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 9, 2015)

Faun said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...




Regardless of anything to do with the tazer...once he turned and ran no shots should have been fired, at all....sadly, adrenaline took over and the cop couldn't control it......


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


So? He also said the cop had control. Sounds like they were on the ground because the cop was possibly trying to arrest Scott.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Maybe you didn't watch the video, it was an execution.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...






tigerred59 said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



If you're suggesting FOX will rally around the officer, you're wrong.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 9, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...



People can act however they want.  Problem is when they act certain ways and the cop reacts to it in a way they don't like, they wonder what happened.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...






You need to learn more of the details of this case.

The police reports were released to the public yesterday. In that police report they claim they did CPR on him. Which they didn't do. I would have to go and read the reports again for the other lies, that was the one I could remember.  Better yet, why don't you read those reports?

A broken taillight isn't a felony. The law says to be able to shoot a fleeing person they have to be a felon and have to be a serious risk to the community.

The cop ran his background when he was first stopped. That's just proper police procedure.If he had been a felon then the cop would have arrested him on the spot.  The police would have already released his arrest record to the public and not charged the police who shot him with murder.

Which that man wasn't a felon. A broken tail light isn't a serious risk to the community. If it was then the penalty for it would be death not just a fine and a misdemeanor.

You're incorrect in your analysis.

If the situation was what you claim it to be, then why did the police force stop defending him and charge  him with murder?

And please tell me what felony the man committed.

I didn't say the cop planted at tazer. I said the cop planted evidence. Which he clearly did in the video. We don't know what it was that he planted but the video clearly shows he planted something in an effort to cover his own butt for murdering that man.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by _Tennessee v. Garner,_ 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."[2]
> 
> "A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force."
> 
> ...



The officer in question is a murderer and a coward, he deserves whatever happens to him.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Watch the witness on the TV shows tomorrow morning.
> ...






Lawrence O'Donnell played the interview on his show last night. 

The thing is you would have to turn off fox news and turn the channel to MSNBC which I have a feeling is something you wouldn't do.

He also showed the police reports and read parts of it on the air.


----------



## Papageorgio (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Gee, FOXNews or MSNBC, I don't watch either. Lol! I don't trust either to be fair or accurate.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...




How is having a tail light out being a violent felon? What proof do you have that he was a violent felon? If he had a felony record I'm sure that it would have been released by now. It's a public record and I'm sure some right winger would have found it by now and let us all know about it.

I have read the reports. I have seen the reports presented on the news.

In that report the cops claim they did CPR on him. Do you see anyone doing CPR on that dead man? I saw the cop search the man and put handcuffs on him then walked back to pick something  up to plant something close to his body.

If he was a violent felon the police department would know all about it by now and the never would have charged the cop with murder.

I think it's disgusting for anyone with the exemption of his lawyer, to even try to defend this murder by a cop.

Here's a detail that I approve of from the police department. The cop's wife is 8 months pregnant. The police will continue health insurance on her and the baby once it's born. Even though they fired the policy holder and don't have to keep covering his wife. Which I think is the right thing to do.


----------



## Papageorgio (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...



COBRA laws say they do, she may have to continue paying premiums however they have to cover, even if they didn't, she could get Obamacare.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 9, 2015)

You touch a cop in the process of doing his duty whether it's traffic stop or anything else you can be charged with committing a Class A felony.
The witness (who believes cops sometimes are only firing blanks. A common myth in the negro community and that's why so many of them 'run' ) said both men "were on the ground".
The jury will find out why. I suggest all you MSNBC LIB negroes at least once stop from once again making complete fools of yourselves and wait until the jury has ruled. THEN you can go burn down the fucking sewers you appear to enjoy living in.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2015)

Papageorgio said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...




I don't watch fox at all.

I do watch MSNBC but not every day. My television isn't turned on until the evening. 

I had seen a report on the MSN site that the person who recorded it on their phone had been interviewed and would be on the Today show Thursday morning. I didn't want to wait and I don't watch the Today show so I turned on MSNBC last night and caught Lawrence O'Donnell's show. 

I get my news from a variety of sources. None of them are fox. I find that the Christian Science Monitor, the BBC and Canadian News to be the most honest and best sources of REAL news. 

However it seems that by watching MSNBC last night I have more details of the facts of this situation than some on this board.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.

This cop is in serous trouble, only short of the trouble he gave to Scott.

I wonder if the drugs used in the lethal injections are as horribly painful as described.


----------



## Conservative65 (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> 
> This cop is in serous trouble, only short of the trouble he gave to Scott.
> 
> I wonder if the drugs used in the lethal injections are as horribly painful as described.


I thought you were opposed to the death penalty?


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> You touch a cop in the process of doing his duty whether it's traffic stop or anything else you can be charged with committing a Class A felony.
> The witness (who believes cops sometimes are only firing blanks. A common myth in the negro community and that's why so many of them 'run' ) said both men "were on the ground".
> The jury will find out why. I suggest all you MSNBC LIB negroes at least once stop from once again making complete fools of yourselves and wait until the jury has ruled. THEN you can go burn down the fucking sewers you appear to enjoy living in.


