White Cop Shoots Black Man, Charged With Murder

[The Unknown Poster]

Its not about me being wrong and them right.  This is my opinion.

 

Im only giving you personal experience to support my opinion because I know what its like to be under grave threat.

 

The problem with your position is you're taking the image of the cop shooting a person running away as if its the total story, which it isnt.

 

I read a story on this but dont have it as I cant remember which story it was but it explained that Murder in that jurisdiction requires premeditation.  Clearly that was not the case.  Im sure you'd agree.  I think he was charged with murder because it looked really really bad and there was political pressure.  I think on its surface this looked like a racially motivated bad shooting.  I think what we have learned since and upon further reflection, there is no evidence that this was racially based.  In fact, the interaction of the officer with the suspect didnt indicate anything unusual.  The officer's attempt, after the suspect fled, to use a stung gun demonstrates that the cop was going by the book, and had no desire to use lethal force.  That changes when the officer was under threat.

 

How many seconds passed from the moment the officer made any motion towards his gun, to the time of the shooting?  I think you previously admitted had the cop shot him at the location of the altercation that this would be a "good shooting".  The defense will surely have several shrinks and experts detailing the fight or flight response, the body's reaction to threat, the time it took to fire etc.  How a person perceives situations can be very different.

 

Remember when Vince Li killed that guy on the bus?  The witnesses described him as huge.  He's actually very small.  They all perceived him, due to the threat and their reactions, to be this massive person.  That answered the question as to why did nobody try to stop him.  They were all petrified and felt under grave threat.  Now, we hold cops to a higher standard.  I have no problem with that.  That's going to be up to a jury to decide.  I bet the DA will ask for the jury to be given the option of manslaughter.

[Fatty Liver]

 

 

I've been reading this thread, reading other articles, and scratching my head for the past few days.

Running away from Police is a strange decision to make - sometimes people make strange decisions. Does that mean they should be shot?

I dare say not.

I get that some of you are arguing semantics and commenting on the rights of Police Officers in general - but why defend a cop who shot and killed an unarmed, fleeing suspect?

If you really read the thread you know the answer. The narrative of "oh he was just running away" isn't accurate. Add in the warrants, the assault, the struggle over the stun gun....the bigger picture isn't as near and tidy as originally thought. In a perfect world the cop would not have shot the guy. The victims actions lead to the shooting. The cop made the choice to shoot.

Honestly the worst thing the cop did was plant the stun gun. That's going to be the hint hole in any Defense even if he's innocent. And again by the law this ain't mirder.

 

 

Then why is he being held without bond and charged with murder?

 

 

Damage control 101.  To be charged is one thing to be convicted another.

[Fatty Liver]

 

I've been reading this thread, reading other articles, and scratching my head for the past few days.

Running away from Police is a strange decision to make - sometimes people make strange decisions. Does that mean they should be shot?

I dare say not.

I get that some of you are arguing semantics and commenting on the rights of Police Officers in general - but why defend a cop who shot and killed an unarmed, fleeing suspect?

If you really read the thread you know the answer. The narrative of "oh he was just running away" isn't accurate. Add in the warrants, the assault, the struggle over the stun gun....the bigger picture isn't as near and tidy as originally thought. In a perfect world the cop would not have shot the guy. The victims actions lead to the shooting. The cop made the choice to shoot.

Honestly the worst thing the cop did was plant the stun gun. That's going to be the hint hole in any Defense even if he's innocent. And again by the law this ain't mirder.

 

 

In regard to the weapon that the officer dropped and later retrieved beside the victim.  Doesn't a tazer have wires that remain connected it to it's projectile?  I see nothing like that in the video, to me it looks like a standard handgun with no attachments.

[The Unknown Poster]

The tazer does have leads that extend.  They can be seen at the very start of the video.  I believe they get expelled at some point and the stun gun can be used as a regular (non projectile) stun gun, which is why it was dangerous for the officer if he missed the suspect and the suspect was fighting with him for control of it.

 

You are correct though that we dont know what was dropped beside the victim, at least not that I've seen.  We've made the assumption it was the tazer but again, you're correct that if it was the tazer sans leads, then the leads were still laying where they were fired which changes the officer's story a bit.  I cant see it being a gun the officer placed there because even in his initial story before the video surfaced, there was no mention of a second gun.

