Cop charged with murder after shooting

[HomerJS]

The fund or the site's actions? Frankly I'm wondering who would give money to that officer after watching the video. The KKK and Stormfront? Lol.

Loyal Fox News viewers

 

[HomerJS]

Everyone needs to watch interview with Feidin Santana the guy who recorded the shooting

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/witness-to-walter-scott-speaks-out_n_7029388.html

 

[Blackjack200]

From the video it is pretty evident that the cop is guilty of voluntary manslaughter at best, even so this decision by GoFundMe rubs me the wrong way. I would like to the cop get the very best legal help possible and still get convicted.

I can't understand this at all. The cop is entitled to competent legal counsel, and I don't see anyone suggesting that he shouldn't get it. I can think of much more publicly useful things a talented lawyer can do than passionately defend some thug who shot a fleeing man in the back.

 

[emperus]

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf This is an 18-year survey and, unlike the link you posted, doesn't include a large number (in your case more than 29%) of offenders as "unknown" in terms of race. I expect the large percentage of "unknowns" in the 2013 table accounts for the difference.

So why don't you voice the point you are trying to make instead of hiding behind massaged data to make it. There is a reason that you chose an FBI data set and stats that ended in 2008. Btw, you should probably go tell the FBI that African Americans account for the majority of "unknown" offenders, because somehow you clearly know something they don't.

 

[HomerJS]

Checked foxnews.com today and every related story to this shooting has comments disabled.

Guess they don't want the true nature of their peeps exposed.

 

[emperus]

Watching the guy who shot the video on Morning Joe.

Interesting Points.

1.) The officers saw him shooting the video
2.) He told the officers he knew what happened. The told him to wait somewhere, he walked to the spot and then ran away.

Transcript
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/transcript-morning-joe-exclusive-feidin-santana

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

So why don't you voice the point you are trying to make instead of hiding behind massaged data to make it. There is a reason that you chose an FBI data set and stats that ended in 2008. Btw, you should probably go tell the FBI that African Americans account for the majority of "unknown" offenders, because somehow you clearly know something they don't.

It's not "massaged" data - it is data assembled and promulgated by the FBI over a span of 18 years. I would not expect any dramatic change in these percentages over the past 5 years, and in any case a data set in which > 29% of the individuals are listed as "unknown" is not particularly helpful. (Moreover, even the "known" portion of the data supports my point, in that it reflects dramatically more homicides committed by black people, who represent 12.5% of the population, than by white people, who represent 72.4% of the population.)

I am not using the empirical data to argue that black people are intrinsically bad or anything of the kind - I am just saying that the predominant reason they have more interactions with police (and thus more violent interactions) than white people is that they are much likelier to engage in serious criminality than white people.

I think the point I was "trying to make" was made clearly. If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask them.

 

[Meghan54]

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf This is an 18-year survey and, unlike the link you posted, doesn't include a large number (in your case more than 29%) of offenders as "unknown" in terms of race. I expect the large percentage of "unknowns" in the 2013 table accounts for the difference.

So, unknown is really code for "mostly blacks". Gotcha. :whiste:

 

[rudeguy]

Checked foxnews.com today and every related story to this shooting has comments disabled.

Guess they don't want the true nature of their peeps exposed.

How do you feel when mods lock racist threads here?

Do you think the true nature of AT peeps is that they are racist?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

So, unknown is really code for "mostly blacks". Gotcha. :whiste:

You're not examining the numbers with care. Even the "known" portion of the data reflects dramatically more homicides committed by black people, who represent 12.5% of the population, than by white people, who represent 72.4% of the population. Why would the "unknown" portion reflect wildly different percentages, when such an allocation would be contrary to both the "known" portion and the historical numbers over the last few decades? Unfortunately economic conditions for people of color have not improved over that interval (there are a variety of reasons for this IMO, reflecting both malign and benign neglect by government, among other causes), so I see no reason to think the crime numbers would have shifted dramatically toward less criminal behavior by black people.