There's no evidence other than the cop's claim that Scott "touched him." That they may have been "on the ground" does not necessarily mean Scott did anything offensive.


----------



## EverCurious (Apr 9, 2015)

Maybe I'm just being a chicken-shit here, but if ANYONE attacks an armed and trained officer, then they sure as hell become a suspected threat to the public.  What is going to happen if that person comes across an untrained civilian and attacks them? (see "knock out game" videos for one fairly well documented example of what happens when you mix violent people with random civilians on the streets.)


That said, I don't have enough evidence to say if the officer was actually attacked or not yet, but the witness did state that they were down on the ground at some point.  He said that it looked like the officer had the suspect under control, but that's rather irrelevant, it is clear that the officer lost control of the suspect - twice actually, the first time when the suspect ran and they had to catch him, then again moments before the fatal shooting. (Note, I've only had time to watch the initial short clip and read the witness guy with the phone camera's interview so far.)


----------



## Bush92 (Apr 9, 2015)

guno said:


> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> 
> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier*


He did have a good Weaver Stance when he fired though. Helluva shot at a moving target.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Not too many people are watching MSNBC these days. Their ratings continue to tank further and further.


----------



## Dot Com (Apr 9, 2015)

Thangod this concerned citizen was there to catch the taxpayer-financed, white devil's treachery: Witness to S.C. police shooting thought about erasing the video - Yahoo News

*** just saw the vid in that link and wished I hadn't watched it. That fat cop was within walking distance to the suspect. He didn't even attempt to run after the guy who was within "spittin' distance" of him. He should have been on the "fat boy club" and forced to run around a track on his lunch break.Sick & sad. Lets hope he gets the royal welcome in prison guno


----------



## Care4all (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> 
> This cop is in serous trouble, only short of the trouble he gave to Scott.
> 
> I wonder if the drugs used in the lethal injections are as horribly painful as described.


it's NOT premeditated murder imo, so no death penalty.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

Care4all said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> ...


Makes sense.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Care4all said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> ...


I don't even see where there is grounds for the cop to be charged at all.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...


The suspect could be a felon if he attacked the cop and wrestled with him, as the cop said.  With no video to disprove that, and a witness saying both guys were on the ground, it appears that there was a fight, and the cop says the suspect caused it.  With nothing to disprove that, the cop should be walking (not charged), as his shooting would be legal, based on the fleeing felon rule.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Faun said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > You touch a cop in the process of doing his duty whether it's traffic stop or anything else you can be charged with committing a Class A felony.
> ...


If all there is, is the cop's account of the incident, than there is insufficient evidence to charge him.  Starting to look like another Zimmerman situation.  City fathers afraid of race hustlers and their riot mobs, quickly charge cop to keep rioters from tearing up the town.  These goons are beginning to control America.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


You also think you are a failure because of AA...it just doesn't matter what you think...hate and rage makes you blind to the truth.  

A few months from now, they will announce a plea agreement of manslaughter.  This cop is probably gong to jail...but there still may be information we do not know, so we will have to wait and see.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



The traffic footage says otherwise. It appears Slager used his taser as he was chasing Scott. The taser was therefore useless.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Of course you don't.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 9, 2015)

Care4all said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> ...


That's what I thought too.  We are both wrong.  Under South Carolina law when the cop moved the taser to put it next to the dead guy that's despoiling the crime scene making it capital murder and a death penalty case.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

1.  Was the suspect fleeing an imminent danger to the cop or others?
2.  Were the eight shots fired at the back of the suspect proportional in nature?
3.  In light of 1 and 2, was the cop's actions reasonable?


----------



## hjmick (Apr 9, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




For what it's worth, all the local stations are saying 30 to life...


----------



## Nutz (Apr 9, 2015)

Well the dashcam video is out.  Not really informative.  Except the taser claim...if TK is right about the type of taser - it was useless.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> 1.  Was the suspect fleeing an imminent danger to the cop or others?
> 2.  Were the eight shots fired at the back of the suspect proportional in nature?
> 3.  In light of 1 and 2, was the cop's actions reasonable?



This cop slaughtered the guy.


----------



## initforme (Apr 9, 2015)

8 shots?  C'mon...8 shots? Stupid that is.  Over the line that is.  Guilty as charged in my book.  A bad example of a police officer.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> 
> This cop is in serous trouble, only short of the trouble he gave to Scott.
> 
> I wonder if the drugs used in the lethal injections are as horribly painful as described.


The drugs used in lethal injections aren't painful at all.

The first injection puts the person into a deep sleep.   The second is a paralytic to immobilize the muscles.  The last one stops the heart.   It's like dying in your sleep.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Apr 9, 2015)

Some of the rest of the story....  UPDATE Walter Scott Shooting Witness Feidin Santana Speaks Out UPDATE The Professional Handler Steps In The Last Refuge 
Walter Scott “running from the auto-parts store“? “Wrestling on the ground“? Mr. Scott “being tazed during struggle“? Etc.

Of course none of that negates what is seen in the video; nor does it essentially change the absence of justification; but it does, well, broaden the picture somewhat…. Your thoughts?