[New_Earth_Mud]

Its not about me being wrong and them right.  This is my opinion.

 

Im only giving you personal experience to support my opinion because I know what its like to be under grave threat.

 

The problem with your position is you're taking the image of the cop shooting a person running away as if its the total story, which it isnt.

 

I read a story on this but dont have it as I cant remember which story it was but it explained that Murder in that jurisdiction requires premeditation.  Clearly that was not the case.  Im sure you'd agree.  I think he was charged with murder because it looked really really bad and there was political pressure.  I think on its surface this looked like a racially motivated bad shooting.  I think what we have learned since and upon further reflection, there is no evidence that this was racially based.  In fact, the interaction of the officer with the suspect didnt indicate anything unusual.  The officer's attempt, after the suspect fled, to use a stung gun demonstrates that the cop was going by the book, and had no desire to use lethal force.  That changes when the officer was under threat.

 

How many seconds passed from the moment the officer made any motion towards his gun, to the time of the shooting?  I think you previously admitted had the cop shot him at the location of the altercation that this would be a "good shooting".  The defense will surely have several shrinks and experts detailing the fight or flight response, the body's reaction to threat, the time it took to fire etc.  How a person perceives situations can be very different.

 

Remember when Vince Li killed that guy on the bus?  The witnesses described him as huge.  He's actually very small.  They all perceived him, due to the threat and their reactions, to be this massive person.  That answered the question as to why did nobody try to stop him.  They were all petrified and felt under grave threat.  Now, we hold cops to a higher standard.  I have no problem with that.  That's going to be up to a jury to decide.  I bet the DA will ask for the jury to be given the option of manslaughter.

 

 

Fair enuff....  these are all just our opinions.

 

As for you using your experience to support your opinion ... thats all good and may support your opinion as far as your concerned but not me.

 

Your not trained to be a cop or be in these situations so i wouldnt expect you to react the same as a trained cop. Id expect more from a trained cop. Its his job.

 

And as for my position....  Im basing it off what we have seen and heard. Im not trained to be in these situations. Im basing my position off what i have watched and learned about this case.

 

Yes i keep bring up the running away part because of a few things ive watched and learned from people who know....

 

The warrant thing.....  The cop had no idea of any warrants at the time of the shooting.

 

The grave danger......  Every cop and lawwyer ive seen on TV have all said the grave danger was over at the time the dude ran away. He had no weapon and the cop had nothing to show him the guy was any danger to anyone else. This is why as soon as the vid came out the cop was fired and arrested for murder. As for the fighting over the tazzer? Well we dont really know but the 2 witnesses that have come forward neither has said the guy tried to get the cops tazzer. From the vid it looks like either the cop missed or the leeds got hooked into the guys cloaths and didnt hit his skin.

 

 

This is a good discussion and debate.  Fun to learn others opinions and point of views.  

[The Unknown Poster]

I agree that police should be held to higher standards due to their training.  I can also tell you I've seen video of police in action that would indicate they either did not remember their training or had not used it in enough time to have forgotten it.  Plus, in tense situations, if you are very well trained to the point your body reacts to the training, it will simply react to the normal fight or flight response in all humans.  I've had some training and experience.  The first time someone pulled a knife on me when I was 18 years old, I panicked and freaked out.  I literally couldnt even speak properly and couldnt remember anything that happened in detail (ie. description of suspect).  In later years, a knife being pulled on me resulted in the suspect being disarmed and restrained.

 

Same for medical.  First time I come across an injured, bloody person = panic.  In later years, dealt with all the time and its an instinctive reaction to immediately spring to work assisting.  It used to be difficult to go to bars on days off because my partners and I would instinctively be "on patrol" scanning the crowd and reacting to movements and whatnot.  Hard to relax.  One of my trainers actually advised wearing a cup (some guys did, I never did) and wore his every moment of every day that he was outside his home.

 

Anyway, enough about me.  I also agree that once the suspect fled, the danger was over.  I could argue the point that a suspect that has a premeditated plan to evade capture (remember his brother said he would run rather than risk jail) and was willing to assault an officer in the process represented a danger to officers at large.  We dont know what else the suspect might have done had he escaped.  Car jack?  Take a hostage?  Go home and watch Family Guy?  We dont know.  We only know what he did in those few moments.

