Why was he running away?

[UllysesS.Archer]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

 

[Grandma]

According to the deceased's brother, he was terrified he'd be sent to jail.


A 50-year-old running from a cop isn't exactly logical, a backup cop could easily catch him.


And no one deserves the death penalty for running.

 

[Pogo]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

 

[eots]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

he had a warrant out for unpaid child support

 

[The Professor]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

The man, 50-year old Walter Scott had a warrant for non-payment of child support and apparently ran to avoid going to jail on that charge. Did the police have the right to shoot him to prevent his escape? The law is clear they did not.. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination, and the use of deadly force against him was criminal.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) examined a Tennessee State statute which allowed the police to use deadly force against ALL fleeing felony suspects. The SCOTUS found the Tennessee statute to be unconstitutional, ruling that deadly force could only be used to prevent the escape of a dangerous felon. The following are pertinent portions of the Supreme Court's Court's findings (highlights are my own):

“The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”

“However, it is not unconstitutional on its face. 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. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”

Tennessee v. Garner Cop Block

I hope that answers your question.

 

[Politico]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

No he ran because he had warrants. Nice Leftytoon fail though.

 

[G.T.]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

most factual answer ^

 

[DigitalDrifter]

This is an interesting twist.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

According to the deceased's brother, he was terrified he'd be sent to jail.


A 50-year-old running from a cop isn't exactly logical, a backup cop could easily catch him.


And no one deserves the death penalty for running.

Terrified he'd be sent to jail, over a tail light? Makes no sense.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

Not a real answer.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

he had a warrant out for unpaid child support

That would make some sense, even a dead beat dad doesn't deserve the death penalty, unless you ask the children's mother, that is.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

The man, 50-year old Walter Scott had a warrant for non-payment of child support and apparently ran to avoid going to jail on that charge. Did the police have the right to shoot him to prevent his escape? The law is clear they did not.. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination, and the use of deadly force against him was criminal.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) examined a Tennessee State statute which allowed the police to use deadly force against ALL fleeing felony suspects. The SCOTUS found the Tennessee statute to be unconstitutional, ruling that deadly force could only be used to prevent the escape of a dangerous felon. The following are pertinent portions of the Supreme Court's Court's findings (highlights are my own):

“The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”

“However, it is not unconstitutional on its face. 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. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”

Tennessee v. Garner Cop Block

I hope that answers your question.

That explains it a lot better, thank you.

 

[Roadrunner]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

Yes, it was very obvious the cop was going to execute him in the car, after he politely asked him to remain in the car.

Everyone could clearly see the cop only went back to his car and check the license to lure the dead guy into a sense of submission.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

The man, 50-year old Walter Scott had a warrant for non-payment of child support and apparently ran to avoid going to jail on that charge. Did the police have the right to shoot him to prevent his escape? The law is clear they did not.. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination, and the use of deadly force against him was criminal.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) examined a Tennessee State statute which allowed the police to use deadly force against ALL fleeing felony suspects. The SCOTUS found the Tennessee statute to be unconstitutional, ruling that deadly force could only be used to prevent the escape of a dangerous felon. The following are pertinent portions of the Supreme Court's Court's findings (highlights are my own):

“The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”

“However, it is not unconstitutional on its face. 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. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”

Tennessee v. Garner Cop Block

I hope that answers your question.

It wasn't a "felony stop" and the cop had no reason to fear fro his life.

We'll see a lot of twist and shout as this unfolds but there is nothing that will make the basic facts go away.

 

[Roadrunner]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

The man, 50-year old Walter Scott had a warrant for non-payment of child support and apparently ran to avoid going to jail on that charge. Did the police have the right to shoot him to prevent his escape? The law is clear they did not.. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination, and the use of deadly force against him was criminal.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) examined a Tennessee State statute which allowed the police to use deadly force against ALL fleeing felony suspects. The SCOTUS found the Tennessee statute to be unconstitutional, ruling that deadly force could only be used to prevent the escape of a dangerous felon. The following are pertinent portions of the Supreme Court's Court's findings (highlights are my own):

“The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”

“However, it is not unconstitutional on its face. 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. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”

Tennessee v. Garner Cop Block

I hope that answers your question.

It wasn't a "felony stop" and the cop had no reason to fear fro his life.

We'll see a lot of twist and shout as this unfolds but there is nothing that will make the basic facts go away.

The smart witnesses who observed what happened and what was said between videos will STFU, and wait for the protection of testifying before a Grand Jury, just like in Ferguson.

 

[rdean]

The guy that took the video to the police station also ran away. Trayvon Martin ran away. People do that when they are scared. But don't worry, right wingers have a way of catching up to them.

 

[Iceweasel]

No, the idiot didn't deserve to die but I don't feel sorry for him either. Or any dead beat dad. I saw an interview with a witness and she said there was a scuffle between the two before he fled. I think he was tased but it didn't stop him, maybe only one probe hit? At any rate it's a case of two stupid people meeting and two lives ruined.

 

[Indofred]

I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He was probably frightened the cop was a violent bastard, out to kill him.
Oh ...........

 

[Iceweasel]

He was probably frightened the cop was a violent bastard, out to kill him.
Oh ...........

And was faster than a speeding bullet?

 

[Pogo]

I was one of the first on the bandwagon to say to hang the cop who shot the unarmed black man in the back in SC.

Tonight I saw the dashcam video from the police cruiser, and I want to know, what caused the black man to get out of his car and take off running?

He shouldn't have been killed over it(I don't think), but I would like to know the answer.

Doing what little he could to get away from a murderer?

Just a guess...

No he ran because he had warrants. Nice Leftytoon fail though.

Unlike some wags around here I just don't have the arrogance to presume to know the contexts of a place I've never visited, Kreskin.
Knowing everything must suck. That would take all the mystery out of life.