 

[bshole]

I can't understand this at all. The cop is entitled to competent legal counsel, and I don't see anyone suggesting that he shouldn't get it. I can think of much more publicly useful things a talented lawyer can do than passionately defend some thug who shot a fleeing man in the back.

In other words you would rather have the taxpayers fund this guys defense because you believe he will have a better chance of getting convicted due to incompetent council. I on the other hand would prefer that the guy pay for his defense using GoFundMe, save the taxpayers a few dollars, get a good lawyer with a result less likely to overturned.

 

[emperus]

It's not "massaged" data - it is data assembled and promulgated by the FBI over a span of 18 years. I would not expect any dramatic change in these percentages over the past 5 years, and in any case a data set in which > 29% of the individuals are listed as "unknown" is not particularly helpful. (Moreover, even the "known" portion of the data supports my point, in that it reflects dramatically more homicides committed by black people, who represent 12.5% of the population, than by white people, who represent 72.4% of the population.)

I am not using the empirical data to argue that black people are intrinsically bad or anything of the kind - I am just saying that the predominant reason they have more interactions with police (and thus more violent interactions) than white people is that they are much likelier to engage in serious criminality than white people.

I think the point I was "trying to make" was made clearly. If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask them.

Both the data sets you have used in to make your point have been massaged. You initially used raw numbers for Blacks and whites shot by cops. A wholly meaningless number without the percentage population makeup of the races.

Then you used an FBI study from 1980-2008 to make a point that African Americans make up more than 50% of all homicides. But there is a more recent study from 2013 which shows a lower rate. So, you try to diminish that recent study by pointing out that the "Unknown" race portion is predominately African American. But, how you know something the FBI statisticians don't is beyond me. But the further problem with your analysis is that if you looked into the FBI study from 1980-2008 (pg. 11) you would see that the homicide offending rate by blacks had a sharp decline from 1991-2008.

I'm not sure what your exact point is and I'm not going to put words in your mouth. But I do know that you are attempting to use these massaged numbers to say something you aren't willing to come out and say. Because how you look at, use and see these stats (Unknown) means something.

 

[echo4747]

In other words you would rather have the taxpayers fund this guys defense because you believe he will have a better chance of getting convicted due to incompetent council. I on the other hand would prefer that the guy pay for his defense using GoFundMe, save the taxpayers a few dollars, get a good lawyer with a result less likely to overturned.

I would like to see the cop just plead guilty ,admit he made a poor decision in a somewhat stressful situation ,avoid a trial completely, accept whatever sentence the judge gives him.
-saves the taxpayers and the system time and money.

 

[Attic]

From the video it is pretty evident that the cop is guilty of voluntary manslaughter at best, even so this decision by GoFundMe rubs me the wrong way. I would like to the cop get the very best legal help possible and still get convicted.

Agree here. I'm not looking for a conviction necessarily though, i'm looking for the truth. The video shows with what I consider high likelihood that it was at minimum a voluntary manslaughter.

GoFundMe should not have shutdown the fund, it should have tolerated it even though it disagrees (as do I) with folks contributing, or the idea of contributing to the policeman's fund. It's very important we protect that right, even if we don't like how it is used in every circumstance. We should not be shutting down what we disagree with (current liberalism has taken on this mutation of thinking though).

The loons are already out on this issue, the Fox nutters (not the watchers, the haters), the racists who have to push race into everything. For all the issues the incidenct exposes, it looks like it will come to two things.

1) A highly public conviction of an officer
2) Stronger and continued push for Police Body cameras


This doesn't solve the larger issue of our growing police state IMO. Camera's don't really change the paradigm that is leading to unfair persecution of the poor and minority groups. The more distractions the loons toss out and bite into, the greater chance real change is mitigated through distraction.