UPDATE: WOAH !! Talk about broadening the picture – Video’s removed? Social Media Scrubbed? An “unknown” passenger in the vehicle of Walter Scott when it was pulled over by Officer Michael Slager?….

….and, wait for it…. all of a sudden we find out that Scott Family attorney Chris Stewart has been working with Ryan Julison? Who is person who crafted all the Trayvonn lies....... more than meets the eye again


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Nutz said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...


LOL.  What a mess.  Looks like satire.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...


And of course you do.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


First there has to be a reason to charge him, and there isn't because of insufficient evidence.  The cop's account can't be refuted because there's no video, and the only witness indicated there was a fight going on.  So if the suspect attacked, that puts him in the felon category, and his fleeing the scene puts the cop in legal standing to shoot him in the back, under* the Fleeing Felon Rule.*

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

initforme said:


> 8 shots?  C'mon...8 shots? Stupid that is.  Over the line that is.  Guilty as charged in my book.  A bad example of a police officer.


Doesn't matter if it is 8 shots or 80 shots.  Fleeing felon rule is what matters.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Some of the rest of the story....  UPDATE Walter Scott Shooting Witness Feidin Santana Speaks Out UPDATE The Professional Handler Steps In The Last Refuge
> Walter Scott “running from the auto-parts store“? “Wrestling on the ground“? Mr. Scott “being tazed during struggle“? Etc.
> 
> Of course none of that negates what is seen in the video; nor does it essentially change the absence of justification; but it does, well, broaden the picture somewhat…. Your thoughts?
> ...


The Scott family is the least reliable source in this whole thing. The media putting them on TV is just pure sensationalism.  They are 100% biased, and when interviewed on the Hannity Show, appeared to be lying continuously.  Whatt a joke to hear Don Lemon, on CNN, say the words_ "according to the Scott family".  _Good grief!


----------



## protectionist (Apr 9, 2015)

Matthew said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  Was the suspect fleeing an imminent danger to the cop or others?
> ...


Cops can slaughter people far more than in this case, 100% legally.  It all depends on the situation.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

And this situation condemns the cop, Protectionist.

It's over for him.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> ...


Actually the last one burns the arteries so they can't function, and if the sedative is not working, the pain is unbelievable.


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys said:
> ...


False. Unlike the Zimmerman case, there is an eyewitness. And he's saying Scott never had possession of Slager's taser, which counters Slager's claim that he did.


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

protectionist said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...


Why lie? The witness never said there was a fight going on.


----------



## bornright (Apr 9, 2015)

The media keeps saying he was shot 8 times in the back.  That will turn out to be another media lie.


----------



## bornright (Apr 9, 2015)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


When he got out of the vehicle he had a cap on.  When he was shot he did not have a cap on.  This could be evidence that the so called witness lied if he said there was no fight.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 9, 2015)

bornright, you fit the Hank Hill line of


----------



## bornright (Apr 9, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> bornright, you fit the Hank Hill line of


wait and see on the 8 shots in the back.  There will be evidence of a fight come out.


----------



## Liminal (Apr 9, 2015)

Care4all said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys is showing his ass yet again.
> ...



Looked like he had more than enough time to consider his decision.


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2015)

bornright said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


A missing cap does not mean a fight took place. It certainly is not evidence of a fight. The eyewitness said the two men were on the ground and that the officer had control of Scott just prior to recording it. The cap could have come off then, for all anyone knows.

Good observation though about the hat missing.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 9, 2015)

Dunno if anyone posted it yet... dashcam video.


----------



## GreenBean (Apr 9, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Fleeing felon rule...for the 100th time.  Officer attempted non lethal force via tazer.
> 
> Now,  you want to make a valid complaint?  Tampering with evidence by moving the tazer closer to the victim.
> 
> That's what is going to sink this guy.


No amount of convoluted logic can change the reality that the cop shot the guy in the back while he was running away -  No excuse - no way - no how - he executed that man and than lied about the circumstances.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 9, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> The thing is you would have to turn off fox news and turn the channel to MSNBC which I have a feeling is something you wouldn't do.



I'll bet it has something to do with it being the worst cable news channel on TV. Fox on the other hand has a monopoly.


----------



## Politico (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > not only did he shoot him in the back but he shot him in the back 8- TIMES
> ...


Five hit him. Get it right.



jon_berzerk said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


It was the taser as admitted by the guy who said they were on the ground fighting before he started his Parkinsons video.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 10, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



in one of the earlier posts 

you can see the "wires" from the stun  gun in the cops hands and not the stun gun 

i am not convinced that a single shot tazer can not be energized more then once 

during a single usage as long as the wires are in "contact" and someone pulls the trigger 

from my understanding as long as one is holding the trigger 

it continues to send the juice 

in that split second to the cop it may have not appeared useless


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 10, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




oh well wish so many had the same empathy for the victim


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 10, 2015)

Politico said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



thanks


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 10, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys said:
> ...




looking back at the video it appears for a sec that the scott  had the tazer


----------



## Dot Com (Apr 10, 2015)

Repubs start a "go fund me" campaign yet.?


