Cop charged with murder after shooting

[waggy]

The drop is right in front of the other officer.

yeah that's what i thought.

This guy should go to jail for a long time. fuck him.

 

[LTC8K6]

that's some CSI zoom enhance stuff right there.

Well, I think it's pretty obvious when you watch the video and compare with stills. You are free to disagree with me, of course.

Don't worry, my opinions won't change any of the facts.

The officer is a cold blooded murderer, imo.

His partner knows it too, imo.

Slager will be very lucky not to get the death penalty.

 

[Subyman]

I did find it entertaining to watch last night when Anderson Cooper was running pixelated footage of the drop over and over. It looked like a blurry box, but of course it was a taser to Anderson. In all likely hood it was the taser, but its funny to see people fill in details so quickly, begin to take it as fact, and then build more narrative based on those filled in details. Before I knew it, he had five experts all talking about the "taser" (blurry box) the guy dropped and what charges they would give him for tampering/framing evidence.

 

[CU]

I saw a second video or maybe just a long cut between the first where he picks it back up from where he dropped it at Scott. If he was planting it, did he just change his mind and pick it back up. Don't take that the wrong way. I still don't see any reason to shoot the guy running away.

 

[LTC8K6]

I did find it entertaining to watch last night when Anderson Cooper was running pixelated footage of the drop over and over. It looked like a blurry box, but of course it was a taser to Anderson. In all likely hood it was the taser, but its funny to see people fill in details so quickly, begin to take it as fact, and then build more narrative based on those filled in details. Before I knew it, he had five experts all talking about the "taser" (blurry box) the guy dropped and what charges they would give him for tampering/framing evidence.

I think it's the Taser because of the location where Slager picks it up.

The Taser is knocked out of Slager's hand and lands behind him in a recognizable spot. A spot that Slager returns to and picks something up.

There's nothing else there for Slager to be picking up.

 

[LTC8K6]

I saw a second video or maybe just a long cut between the first where he picks it back up from where he dropped it at Scott. If he was planting it, did he just change his mind and pick it back up. Don't take that the wrong way. I still don't see any reason to shoot the guy running away.

You don't move evidence around at a crime scene. You just don't.

You don't claim you administered CPR in your official report if you didn't administer CPR.

 

[BoberFett]

I am only defending their right to set up an online business and have a clear cut TOS that does not discriminate against or take away anyone's rights. No one has a right to an online defense fund on their website. This isn't a brick and mortar denying service to protected classes based on religious beliefs of the compay. This is their website, their servers, their TOS. They are not refusing service because someone is gay, black, whatever.

What they are saying is that they are not the courts and don't want to engage in the business of helping someone, anyone charged with crimes such as the ones spelled out in their TOS. Due to the fact that their severs, their website MIGHT be used to aid of in the financial defense of someone, anyone who MIGHT end up guilty, they simply do not allow it regardless of perceived guilt, not because of it as you are suggesting.

This has nothing to do with them judging cases online or the court of public opinion... this has to do with their name never being allowed to be used in this light.

And yes, even Manslaughter falls under their TOS which clearly states they don't allow funds for defendants charged with "violent" crimes.

If I were part of a business such as Go Fund Me, I am sure our TOS would mirror this one exactly and might even go so far as to include any and all charges brought by police.

It also includes sexual acts. So I guess if a gay couple gets arrested in Mississippi then too bad, it's in the TOS. They're just perverts anyway who don't need anything more than a public defender. Some good ole' boy to defend the gay couple.

Again, the cop looks pretty damn guilty, but I'm getting tired of this push from the left wing to crucify everyone. American "liberals" look almost exactly like conservatives to me.

 

[CU]

You don't move evidence around at a crime scene. You just don't.

You don't claim you administered CPR in your official report if you didn't administer CPR.

Oh, I agree. Just questioning was he planting it? If so what changed his mind? The other cop, maybe?

 

[emperus]

I did not "massage" anything.

You are still attempting to massage the stats.

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.

To begin, the so called bogus stats came from Fbi.gov or the FBI. They are the ones who categorized the stats and left the "unknown" portion. Attempting to make assumptions about what comprises the unknown category and then attempting to use it in some meaningful way to compare to the DOJ study actually defies logic. There are so many questions you couldn't possible have the answer to. Like, what were the demographic changes in that time period. ex. Did the Hispanic population increase and were responsible for more murders, did the Asian population increase and were they responsible for more murders? Also, how did the DOJ study account for the "unknown" portion in the FBI study. Were they initially counted, were they excluded? It seems like you've already settled on ur conclusion and are now trying to massage the stats to that conclusion.

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.

Like I said you seem to have a preconceived notion on this subject which you are trying to massage the numbers to fit with. You should probably try this, If you have black friends(male), ask them how many unplanned police encounters they have had in their lives and compare that to your white friends in that same socio-economic circle.

 

[Printer Bandit]

is he on suicide watch?

 

[Ns1]

dashcam video, dude bolts after 2:30

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-south-carolina-race-shooting-20150409-story.html#page=1

 

[Attic]

dashcam video, dude bolts after 2:30

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-south-carolina-race-shooting-20150409-story.html#page=1

Changes my optics a bit.

