Story of shooting BEFORE the cellphone video showed up, "He took my tazer"

[westwall]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

 

[Katzndogz]

And thank heavens whoever it was on the spot that took the video, God bless them for being there at the right time. Whoever it was is a hero in my books.

Has anyone seen this? First up the fairy tale.

"POLICE VERSION

Police officer Michael Slager said in a statement earlier this week that his encounter with Walter Scott began at around 9.30am on Saturday.

He said he pulled Scott's Mercedes over as a routine traffic stop for a broken brake light.

He said Scott then ran away into a vacant grassy lot where, at some point during the chase, the victim confronts Slager.

The officer then tried to use his Taser to subdue Scott, but claims the suspect grabbed the stun gun during the struggle, according to the statement.

According to police reports, Slager fired the stun gun, but it did not stop Scott.

At that point, the officer fired at Scott several times because he 'felt threatened,' Slager's statement said.

He added that his actions were in line with procedure.

Police then said Slager reported on his radio moments after the struggle: 'Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser.'

His department said the officers then performed CPR and delivered first aid to the victim. "

Then the nightmare that is truth.

WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS

Slager’s account has been called into question after the video appears to show him shooting Scott in the back.

The footage begins in the vacant lot apparently moments after Slager fires his Taser.

Wires which administer the electrical current appear to be extending from Scott's body.

As Scott turns to run, Slager draws his pistol and, only when he is 15 to 20 feet away, starts to fire the first of the eight shots at his back.

The video shows Slager handcuffing Scott's lifeless body.

Footage then appears to show Slager jogging back to the point where the Taser fell to the ground, bringing it over to Scott's body around 30 feet away and dropping it next to him.

It is only after two-and-a-half minutes that Slager is seen placing his hand on Scott's neck in an apparent attempt to check his pulse.

A black colleague then arrives and puts on blue medical gloves before handling the body, but is not seen performing first aid.

They are joined by a third officer, who also does not appear to tend to the victim. "

Daily Mail is doing a great job reporting this. The stills are really good.

Walter Scott shot in the back FIVE TIMES by cop Michael Slager in Charleston Daily Mail Online

Is every cop supposed to just let suspects run away ? How would you propose to stop them ? Maybe throw a lasso around them, like a cowboy roping a steer ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

For the fleeing felon rule to apply there must have to have been a felony. There's no felony here. The cop lost control. It's manslaughter or at a stretch Murder 2.

 

[protectionist]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[protectionist]

And thank heavens whoever it was on the spot that took the video, God bless them for being there at the right time. Whoever it was is a hero in my books.

Has anyone seen this? First up the fairy tale.

"POLICE VERSION

Police officer Michael Slager said in a statement earlier this week that his encounter with Walter Scott began at around 9.30am on Saturday.

He said he pulled Scott's Mercedes over as a routine traffic stop for a broken brake light.

He said Scott then ran away into a vacant grassy lot where, at some point during the chase, the victim confronts Slager.

The officer then tried to use his Taser to subdue Scott, but claims the suspect grabbed the stun gun during the struggle, according to the statement.

According to police reports, Slager fired the stun gun, but it did not stop Scott.

At that point, the officer fired at Scott several times because he 'felt threatened,' Slager's statement said.

He added that his actions were in line with procedure.

Police then said Slager reported on his radio moments after the struggle: 'Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser.'

His department said the officers then performed CPR and delivered first aid to the victim. "

Then the nightmare that is truth.

WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS

Slager’s account has been called into question after the video appears to show him shooting Scott in the back.

The footage begins in the vacant lot apparently moments after Slager fires his Taser.

Wires which administer the electrical current appear to be extending from Scott's body.

As Scott turns to run, Slager draws his pistol and, only when he is 15 to 20 feet away, starts to fire the first of the eight shots at his back.

The video shows Slager handcuffing Scott's lifeless body.

Footage then appears to show Slager jogging back to the point where the Taser fell to the ground, bringing it over to Scott's body around 30 feet away and dropping it next to him.

It is only after two-and-a-half minutes that Slager is seen placing his hand on Scott's neck in an apparent attempt to check his pulse.