----------



## Bush92 (Apr 10, 2015)

Dot Com said:


> Thangod this concerned citizen was there to catch the taxpayer-financed, white devil's treachery: Witness to S.C. police shooting thought about erasing the video - Yahoo News
> 
> *** just saw the vid in that link and wished I hadn't watched it. That fat cop was within walking distance to the suspect. He didn't even attempt to run after the guy who was within "spittin' distance" of him. He should have been on the "fat boy club" and forced to run around a track on his lunch break.Sick & sad. Lets hope he gets the royal welcome in prison guno


Your a piece of shit for calling police "white devils."


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 10, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


I agree with you on that.  I met several folks over a twenty year period who had served on the execution teams for Texas.  The mental damage is awful. they said.  Except for one of the chaplains, who got off on it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 10, 2015)

Bush92 said:


> [Your a piece of shit for calling police "white devils."


Your generalization is full of shit.  He is talking about the killer cop.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


At least get your facts straight asshole. The cop fired eight rounds and four hit the guy.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

Dana7360 said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


I wonder how much 'quality time' the simian was spending with the kids he wasn't helping support but was instead driving around in a fucking Mercedes? Possibly stolen from someone who worked to buy the car.
You have no clue what happened when according to an eyewitness both men "were on the ground".
Either do I.
You run your mouth. I'll wait for all the facts to be released before I draw any conclusions.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

JFK_USA said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > The man wasn't supporting his family.
> ...


Not eight. Four times.
Still wearing your "Hands Up Don't Shoot' T-shirt? HAAAAA HAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Are you saying you had those facts on Tuesday when we were discussing this?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys is merely running his racialist mouth.

If we were to use his characterizations, dannyboys would describe himself as a "white cave ape."

I will skip most of his postings henceforth, and others would be better off as well in so doing.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

J.E.D said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Where did you get your fucking brains? 
If the man laid a single finger on the cop that man had just committed a Class A felony.....anywhere in any State.
An eye witness has stated "both men were on the ground".
Case Closed.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 10, 2015)

No case is closed, except your brain, dannyboys, has been closed for a very long time.


----------



## Faun (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> J.E.D said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...


_Santana said when he first came on the scene while walking to his job he saw Slager on top of Scott, who was on the ground. He could hear the sound of a Taser in use.

At no time did Santana see Scott go after the Taser. He believes Scott was trying to get away.

"Mr. Scott never tried to fight," Santana told CNN._

Feidin Santana shooting witness fears retribution - CNN.com


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 10, 2015)

Bush92 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Thangod this concerned citizen was there to catch the taxpayer-financed, white devil's treachery: Witness to S.C. police shooting thought about erasing the video - Yahoo News
> ...


Lots of them are white devils. Some people just call things as they are.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...


The only simian was the cop. The guy the cop shot was Black. First homo sapiens.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

SlowMo gif frame by frame before shooting

What do you see?


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


So the eyewitness said both men were "on the ground". What was happening? The negro was blowing the cop?


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


I'm saying all you fuck-wit LIBs who habitually condemn the cops without all the information make yourself look like idiots. Again and again and again.
Fucking grow up!


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys said:
> ...



Calling me a lib really makes you look like an idiot.


----------



## J.E.D (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > dannyboys said:
> ...


Aren't you condemning the deceased without all of the facts? Asshole?


----------



## Dot Com (Apr 10, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > [Your a piece of shit for calling police "white devils."
> ...


yeah Bush92


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 10, 2015)

J.E.D said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


"
I wonder how much 'quality time' the simian was spending with the kids he wasn't helping support but was instead driving around in a fucking Mercedes? Possibly stolen from someone who worked to buy the car.
You have no clue what happened when according to an eyewitness both men "were on the ground".
Either do I.
You run your mouth. I'll wait for all the facts to be released before I draw any conclusions."
Does this post read like I'm "condemning the deceased" asshole?


----------



## Liminal (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Only four out of eight, at that distance?  At a target moving that slow?  The officer should have been fired for being a bad shot too.


----------



## Bush92 (Apr 10, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...


Ass Lips speaks.


----------



## Marianne (Apr 10, 2015)

guno said:


> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back*
> 
> *North Charleston officer faces murder charge after video shows him shooting man in back - Post and Courier*


Clear case of police brutality.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Second, the Taser police model X3 can fire three times without a reload. Only civilian models X2 and earlier are restricted to single fire configurations.
> ...



Not so mush an assumption as a possibility...but you are correct,  a non-repeating Taser blows a huge hole in my theory.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...




Good point.  Even the older models can be energizer more than once...it is the CO2 cartridge that is one time use.  The battery is in the gun itself,  and can be used several times.  You replace the cartridge that fires the probes.

Good catch Jon.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 10, 2015)

Missourian said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Missourian said:
> ...



Takes balls to admit when you're wrong. You're okay in my book, pal.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 10, 2015)

Missourian said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



BUT, a big but here, is I doubt Scott could have gotten close enough to employ drive stun on the officer. And, given that the cop is trained in hand to hand, it would have been impossible. I know for a fact cops are trained in ways to disarm a dangerous suspect without killing him. Also, you have to assess the combat capabilities of the two. One was a veteran, the other is a seasoned cop. Slager had control of the situation, showing he was capable of winning a physical altercation with Scott.  Therefore, you can assume the Taser was useless to Scott at that point, realizing he had no chance to get at the Officer. Why else would he run?


