Southern cop shoots man running away in the back..

[Missourian]

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]

 

[TemplarKormac]

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 was, but what is WASN'T was the taser.


View attachment 39331


Second, the Taser police model X3 can fire three times without a reload.
Civilian models are only capable of 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 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.

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]

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]

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]

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. ​

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
​

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?

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]

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]

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]

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. ​

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
​

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?

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.

NBC just showed the whole video in slow motion, the officer clearly attempts to plant evidence.

Did they show the fight between the 2 guys, that Slager claims occured ?

 

[TemplarKormac]

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]

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. ​

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
​

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?

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

Do you have some proof to refute the officer's claim ?

I just posted it. Please, feel free to read the last two pages.

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]

Do you have some proof to refute the officer's claim ?

I just posted it. Please, feel free to read the last two pages.

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. Wen you have some of THAT, let me know. And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?

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]

And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?

This wasn't anything of the sort. My knowledge of the incident clearly surpasses your own.

 

[protectionist]

Do you have some proof to refute the officer's claim ?

I just posted it. Please, feel free to read the last two pages.

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. Wen you have some of THAT, let me know. And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?

Just notice that Missourian missed the fact that Slager was using an X26 model taser, not an X23. I also pointed out in my posts key parts of the video. Go watch it if you like.

Ok?

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]

And no more wildgoose chases, OK ?

This wasn't anything of the sort. My knowledge of the incident clearly surpasses your own.

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]

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."