A black colleague then arrives and puts on blue medical gloves before handling the body, but is not seen performing first aid.

They are joined by a third officer, who also does not appear to tend to the victim. "

Daily Mail is doing a great job reporting this. The stills are really good.

Walter Scott shot in the back FIVE TIMES by cop Michael Slager in Charleston Daily Mail Online

Is every cop supposed to just let suspects run away ? How would you propose to stop them ? Maybe throw a lasso around them, like a cowboy roping a steer ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

For the fleeing felon rule to apply there must have to have been a felony. There's no felony here. The cop lost control. It's manslaughter or at a stretch Murder 2.

Fighting with the cop would clearly be a felony.

 

[Roadrunner]

All I was able to see were the stills but man right from the get go this was a cold blooded killing.

I still can't believe what I saw.

I can't believe anybody still thinks cops won't shoot your ass if you resist lawful arrest and run.

There is that pesky thing,being in mortal danger,you seem to think is irrelevant?rational people don't see it that way,you become a mortal risk then tough luck,if your not being killed is not exceptiable

The cop has been arrested, charged, fired and held without bail.

You expect a lynching tonight, or, can you wait until Friday?

 

[Roadrunner]

And thank heavens whoever it was on the spot that took the video, God bless them for being there at the right time. Whoever it was is a hero in my books.

Has anyone seen this? First up the fairy tale.

"POLICE VERSION

Police officer Michael Slager said in a statement earlier this week that his encounter with Walter Scott began at around 9.30am on Saturday.

He said he pulled Scott's Mercedes over as a routine traffic stop for a broken brake light.

He said Scott then ran away into a vacant grassy lot where, at some point during the chase, the victim confronts Slager.

The officer then tried to use his Taser to subdue Scott, but claims the suspect grabbed the stun gun during the struggle, according to the statement.

According to police reports, Slager fired the stun gun, but it did not stop Scott.

At that point, the officer fired at Scott several times because he 'felt threatened,' Slager's statement said.

He added that his actions were in line with procedure.

Police then said Slager reported on his radio moments after the struggle: 'Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser.'

His department said the officers then performed CPR and delivered first aid to the victim. "

Then the nightmare that is truth.

WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS

Slager’s account has been called into question after the video appears to show him shooting Scott in the back.

The footage begins in the vacant lot apparently moments after Slager fires his Taser.

Wires which administer the electrical current appear to be extending from Scott's body.

As Scott turns to run, Slager draws his pistol and, only when he is 15 to 20 feet away, starts to fire the first of the eight shots at his back.

The video shows Slager handcuffing Scott's lifeless body.

Footage then appears to show Slager jogging back to the point where the Taser fell to the ground, bringing it over to Scott's body around 30 feet away and dropping it next to him.

It is only after two-and-a-half minutes that Slager is seen placing his hand on Scott's neck in an apparent attempt to check his pulse.

A black colleague then arrives and puts on blue medical gloves before handling the body, but is not seen performing first aid.

They are joined by a third officer, who also does not appear to tend to the victim. "

Daily Mail is doing a great job reporting this. The stills are really good.

Walter Scott shot in the back FIVE TIMES by cop Michael Slager in Charleston Daily Mail Online

Is every cop supposed to just let suspects run away ? How would you propose to stop them ? Maybe throw a lasso around them, like a cowboy roping a steer ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

For the fleeing felon rule to apply there must have to have been a felony. There's no felony here. The cop lost control. It's manslaughter or at a stretch Murder 2.

Fighting with the cop would clearly be a felony.

Apparently not if you are a black male.

Something in the 14th Amendment, I think.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

And every one resisted arrest and attacked the cop or ran.

 

[protectionist]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your own link answers your question. The felon must be posing an imminent threat. A man running away rather than being arrested for a broken taillight and a failure to pay child support does not pose an imminent threat, even it he resisted arrest and while doing so may have committed the felony offense of assaulting the officer attempting the arrest. All felonies do not pose immediate or even predictable imminent danger to the public.

FALSE! All that is necessary for a suspect to be shot while fleeing is for the officer to have "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] There is not a word in this decision about anything being "imminent".