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

Checked the manual,  the X26 Taser is capable of multiple discharges.  If the officer hit the suspect with a standard 5 second one-trigger-pull discharge,  the full battery will discharge at least 100 seconds...and depressing and holding the trigger will deliver a continuous discard until the battery pack is completely depleted.

http://www.womenonguard.com/images/TASER-X26c-manual.pdf


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 10, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Checked the manual,  the X26 Taser is capable of multiple discharges.  If the officer hit the suspect with a standard 5 second one-trigger-pull discharge,  the full battery will discharge at least 100 seconds...and depressing and holding the trigger will deliver a continuous discard until the battery pack is completely depleted.
> 
> http://www.womenonguard.com/images/TASER-X26c-manual.pdf



Ahh, so, even then with the wires still connected to the taser, it would be useless to Scott. You would need to physically reattach the wires on the officer, which is also impossible. It was useless with the cartridge still inserted and all the wires on the ground.

And even at that point, if the taser was capable of multiple discharges, why didn't he [the officer] just continue pulling the trigger? Multiple shots are usually enough to disable anyone.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...




  Thanks.

You found evidence that debunked my theory.  I don't see how I had any choice.  It was a good find.  Facts like that bring us closer to the truth.  And the fun is arguing theories based in fact.

Good find on your part...kudos to you.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > Checked the manual,  the X26 Taser is capable of multiple discharges.  If the officer hit the suspect with a standard 5 second one-trigger-pull discharge,  the full battery will discharge at least 100 seconds...and depressing and holding the trigger will deliver a continuous discard until the battery pack is completely depleted.
> ...




Well,  the wires were wrapped around the officers wrist.  Could he receive a shock that way?  Did he know one way or the other whether he could or not?

The question would be if the wires are insulated in some way...if not,  then the officer COULD receive a shock.

Time to hit the web and see what comes up.


----------



## Faun (Apr 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


Your envy aside, why are you asking me? I wasn't there. You'll have to ask the eyewitness who was...

_ Santana said when he first came on the scene while walking to his job he saw Slager on top of Scott, who was on the ground. He could hear the sound of a Taser in use.

At no time did Santana see Scott go after the Taser. He believes Scott was trying to get away.

*"Mr. Scott never tried to fight,"* Santana told CNN.

Feidin Santana shooting witness fears retribution - CNN.com_​


----------



## TemplarKormac (Apr 10, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Time to hit the web and see what comes up.



Agreed.


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 10, 2015)

Bush92 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


Your lips are your ass.


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

Hard to find,  but the info was out there.  CEW stands for Conducted Energy Weapon.   This is from Taser International:



Controlling and restraining a subject during CEW exposure may put the CEW user and those assisting at risk of accidental or unintended shock.

Avoid touching the probes and wires and the areas between the probes during the electrical discharge.

https://www.taser.com/images/resour...rnings/downloads/law-enforcement-warnings.pdf

Page 2.​


----------



## Missourian (Apr 10, 2015)

Let's see if this animated GIF will upload.

It shows the taser bouncing behind the officer,  outside of his field of view.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

As of today:

Officer Slager got attorney - Andy Savage. He's reported that the police department and government officials are trying to prevent his access to crucial documents.
Grand Jury will hear Slager's case - Slager has been formally accused of murder, and the news media made it sound like he had been officially indicted. He has NOT been indicted - the case will go to a grand jury.
Evidence updates - Deshcam video and frame by frame analysis of shooting itself and prior the shooting.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

Liberal backpedaling begin: 

Huffington Post: *Why the Former South Carolina Cop May Walk in Scott Murder*
Daily Beast: *Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott: Here’s Why*


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 10, 2015)

More news:

National Bar Association: *North Charleston officer should be fired, indicted for allegedly filing false report*
The Post And Courier: *National Bar Association wants second officer in Walter Scott shooting video fired, arrested*


----------



## Asclepias (Apr 10, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Liberal backpedaling begin:
> 
> Huffington Post: *Why the Former South Carolina Cop May Walk in Scott Murder*
> Daily Beast: *Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott: Here’s Why*


They know the racists will do everything in their power to get the skinhead cop off. Just like I called Wilson walking I'm predicting this guy will not be convicted of anything do with murder or manslaughter.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 11, 2015)

TemplarKormac said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...




you are making way too many assumptions


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 11, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Checked the manual,  the X26 Taser is capable of multiple discharges.  If the officer hit the suspect with a standard 5 second one-trigger-pull discharge,  the full battery will discharge at least 100 seconds...and depressing and holding the trigger will deliver a continuous discard until the battery pack is completely depleted.
> 
> http://www.womenonguard.com/images/TASER-X26c-manual.pdf



thanks


----------



## jon_berzerk (Apr 11, 2015)

Missourian said:


> Let's see if this animated GIF will upload.
> 
> It shows the taser bouncing behind the officer,  outside of his field of view.
> 
> View attachment 39455




and what no buddy sees at this point 

is what happened between the the two 

to cause the stun gun to go flying


----------



## Politico (Apr 11, 2015)

Dot Com said:


> Repubs start a "go fund me" campaign yet.?