 

I have actually been generally unimpressed with the actions of police officers in recent years.  The tazer mentality has made it too easy and instinctive for police to take an arms-length approach to policing.  I want officers to be safe but the job requires risk.  It requires them to step forward and risk injury or death to defend the community.  You see instances where 20 cops surround a guy with a knife and they shoot him.  I can say they were justified at the same time as saying "really?  Twenty cops couldnt have taken him down?" 

 

But I think the officer in this case could likely find experts that would testify that he followed his training because at the moment he reached for his gun, he was under duress and felt in grave danger.  It's not for you or me to say how that person felt.  They feel how they feel.  But a jury will get to hear all about his training, how he is taught to react, what he *should* feel in that situation and if he was justified in shooting whether the suspect was two feet in front of him or twenty.

 

***EDIT*** to add, on the subject of the Warrants.  I was talking to a buddy and he asked that question, did the officer know of the warrants when the suspect fled.  And I said we dont know.  I thought his point was going to be "well if its just a child support payment issue, so what, let him run" but he said "If he didnt know, then as far as the officer knew, the suspect could have been armed, dangerous, a fugitive etc...he ran for a reason, why did he run?  The cop couldnt know and had to assume there was a reason and if the suspect felt he needed to run then the cop had to stop him."  Interesting perspective.

[New_Earth_Mud]

I agree that police should be held to higher standards due to their training.  I can also tell you I've seen video of police in action that would indicate they either did not remember their training or had not used it in enough time to have forgotten it.  Plus, in tense situations, if you are very well trained to the point your body reacts to the training, it will simply react to the normal fight or flight response in all humans.  I've had some training and experience.  The first time someone pulled a knife on me when I was 18 years old, I panicked and freaked out.  I literally couldnt even speak properly and couldnt remember anything that happened in detail (ie. description of suspect).  In later years, a knife being pulled on me resulted in the suspect being disarmed and restrained.

 

Same for medical.  First time I come across an injured, bloody person = panic.  In later years, dealt with all the time and its an instinctive reaction to immediately spring to work assisting.  It used to be difficult to go to bars on days off because my partners and I would instinctively be "on patrol" scanning the crowd and reacting to movements and whatnot.  Hard to relax.  One of my trainers actually advised wearing a cup (some guys did, I never did) and wore his every moment of every day that he was outside his home.

 

Anyway, enough about me.  I also agree that once the suspect fled, the danger was over.  I could argue the point that a suspect that has a premeditated plan to evade capture (remember his brother said he would run rather than risk jail) and was willing to assault an officer in the process represented a danger to officers at large.  We dont know what else the suspect might have done had he escaped.  Car jack?  Take a hostage?  Go home and watch Family Guy?  We dont know.  We only know what he did in those few moments.

 

I have actually been generally unimpressed with the actions of police officers in recent years.  The tazer mentality has made it too easy and instinctive for police to take an arms-length approach to policing.  I want officers to be safe but the job requires risk.  It requires them to step forward and risk injury or death to defend the community.  You see instances where 20 cops surround a guy with a knife and they shoot him.  I can say they were justified at the same time as saying "really?  Twenty cops couldnt have taken him down?" 

 

But I think the officer in this case could likely find experts that would testify that he followed his training because at the moment he reached for his gun, he was under duress and felt in grave danger.  It's not for you or me to say how that person felt.  They feel how they feel.  But a jury will get to hear all about his training, how he is taught to react, what he *should* feel in that situation and if he was justified in shooting whether the suspect was two feet in front of him or twenty.

 

***EDIT*** to add, on the subject of the Warrants.  I was talking to a buddy and he asked that question, did the officer know of the warrants when the suspect fled.  And I said we dont know.  I thought his point was going to be "well if its just a child support payment issue, so what, let him run" but he said "If he didnt know, then as far as the officer knew, the suspect could have been armed, dangerous, a fugitive etc...he ran for a reason, why did he run?  The cop couldnt know and had to assume there was a reason and if the suspect felt he needed to run then the cop had to stop him."  Interesting perspective.