 

[westwall]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Failure to pay child support isn't a felony last time I checked.

 

[westwall]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your own link answers your question. The felon must be posing an imminent threat. A man running away rather than being arrested for a broken taillight and a failure to pay child support does not pose an imminent threat, even it he resisted arrest and while doing so may have committed the felony offense of assaulting the officer attempting the arrest. All felonies do not pose immediate or even predictable imminent danger to the public.

FALSE! All that is necessary for a suspect to be shot while fleeing is for the officer to have "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] There is not a word in this decision about anything being "imminent".

Yeah....watching the video where oh where is the victim a threat? To anyone.....anyone at all.

 

[protectionist]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Failure to pay child support isn't a felony last time I checked.

That's not the issue. Attacking a cop is.

 

[westwall]

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Failure to pay child support isn't a felony last time I checked.

That's not the issue. Attacking a cop is.

It's pretty damned obvious the cop was never attacked. Run away from yes...but attacked? Not by a long mile.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Let's not try and convict the Officer please.

 

[protectionist]

2nd Degree implies malice aforethought as well. Just not planned. IIRC the difference is the planning part. Both imply malice, both imply pre-meditation, the First degree means there was planning. That's where the planting of the weapon comes in.

Either way the cop should go down for life.

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or
2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. -

See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your own link answers your question. The felon must be posing an imminent threat. A man running away rather than being arrested for a broken taillight and a failure to pay child support does not pose an imminent threat, even it he resisted arrest and while doing so may have committed the felony offense of assaulting the officer attempting the arrest. All felonies do not pose immediate or even predictable imminent danger to the public.

FALSE! All that is necessary for a suspect to be shot while fleeing is for the officer to have "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] There is not a word in this decision about anything being "imminent".

Yeah....watching the video where oh where is the victim a threat? To anyone.....anyone at all.

Nowhere. But so what ? 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.

 

[protectionist]

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Failure to pay child support isn't a felony last time I checked.

That's not the issue. Attacking a cop is.

It's pretty damned obvious the cop was never attacked. Run away from yes...but attacked? Not by a long mile.

How can you say that ? Do you have a shred of evidence to back it up ?

 

[westwall]

He's not a fleeing felon. He had a warrant, that's all. Fleeing felon laws pertain to those who have been convicted. And even there you're going to have a hard time convincing a jury that it was proper to kill a fleeing tax evader.

FALSE! Simply suspicion of a felony is enough.

"At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight." >> Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Failure to pay child support isn't a felony last time I checked.

That's not the issue. Attacking a cop is.

It's pretty damned obvious the cop was never attacked. Run away from yes...but attacked? Not by a long mile.

How can you say that ? Do you have a shred of evidence to back it up ?

The cop is untouched. Not a wisp of hair out of place.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If he was pulled over for a broken tail light then why were they on some grassy knoll? where was the car?

Hmmmmm

What would you do, if pulled over, your license checked, and it was found that there were outstanding warrants for your arrest?

Be honest.

I have been pulled over for tail-lights, and was glad I was informed.

Never had an outstanding warrant when it happened though.

I was brought up to support the kids I fathered.

Makes life so much easier.

He'll walk. This country is fucked.

I don't think so. IF this stuff is true, and he did lie about the tazer, which it looks like he did, then he will go to prison. The cop was wrong and he should go to jail. All the other cases ive seen previous to this, i.e. Brown, Garner, etc., the cop was in the right, but this one is different. Id say that makes it pretty fucking rare. In a nation our size, youd think you could find at least one example of this kind of stuff per day on youtube.

There is no epidemic of cop violence. Sure it happens, but its an inevitability. Whenever you have guys with guns in dangerous situations, there will be gun violence. Sometimes the violence will be illegal. The cops know this. They know if they break the rules, they go to prison. There are millions of cameras in the streets now, so they are playing with fire if they decide to execute people. Life in prison is a great deterrent, but its not like we have a choice, because thats the only deterrent weve got.