No a bunch of Millennials did though.



Ame®icano said:


> SlowMo gif frame by frame before shooting
> 
> What do you see?


How dare you show the pre CNN edited video!



dannyboys said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


No he was trying to grab his taser.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 11, 2015)

Politico said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> > SlowMo gif frame by frame before shooting
> ...


Maybe CNN should visit USMB to learn about reporting.


----------



## bornright (Apr 11, 2015)

bornright said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > bornright, you fit the Hank Hill line of
> ...


enough said


----------



## Missourian (Apr 11, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Liberal backpedaling begin:
> 
> Huffington Post: *Why the Former South Carolina Cop May Walk in Scott Murder*
> Daily Beast: *Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott: Here’s Why*




Haven't read the Huff-Po article,  but the Daily Beast,  though totally biased,  has a nugget of good information.  First it goes into Tennessee v Garner,  which we have already covered...but then it goes on to report another Supreme Court case with relevance to deadly force actions by police officers:

The second relevant Supreme Court case is _Graham v. Connor_ and it is here that Slager’s defense will likely prevail against the prosecution’s representation that Slager murdered Scott, since _Graham_ gives wide latitude and the benefit of the doubt to the police in the use of force, particularly deadly force. 

Graham holds that any determination of the “reasonableness” of a particular “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures *“must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than with the vision of 20-20 hindsight”* (of say, a non-police officer sitting on a jury). _Graham_ also mandates that the “seizure” (of Scott), be judged from the perspective of a reasonable _officer _who might have been at the scene of the shooting, and not some otherwise reasonable person who does not share the law enforcement pedigree and worldview.  

Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott Here s Why - The Daily Beast​


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 11, 2015)

But the Slager case does not meet either of the findings.

The guys is never going wear anything but prison clothes for at least 20 years, as long as he can stay two steps ahead of the bad boys in the gray-bar hotel.


----------



## EverCurious (Apr 11, 2015)

As I understand it a tazer can be used directly after the barbs have been deployed, I don't know about that model, or even what model the officer had (so far all I've seen is presumption based on what /other/ stations use, yes?)  In any event, I've heard you can fire off whatever range charge, but it can also be used in "hand to hand" as it were.

I'm not sure it matters if the suspect actually had the tazer or not frankly.  IF the suspect tried to take the tazer and the officer THOUGHT he had it, then that is enough for the officer to believe that the suspect is now a danger to the public or other officers.

The fact that the officer has been arrested is NOT necessarily an indication of anything more than the police station felt there were serious questions about his actions, and given recent national events they chose to err on the side of caution and placation - the first thing they said after arresting/detaining him was in relation to riots in Ferguson.  I do however think they have questions given the phone video, and I think they are /valid/ questions. -- I think they've made the right move in detaining the officer until they sort things out; not only for "IF" the officer acted wrongly, but for the riot issue as well.


I'd like to note that even in the very limited amount of time I have had to research on this incident, I have found a TON of inconsistencies between the reported "facts" given in various articles.  While a lot of it is pretty minor, sloppy reprinted evidence, there's been some MAJOR mistakes.  Like I'm trying to figure out if it was the officer who was in the coast guard for 6 years, or if the suspect was in the coast guard for 2 years; because I've seen multiple reports of both.  Maybe they were _both_ in the coast guard? 

Bottom line - don't just trust what you're reading is true: as usual the media are being a bunch of greedy self-serving sock-puppets.


A couple opinions/speculations here: I've seen a number of reports that said the suspect didn't actually have a warrant out for his arrest at the time he was pulled over - though his family is reported to have said that they figured he had ran because he didn't want to go to jail again for arrears child support.  He was jailed for failure to pay child support at least three times over the past decade or so, and from what I've read and had been as much as $7.8k behind, the last time he was jailed he was supposedly $5k behind, and was currently $7.5k behind. 

I trust the child support division about as far as I can pick up their building and throw it; that entire body is fucked and needs to be *completely* reworked - I've LIVED through some of the most ridiculous stupid bullshit with them because someone's exe fucking lied, and those bastards just go "okay" and proceed to immediately destroy the non-custodial parent's life, don't even get me started...  That said, I do believe this guy owed a fairly large amount of back child support and was indeed actively trying to avoid his responsibility to pay it - why is another question for sure, but he owed it and it is very probable that is why he ran, stupidly thinking he could avoid it.  He already knew better if that payment history is correct, he was already in the financial prison hell of CS enforcement, but for whatever reason he thought he could get away; perhaps again, or maybe /this/ time to see if he could, who knows...  