 

[Attic]

I would like to see the cop just plead guilty ,admit he made a poor decision in a somewhat stressful situation ,avoid a trial completely, accept whatever sentence the judge gives him.
-saves the taxpayers and the system time and money.

Yea, but he doesn't come across as the type

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Both the data sets you have used in to make your point have been massaged. You initially used raw numbers for Blacks and whites shot by cops. A wholly meaningless number without the percentage population makeup of the races.

Then you used an FBI study from 1980-2008 to make a point that African Americans make up more than 50% of all homicides. But there is a more recent study from 2013 which shows a lower rate. So, you try to diminish that recent study by pointing out that the "Unknown" race portion is predominately African American. But, how you know something the FBI statisticians don't is beyond me. But the further problem with your analysis is that if you looked into the FBI study from 1980-2008 (pg. 11) you would see that the homicide offending rate by blacks had a sharp decline from 1991-2008.

I'm not sure what your exact point is and I'm not going to put words in your mouth. But I do know that you are attempting to use these massaged numbers to say something you aren't willing to come out and say. Because how you look at, use and see these stats (Unknown) means something.

I did not "massage" anything.

You are certainly right that the "raw" numbers regarding the disparity in the numbers of people killed by police are arguably better understood in the context of how many black people there are in the population as a whole. That number bears out that black people are, when their percentage of the population is factored in, four times likelier than white people to be killed by police using guns. That being said, black people also have a disproportionate number of interactions with police, because black men, in particular, commit a wildly disproportionate number of serious and violent crimes compared to any other group in the United States. As a whole, black people are 8 times likelier than whites to commit murders. In that context, the fact that they are 4 times likelier to be killed by police is more understandable and not, in view, necessarily attributable to bias by the police.

I have repeatedly addressed the bogus 2013 stats cited above. It does not show a "lower rate." The "known" statistics entirely bear out my point, in that they show black people (who make up 12.5% of the population) committing 20% more murders than white people (who make up 72.4% of the population). The "unknown" category is . . . unknown (and represents nearly a third of the total number). It defies common sense, though, to assume that it would break out differently than the "known" category, or the historic trends over the previous decades.

I am far from happy that black people are so much more heavily involved in criminality. I think African-Americans as a whole are a population that has suffered from a lot of discrimination and maltreatment by whites and by the government. Unfortunately the reality that black men commit so many more violent crimes means that black people are far likelier to be stopped by police than whites, and charged with lesser crimes like drug possession and traffic offenses. That is unfair and shitty. The problem is complex and multi-layered. That doesn't mean the underlying data does not exist, however, and if we ignore the data, we will inevitably be led down misleading rabbit holes.

 

[HomerJS]

How do you feel when mods lock racist threads here?

Do you think the true nature of AT peeps is that they are racist?

Some are. Although the usual suspects have been absent for a while. My guess its more of a plurality on foxnews.com. They just don't want to engage in the discussion. Forced to cause such a big story.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Garner, who was 6-foot-3 and weighed 350 pounds, suffered from a number of health problems, including heart disease, severe asthma, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea. Garner did not die at the scene of the confrontation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance taking him to the hospital and was pronounced dead about an hour later. He did not die from being put in a choke hold.

With Rice the call dispatch gave to the responding officers was that someone was waving a gun in a public park. The gun had the orange tip removed and looked very real. He wasn't shot because he was black, he was shot because he was waving a very real looking gun in public.

Crawford again was waving a very realistic gun around. It was in fact a BB gun. The media kept saying that it was a "toy" yet I bet if anyone looks at that gun and a real one from 30 feet away they couldn't tell in a split second when a decision had to be made if it was real. Media kept on saying toy and white cop shooting a black cop. He was told to put it down and did not. He instead kept it in the air and attempted to leave. Trying to say that the shooting was a murder is idiotic. All he had to do was put the gun down, explain it was from the store, and he would have walked away.