So officer pulls the deceased over. The deceased gives a story about the car purchase/registration that doesn't sound quite right and when the officer returns to the car the deceased bolts.

I'm not seeing any harassment or racism here in the initial confrontation.

A struggle ensues after the cop reaches the deceased who fled on foot. A taser goes off, shortly after taser goes off (this is where the video from the witness picks up) the deceased gets separation and the cop lethally fires into the back of the deceased as he flees.

I don't see indication here that the deceased was a threat. State of mind of the officer here could be different after the deceased has just broken free. Should have let the guy run, I wonder what the officer was trained to do here? I'm seeing very poor judgement from an officer trained to use lethal force when required.

Also noticed that the officer appears to register and acknowledge the witness taking video while the officer moves the taser.

Looks like voluntary manslaughter to me overall.

Voluntary manslaughter is the killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion", under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed.

 

[rudeguy]

is he on suicide watch?

I hope not.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

I hope not.

Seriously. Put the guy in a cell on the 20th floor with a step stool under an open window. Let him whack himself quick and clean, save the expense and trouble of convicting his murdering scum ass.

 

[waggy]

LOl empurus arguing with DVC? yeah..that's fair.

 

[rudeguy]

Seriously. Put the guy in a cell on the 20th floor with a step stool under an open window. Let him whack himself quick and clean, save the expense and trouble of convicting his murdering scum ass.

This is one time where I have zero compassion. Not a drop.

 

[nyker96]

I am totally shocked something like this could happen. before this video I always think police would overuse violence in some situations, but not like this, this is just sigh, very sad thing for me to watch. why did he do that!? and then release all these false statements before the video surfaced putting the blame on his victim. just ... sigh.

 

[MongGrel]

Seriously. Put the guy in a cell on the 20th floor with a step stool under an open window. Let him whack himself quick and clean, save the expense and trouble of convicting his murdering scum ass.

This is one time where I have zero compassion. Not a drop.

+1

 

[brianmanahan]

I am totally shocked something like this could happen. before this video I always think police would overuse violence in some situations, but not like this, this is just sigh, very sad thing for me to watch. why did he do that!? and then release all these false statements before the video surfaced putting the blame on his victim. just ... sigh.

because many cops seem to think that if someone doesn't comply it is punishable by death, even if the non-compliance is not threatening

if you don't comply, you will die

 

[umbrella39]

dashcam video, dude bolts after 2:30

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-south-carolina-race-shooting-20150409-story.html#page=1

COPS wouldn't have lasted one season had shooting fleeing non-threats in the back been all the rage...

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

COPS wouldn't have lasted one season had shooting fleeing non-threats in the back been all the rage...

That's not fleeing, that's aggressively resisting arrest.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Changes my optics a bit.

So officer pulls the deceased over. The deceased gives a story about the car purchase/registration that doesn't sound quite right and when the officer returns to the car the deceased bolts.

I'm not seeing any harassment or racism here in the initial confrontation.

A struggle ensues after the cop reaches the deceased who fled on foot. A taser goes off, shortly after taser goes off (this is where the video from the witness picks up) the deceased gets separation and the cop lethally fires into the back of the deceased as he flees.

I don't see indication here that the deceased was a threat. State of mind of the officer here could be different after the deceased has just broken free. Should have let the guy run, I wonder what the officer was trained to do here? I'm seeing very poor judgement from an officer trained to use lethal force when required.

Also noticed that the officer appears to register and acknowledge the witness taking video while the officer moves the taser.

Looks like voluntary manslaughter to me overall.

Yeah, that's my take as well. The initial stop was pretty cordial and doesn't indicate any threat coming from the cop. Then, Scott bolts and most any cop is going to suspect something bad was the cause of him bolting so the cops fight/flight adrenaline is going to be pumping big time -- particularly as he has to run him down not knowing if Scott has a weapon.

But, the video is damning in that it shows the cop shooting Scott in the back at a time when Scott ceased to be a threat. A reasonable cop would have been hollering on the radio for backup and giving directions as to where Scott was running and he'd have been running after him. Just no way to ignore the fact he shot him in the back.

There will be huge pressure to charge with murder, but given the adrenaline and the lack of premeditation they may only be able to charge him with manslaughter.

Manslaughter may be the correct charge but unless he's charged with and convicted of murder I fear we'll see more rioting and burning.


Brian

 

[emperus]

LOl empurus arguing with DVC? yeah..that's fair.

I never understand people who don't have confidence in themselves. I think this post says more about you buddy.

 

[Carson Dyle]

I'm not sifting through 373 posts.

What's the story behind why the guy ran? Was the car stolen? Did he have an arrest warrant? Just needed a little exercise?

 

[rudeguy]

I'm not sifting through 373 posts.

What's the story behind why the guy ran? Was the car stolen? Did he have an arrest warrant? Just needed a little exercise?

Last I knew he had a child support warrant. Car was not stolen.