 

 

Good post dude and i can somewhat agree.

 

Just to change the subject a bit....  I just watched that Jodi Aries sentencing....  Man that girl is a whole bunch of crazy. She pretty much just flipped off everybody.  LOL 

[Mark H.]

 

I've been reading this thread, reading other articles, and scratching my head for the past few days.

Running away from Police is a strange decision to make - sometimes people make strange decisions. Does that mean they should be shot?

I dare say not.

I get that some of you are arguing semantics and commenting on the rights of Police Officers in general - but why defend a cop who shot and killed an unarmed, fleeing suspect?

If you really read the thread you know the answer. The narrative of "oh he was just running away" isn't accurate. Add in the warrants, the assault, the struggle over the stun gun....the bigger picture isn't as near and tidy as originally thought. In a perfect world the cop would not have shot the guy. The victims actions lead to the shooting. The cop made the choice to shoot.

Honestly the worst thing the cop did was plant the stun gun. That's going to be the hint hole in any Defense even if he's innocent. And again by the law this ain't mirder.

 

 

I was reading opinion.  I'm still reading opinion.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

I've been reading this thread, reading other articles, and scratching my head for the past few days.

Running away from Police is a strange decision to make - sometimes people make strange decisions. Does that mean they should be shot?

I dare say not.

I get that some of you are arguing semantics and commenting on the rights of Police Officers in general - but why defend a cop who shot and killed an unarmed, fleeing suspect?

If you really read the thread you know the answer. The narrative of "oh he was just running away" isn't accurate. Add in the warrants, the assault, the struggle over the stun gun....the bigger picture isn't as near and tidy as originally thought. In a perfect world the cop would not have shot the guy. The victims actions lead to the shooting. The cop made the choice to shoot.

Honestly the worst thing the cop did was plant the stun gun. That's going to be the hint hole in any Defense even if he's innocent. And again by the law this ain't mirder.

 

 

I was reading opinion.  I'm still reading opinion.

 

You'll have to be more specific.  There is opinion and fact.  Feel free to contribute.

 

More info from CNN:

 

(CNN)Two pieces of audio recorded in the immediate aftermath of a deadly police shooting in South Carolina emerged Monday.

 

The voice of Michael Slager can be heard in both. The former North Charleston police officer is charged with murder in the death of 50-year-old Walter Scott.

Michael Slager is charged with murder.

 

In the first recording, an unidentified officer talks to Slager about what might happen.

 

"Once they get here, it'll be real quick. They're gonna tell you, you're gonna be off for a couple days and we'll come back and interview you then. They're not gonna ask you any type of questions right now. They're gonna take your weapon," the officer says. "It'd probably be a good idea to jot down your thoughts about whatever happened ... once the adrenaline stops pumping."

 

Slager responds: "It's pumping," and then laughs.

 

 

The second audio, taken from dash cam video from inside a patrol car, captures a phone call between Slager and someone CNN believes is his wife.

 

 

He tells her: "Hey. Hey, everything's OK. OK? I just shot somebody."

 

"He grabbed my Taser, yeah. Yeah," says Slager. "He was running from me. ... I'm fine."

 

If convicted of murder, the former officer faces up to life in prison or the death penalty, although a death penalty case appears unlikely at this point.

 

"Based on the facts revealed thus far, it does not appear South Carolina's death penalty provision applies in this case because there are no statutory 'aggravating circumstances' present," Scarlett A. Wilson, who is the chief prosecutor for the Ninth Judicial Circuit in the state, said on her Facebook page.

Slager was charged after cell phone video emerged, showing him firing at Scott as the man ran away.

Pierre Fulton was riding in a car with Scott before the shooting took place.

 

"Walter was a dear friend and I miss him every day," Fulton said in a statement given to ABC News by his lawyer. "Over the past five years he helped me to become a better man and showed me the value of hard work."

 

"I'll never know why he ran, but I know he didn't deserve to die," Fulton said. "Please keep Walter and his family in your prayers and respect my privacy moving forward."

Scott's death has reignited a national conversation around race and policing. Scott was black; Slager is white.

 

The case has also brought to light previous instances in which Slager's behavior on the job is being questioned.