My point is that he ran even though the officer having his ID, kinda makes me think the address was incorrect on that ID.  My thought is he's been dodging it with some success for a good number of years - kind of speaks to character is all.  Couple that with the big if - IF he attacked that officer - then I'm sorry you don't have an _innocent black man_ running away from a _racist_ cop anymore, you have a long-standing /legal/ _problem_ and someone who refuses to take responsibility for his actions to the point that he's going to attack an officer to escape them: and THAT would be why he died.  This seems to be a very common theme for almost EVERY cop vs civilian shooting out there - the refusal to man up and take responsibility for their actions, even though its hard, in their general life as well as in those last second decision's that ultimately end their life... 

I've been down right sassy with officers on more than one occasion in the past because I disagree with them pulling me over, NEVER ONCE has an officer even put a HAND on his gun, never once has an officer had ANY fear of me being /any/ threat, never once have I been even asked to get out of the car, or even to stop arguing with the officer.  In fact, most of the time, both the officer and I leave laughing, half the time without a ticket even if it was /technically/ a violation...  I am NOT going to let an officer walk all over /my/ "rights," or even my /perceived/ rights, but I'm also not going to be a /problem/ that requires immediate, sometimes deadly, force from an officer - ever - and I am 99.99% confident that no police officer is going to shoot me - ever. 

The country as a whole needs to be teaching people how to act in a non-threatening way even when they do think their rights are being violated, NOT going around essentially "forgiving," and thereby condoning, the very behavior that is causing the situation to get to that lethal stage.  IF one truly believes it's /racism/ then take it to court, publicize the shit out of it, and get rich through court or legal settlements, _instead_ of just picking a fight, running, and getting killed.  Flip on that cellphone recorder every. single. time. you get pulled over; one should quickly hit the jackpot in the supposed "epidemic" of "black hate from cops game."  Teach your peeps that, and dollars to doughnuts, the "epidemic" will resolve itself regardless of "why" it's happening...  (A lot of peeps already figured this out, we don't say "I'm gonna kick your ass," we say "You'll be hearing from my lawyer," JS)


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 11, 2015)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



President Obama is a black man, he has an obligation like no other to address what is going on in the black community and if people like you, ie white motherfkkkers don't like it, who gives a fkkk??? I'm not a Sharpton fan, are you?


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 11, 2015)

Matthew said:


> The guy was not armed and was running away with his back turned. Cop is a guilty as hell.



Cops are just lazy...they don't want to chase you down, they don't want to argue with you, they don't want to do a damned thing but get a paycheck, eat a damned doughnut for free and go home. All guilty of not admitting that they secretly hate minorities, especially blacks and don't value them as human beings.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Apr 11, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > tigerred59 said:
> ...


Obama is not black. He's faux black. He was raised by assimilated whities among assimilated whities and went to school with assimilated whites. His absentee father was not even an American black. He was an African national from a country with virtually no involvement in slave trade. Obama's white side is way more american black than his daddy's side. But skin color is all that matters to insulated white lefties and segregationist black bigots.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 11, 2015)

Rosh is describing himself as he projects his self hate on his perceived enemies.


----------



## tigerred59 (Apr 11, 2015)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> tigerred59 said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, do wake me up when you have something to say that's worth my time, until then ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 11, 2015)

tigerred59 said:


> President Obama is a black man, he has an obligation like no other to address what is going on in the black community and if people like you, ie white motherfkkkers don't like it, who gives a fkkk??? I'm not a Sharpton fan, are you?


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 11, 2015)

Responding officer statement - see attachment.

Also...


----------



## Manonthestreet (Apr 11, 2015)

Wonder if they have his social media scrubbed clean yet.........


----------



## Jarlaxle (Apr 11, 2015)

Nutz said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



If he agrees to a plea (unless it's for LWOP), the DA should go down as an accessory.  Fuck that: bring it to trial and go for the needle.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Apr 11, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Seems that 50,000mg of morphine might work better.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Apr 11, 2015)

You will never get murder one. When you lose then you'll have a mess.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Apr 11, 2015)

Go for murder one...take a plea for 25-life or LWOP.  Make sure he is "accidentally" put in general population in a few months.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Apr 11, 2015)

You wont get murder one, if you try his best option is go to court and walk free.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Apr 11, 2015)




----------



## Politico (Apr 12, 2015)

Ame®icano said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano said:
> ...


No this loon bin is the last place they would ever go.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 12, 2015)

The Pros. will go for M1 knowing they will never get it.
The GJ won't even rule the cop be charged...with anything.
The cop will walk away. 
Once the GJ sees all the evidence and hears the families 'star witness' testify the dead gut was at one time on the ground with the cop the Pros's party will be over.
Note to negroes: Don't run.


----------



## Ame®icano (Apr 12, 2015)




----------



## Jarlaxle (Apr 12, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> You wont get murder one, if you try his best option is go to court and walk free.



Second degree murder shouldn't be tough...failing that, voluntary manslaughter should be open and shut.


----------



## bucs90 (Apr 12, 2015)

See the new link? Appears Scott used the taser on the cop....and the object cop picked up wasnt the taser. 

Theres an outside shot he can argue Fleeing Felon due to that...saying he may have tried the same attack on backup officers that he just did to him (tazing him).

Remember...this is a SC jury. VERY conservative and pro police.