Whats the point with protests? What more do you expect to get? Should they make it a rule that only good guys are allowed to sign up? There are bad people in all walks of life. Do you really expect the police force to be any different? A small percentage will do bad stuff. No matter what you do, that will never change. Its human nature.

What's the point of protests?
Really? Ferguson protestors didn't put pressure on the powers that be to expose a problem and make change? They just had elections there yesterday.
It was the protests that led to a federal investigation that exposed the truth.
People shouldn't be upset and voice their concerns publically after such an event in their community?

I wonder what percentage turned out to vote yesterday?

Where is Stats when he is needed?

30%
Double the usual.
What's your point?

My point is, don't bitch if whitey doesn't elect the people you want.

Let's hope it is 60% next time.

Your point is retarded as they voted in two new African American members of city council.
How uninformed can you be?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And thank heavens whoever it was on the spot that took the video, God bless them for being there at the right time. Whoever it was is a hero in my books.

Has anyone seen this? First up the fairy tale.

"POLICE VERSION

Police officer Michael Slager said in a statement earlier this week that his encounter with Walter Scott began at around 9.30am on Saturday.

He said he pulled Scott's Mercedes over as a routine traffic stop for a broken brake light.

He said Scott then ran away into a vacant grassy lot where, at some point during the chase, the victim confronts Slager.

The officer then tried to use his Taser to subdue Scott, but claims the suspect grabbed the stun gun during the struggle, according to the statement.

According to police reports, Slager fired the stun gun, but it did not stop Scott.

At that point, the officer fired at Scott several times because he 'felt threatened,' Slager's statement said.

He added that his actions were in line with procedure.

Police then said Slager reported on his radio moments after the struggle: 'Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser.'

His department said the officers then performed CPR and delivered first aid to the victim. "

Then the nightmare that is truth.

WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS

Slager’s account has been called into question after the video appears to show him shooting Scott in the back.

The footage begins in the vacant lot apparently moments after Slager fires his Taser.

Wires which administer the electrical current appear to be extending from Scott's body.

As Scott turns to run, Slager draws his pistol and, only when he is 15 to 20 feet away, starts to fire the first of the eight shots at his back.

The video shows Slager handcuffing Scott's lifeless body.

Footage then appears to show Slager jogging back to the point where the Taser fell to the ground, bringing it over to Scott's body around 30 feet away and dropping it next to him.

It is only after two-and-a-half minutes that Slager is seen placing his hand on Scott's neck in an apparent attempt to check his pulse.

A black colleague then arrives and puts on blue medical gloves before handling the body, but is not seen performing first aid.

They are joined by a third officer, who also does not appear to tend to the victim. "

Daily Mail is doing a great job reporting this. The stills are really good.

Walter Scott shot in the back FIVE TIMES by cop Michael Slager in Charleston Daily Mail Online

Is every cop supposed to just let suspects run away ? How would you propose to stop them ? Maybe throw a lasso around them, like a cowboy roping a steer ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Was the victim a convicred felon professor?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Let's not try and convict the Officer please.

Have you seen the video?
At what point were 8 shots fired into a man from behind justifiable?
The officer hasn't been convicted but he has been judged as wrong. The murder charge shows as much.
Stop trying to defend him.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Second Degree Murder is typically defined as followed:

Though we're arguing the color of deck chairs on the titanic with this case. We both agree this cop is fucked. And should be.

Why should he be ? Isn't he within his rights to shoot a fleeing felon, as established by the SCOTUS case > Tennessee vs. Garner ?

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your own link answers your question. The felon must be posing an imminent threat. A man running away rather than being arrested for a broken taillight and a failure to pay child support does not pose an imminent threat, even it he resisted arrest and while doing so may have committed the felony offense of assaulting the officer attempting the arrest. All felonies do not pose immediate or even predictable imminent danger to the public.

FALSE! All that is necessary for a suspect to be shot while fleeing is for the officer to have "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] There is not a word in this decision about anything being "imminent".

Yeah....watching the video where oh where is the victim a threat? To anyone.....anyone at all.

Nowhere. But so what ? 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.

The same cop who we all watched dump 8 rounds into Scott's back. Was that officer's life in danger as he did that?