 

On Monday, attorneys for a man named Julius Wilson announced that they were filing a lawsuit in connection with an August 2014 traffic stop.

 

During the stop, three officers -- including Slager -- pulled Wilson out of his car. Wilson was then allegedly shocked with a stun gun. The suit claims Slager used excessive force.

 

Slager was also named in a police complaint in 2013 after he allegedly "Tased a man for no reason" before slamming him to the ground and dragging him, according to the North Charleston Police Department.

 

At the time, Slager was searching for a suspect who was described as being 5-feet-5-inches tall. The African-American man he confronted was 6-feet-3 inches tall.

 

A lawyer for Mario Givens, the man who filed the complaint, said last week that his client plans to file a lawsuit.

 

Givens said Slager came to his door, ordered him out of the house and then Tased him.

 

Slager was later cleared in that incident.

[The Unknown Poster]

And how about in Tulsa where a 73 year old volunteer deputy participated in a sting on a man selling illegal handguns.  Suspect fled, cops chased.  Struggle took place and the deputy intended to taze him, instead pulling his handgun and shooting the suspect.  All captured on video.

 

As for Jodi Arias, I followed that case too.  What a nutjob.  And quite stupid.  Its a good thing criminals are so dumb.  Although good effort in reverse pyschology in asking for the death penalty.

[Mark F]

"CHICAGO - Victims of police torture under former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge would share $5.5 million, receive an apology and see their story taught in school under a reparations package proposed Tuesday that city leaders hope will help close one of the most shameful chapters in Chicago's history.

More than 100 people who have accused Burge and officers under his command of shocking them with cattle prods, beating them with phone books and suffocating them with bags until they gave false confessions over nearly two decades ending in 1991. The $5.5 million adds yet more money to more than $100 million that has been paid in court-ordered judgments, settlements of lawsuits and legal fees."

"At the same time, the city took steps to make sure what Burge and his infamous "midnight crew" did to suspects — most of them African-American — to extract confessions is not forgotten."

today's Canadian Press.

 

sheds some light on why african americans are afraid of police.

 

comments welcomed.

[New_Earth_Mud]

I duno....  The more n more i hear about this case this Slager guy is not a very good cop. Horrible at his job.

 

Sounds like he was pissed off he lost a tussle and the tazzer didnt work for whatever reason so he shot him then wanted to set the scene. I dont even think race played a part in it.

[johnzo]

I just came in here to post about that Burge case. Torturing people to obtain confessions -- that's some ******* medieval **** right there.

Burge himself was convicted of lying about the torture, was sentenced to 4.5 years in jail, but now he's been released. He still collects a police pension.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-burge-reparations-emanuel-met-20150414-story.html#page=1

[Mark F]

And one of the guys that worked under Burge went on to torture at Guantanmo.

[The Unknown Poster]

I duno.... The more n more i hear about this case this Slager guy is not a very good cop. Horrible at his job.

Sounds like he was pissed off he lost a tussle and the tazzer didnt work for whatever reason so he shot him then wanted to set the scene. I dont even think race played a part in it.

I've seen nothing to substantiate this opinion. Lost a tussle so he shot him? Does the suspect bear any responsibility for running, fighting, assaulting and running again?

[Mark F]

People tend to ignore facts that negate their opinion.

 

First form your opinion, then look for facts that support it.

 

or better still, don't bother with any facts.

 

Just the opinion.

[The Unknown Poster]

People tend to ignore facts that negate their opinion.

 

First form your opinion, then look for facts that support it.

 

or better still, don't bother with any facts.

 

Just the opinion.

Yes that is very true.

 

I was having a discussion on another forum about something completely different (it was a movie forum) and in fact engaged in discussion with the writer of a few major films and how his belief in the Truther perspective clouded his work on one film.  Anyway, I obviously love a good debate and I told the story of how I first got into debating when I was a child.  My teacher insisted we debate the opposing view that we held and I was very reluctant to do that saying why on earth would I argue against what I believe.  But she was correct.  It teaches you to be more open minded, see all sides and come to your conclusion more logically (as well as anticipating the other side's arguments).

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

I duno.... The more n more i hear about this case this Slager guy is not a very good cop. Horrible at his job.