In fact in virtually every single case, if people would just listen to police when told to do something, like put the gun down, stop resisting when trying to be arrested they would be alive. Even in this case, he had a warrant for arrest. He resisted and wrestled with the officer then ran away. He had a warrant, should have gone to jail and bonded out the next day. Alive and well. That is NOT saying the shoot was good, it by all means was not from the video. The officer should be punished to the full extent of the law. The facts are if people just fucking listen and don't try to run, fight, and drop the gun when told to they would be alive. It is not because they're black, it's pretty ignorant to make that claim. But you like to try to make that claim. Like these "victims" did nothing wrong.

I'd point all the factual inaccuracies in your post, but you have made it clear you are trolling and really don't care about the facts, just what you want to believe.

But suffice to say, almost everything you typed is wrong.

 

[HTFOff]

Some are. Although the usual suspects have been absent for a while. My guess its more of a plurality on foxnews.com. They just don't want to engage in the discussion. Forced to cause such a big story.

You are borderline neurotic.

 

[Ichinisan]

You are borderline neurotic.

He's probably the reason FNC would restrict comments on such articles. Outside agitators think they're clever by stoking racist talk.

 

[DrPizza]

Both the data sets you have used in to make your point have been massaged. You initially used raw numbers for Blacks and whites shot by cops. A wholly meaningless number without the percentage population makeup of the races.

Then you used an FBI study from 1980-2008 to make a point that African Americans make up more than 50% of all homicides. But there is a more recent study from 2013 which shows a lower rate. So, you try to diminish that recent study by pointing out that the "Unknown" race portion is predominately African American. But, how you know something the FBI statisticians don't is beyond me. But the further problem with your analysis is that if you looked into the FBI study from 1980-2008 (pg. 11) you would see that the homicide offending rate by blacks had a sharp decline from 1991-2008.

I'm not sure what your exact point is and I'm not going to put words in your mouth. But I do know that you are attempting to use these massaged numbers to say something you aren't willing to come out and say. Because how you look at, use and see these stats (Unknown) means something.

First of all,
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/02/why-are-american-cops-so-bad-at-catching-killers

Please point out anything that allows you to infer that whites are getting away with murder at a higher rate than blacks - anything that would shift the statistics of known murders in one direction or another significantly.

 

[rudeguy]

Some are. Although the usual suspects have been absent for a while. My guess its more of a plurality on foxnews.com. They just don't want to engage in the discussion. Forced to cause such a big story.

I'll 100 % agree that some are. But when you say that all fox news readers are racist, you defeat your own purpose by sounding ignorant and hateful.

 

[blankslate]

I'll 100 % agree that some are. But when you say that all fox news readers are racist, you defeat your own purpose by sounding ignorant and hateful.

It's often the satirists who speak more truthfully than most others about such subjects.

It is quite possible that Walter Scott got into a scuffle with the cop who shot someone in the back. But once he was 10, 15, then 20 feet and still running from the cop there was no cause to shoot. The only reasonable cause would be if Walter Scott was a known violent felon and it could reasonably be feared that he would commit violence if allowed to escape.

Here is (afaik) the first interview with the person who recorded the video...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/wa...ed-walter-scott-being-shot-speaks-out-n338126

According to him the officer was attempting to use the taser on Walter Scott who somehow was able to still run and that he didn't see Mr. Scott reach for the taser... then he started recording....



......

 

[Subyman]

The GoFundMe thing isn't a big deal. They clearly show in their terms and conditions:

Campaigns in defense of formal charges of heinous crimes, including violent, hateful, or sexual acts

http://www.gofundme.com/terms

 

[HomerJS]

I'll 100 % agree that some are. But when you say that all fox news readers are racist, you defeat your own purpose by sounding ignorant and hateful.

I didn't say all. Let's be honest you can always find a racist anywhere but if you look where most of them would reside...

It's not even close to being equivalent. That helicopter is both funny and dead on point.