Solicitor has a shit sandwich here.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 12, 2015)

bucs90 said:


> See the new link? Appears Scott used the taser on the cop....and the object cop picked up wasn't the taser.
> 
> Theres an outside shot he can argue Fleeing Felon due to that...saying he may have tried the same attack on backup officers that he just did to him (tazing him).
> 
> ...


Now you are spewing a narrative that the cop himself didn't he claim.


----------



## Rocko (Apr 12, 2015)

This case is getting interesting.  When I first saw the video, like most people I was disgusted, but now it looks like there's a situation where there might be more than meets the eye. I've never subscribed to the theory that there is a faction of police officers that just go around looking to shoot black people. I think it's a ridiculous notion, now that's not to say that every cop is perfect, of course that's not the case, but in large part I think they should commended more often for the job they do. Now back to this case, I think even if the victim tasEd  the officer how does that make the killing justified?


----------



## Nutz (Apr 12, 2015)

It doesn't...but racists will find a way to justify it.  My guess, they will next accuse the victim of raping a white woman.


----------



## Rocko (Apr 12, 2015)

Nutz said:


> It doesn't...but racists will find a way to justify it.  My guess, they will next accuse the victim of raping a white woman.



That's what I thought. The cop was probably pissed off the guy tased him and killed him. The cop can't say he was afraid for his life because the guy was running away. And the cop can't use the fleeing felon law because there's nothing to suggest the guy was a threat to anybody.


----------



## Rocko (Apr 12, 2015)

You got racists that will stand up for the cop no matter what...You also have race baiters that will exploit this and try to make it as much about race as possible. There's no evidence this has anything to do with race, and something like this doesn't happen all that often.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 12, 2015)

Rocko said:


> You got racists that will stand up for the cop no matter what...You also have race baiters that will exploit this and try to make it as much about race as possible. There's no evidence this has anything to do with race, and something like this doesn't happen all that often.


It's too much trouble to make it about race.  The cop was either wrong or not.  I believe he was wrong in this case.  No need to justify my opinion by playing the teaper race card game or by supporting the USMB narrative of anything anti-black.


----------



## Politico (Apr 13, 2015)

Rocko said:


> Nutz said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't...but racists will find a way to justify it.  My guess, they will next accuse the victim of raping a white woman.
> ...


No he did not tase him. The taser fell to the ground when the perp was trying to take it from him.


----------



## bornright (Apr 13, 2015)

Politico said:


> Rocko said:
> 
> 
> > Nutz said:
> ...


Are you sure the officer was not tased?  We have seen media stories change so much in this case like all others they report on.  At first he was shot 8 times in the back.  Then the number fell to 5 and was recently reported as 4.  Eight sounds better so that is the number the media chose to report.  They said there was no physical fight.  Then they had to change that to maybe there was to there actually was.  If he tased the officer it is a felony and he was fleeing.  I do not know the laws of South Carolina so perhaps it was a legal action on the part of the officer.  In most states the above action would not be legal if that is the way it occurred.  Hopefully the court will allow the truth to be brought out and the jury will not be influenced by the falsehoods of the media reportings.  Justice is sometimes difficult to obtain.


----------



## dannyboys (Apr 13, 2015)

Proving that Slager was Tased or not is a no-brainer. Any injuries to Slager will have been documented. Any damage to Slagers clothes from been in contact with a Taser will easily be proven by forensic experts.
The other attending officer has already given a sworn statement about what Slager threw on the ground.
This shooting will certainly give the fucking race whores at MSNBC something to lie about for a few news cycles but as the facts are revealed the fuck-wits at MSNBC will gradually back off like they always have to.
It's hilarious to watch the Union Thug Schultz have to spend time on his failed show read 'soft' news stories about fucking sink-holes in Thailand instead of having union bosses on everyday spinning the truth that fucking unions are fast becoming extinct across the country.


----------



## Nutz (Apr 13, 2015)

If the killer cop was tased...he wouldn't have been fired and arrested (and kept in jail without bail).


----------



## Nutz (Apr 13, 2015)

Despite what the racist teapers say and despite what those who have already found the cop guilty say....it is important to note thatthe SOUTH is doing the right thing. The SOUTH s handling ths situation correctly.  The SOUTH s paving the way for a better America. 

It is a shame that hate sites like USMB have to exist to destroy gains made in America and the South.


----------



## Politico (Apr 14, 2015)

bornright said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > Rocko said:
> ...


A person who is upright and drawing his gun was not tased.


----------



## bornright (Apr 16, 2015)

Politico said:


> bornright said:
> 
> 
> > Politico said:
> ...


Are you sure?


----------



## Politico (Apr 17, 2015)

Yes.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> And this situation condemns the cop, Protectionist.


No it doesn't.

Tennessee v. Garner - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## protectionist (Apr 28, 2015)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Tipsycatlover said:
> ...


Yes he did.  And it wouldn't matter if he didn't say there was a fight.  The officer said there was.  If there is no other evidence about a fight, the officer's account stands.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 28, 2015)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


That doesn't matter.  The simple point of Scott fighting with a cop, puts him in the felon category, and subject to the Fleeing Felon Rule.


----------