Sounds like he was pissed off he lost a tussle and the tazzer didnt work for whatever reason so he shot him then wanted to set the scene. I dont even think race played a part in it.

I've seen nothing to substantiate this opinion. Lost a tussle so he shot him? Does the suspect bear any responsibility for running, fighting, assaulting and running again?

 

 

 

Of course he does....  But with his life?  So your opinion is everyone that does this should just be shot?

 

Look at the case with the 73 year old pretend cop. That dude just sold a cop a gun and ran away. They didnt open fire and shoot him.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

I duno.... The more n more i hear about this case this Slager guy is not a very good cop. Horrible at his job.

Sounds like he was pissed off he lost a tussle and the tazzer didnt work for whatever reason so he shot him then wanted to set the scene. I dont even think race played a part in it.

I've seen nothing to substantiate this opinion. Lost a tussle so he shot him? Does the suspect bear any responsibility for running, fighting, assaulting and running again?

 

 

 

Of course he does....  But with his life?  So your opinion is everyone that does this should just be shot?

 

Look at the case with the 73 year old pretend cop. That dude just sold a cop a gun and ran away. They didnt open fire and shoot him.

 

The 73 year old shooting was an accident and possibly a case of an under-trained volunteer.  It wasn't a choice by the officer to engage in activity he believes was lawful.

 

As for your first question, everyone does what?  Run from a lawful police stop?  Resist arrest?  Assault an officer?  Attempt to wrest control of a potentially lethal weapon? 

 

If someone attacks a cop with his fists, should the cop remove his utility belt and square off?  After all that would be equal force.  If someone attacks the cop with a knife, should the cop produce his own and engage in a knife fight? 

 

If someone pointed a gun at you and ordered you to stop, would you attack that person or would you think "gee he has a gun, I should immediately comply with his directives"

 

I've repeatedly stated that the loss of life in this instance was tragic and preventable.  But from initial reports of racist white cop guns down poor innocent black man for no reason, we've come to a far different conclusion.  The ultimate conclusion is yet to be written.  From everything I am seeing, the officer felt his actions were lawful.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

 

 

I duno.... The more n more i hear about this case this Slager guy is not a very good cop. Horrible at his job.

Sounds like he was pissed off he lost a tussle and the tazzer didnt work for whatever reason so he shot him then wanted to set the scene. I dont even think race played a part in it.

I've seen nothing to substantiate this opinion. Lost a tussle so he shot him? Does the suspect bear any responsibility for running, fighting, assaulting and running again?

 

 

 

Of course he does....  But with his life?  So your opinion is everyone that does this should just be shot?

 

Look at the case with the 73 year old pretend cop. That dude just sold a cop a gun and ran away. They didnt open fire and shoot him.

 

The 73 year old shooting was an accident and possibly a case of an under-trained volunteer.  It wasn't a choice by the officer to engage in activity he believes was lawful.

 

As for your first question, everyone does what?  Run from a lawful police stop?  Resist arrest?  Assault an officer?  Attempt to wrest control of a potentially lethal weapon? 

 

If someone attacks a cop with his fists, should the cop remove his utility belt and square off?  After all that would be equal force.  If someone attacks the cop with a knife, should the cop produce his own and engage in a knife fight? 

 

If someone pointed a gun at you and ordered you to stop, would you attack that person or would you think "gee he has a gun, I should immediately comply with his directives"

 

I've repeatedly stated that the loss of life in this instance was tragic and preventable.  But from initial reports of racist white cop guns down poor innocent black man for no reason, we've come to a far different conclusion.  The ultimate conclusion is yet to be written.  From everything I am seeing, the officer felt his actions were lawful.

 

 

Do you know this to be any fact at all?

 

It all the time ive been watch ive never heard once the guy assaulted the cop. Not once. Even the cop never mentioned he was assaulted. Ever.

 

A witness said there was a tussle and the cop was in control but the guy got away and ran.

 

Only the cop said the guy tried to grab his tazzer. Dont you think that at some point the cop might have said the guy assulted me and tried to grab my tazzer? Even in the phone call he never mentioned that. Thats an odd thing to leave out id think.

 

Was the tussle the cop trying to tackle the guy and they fell to the ground and then the guy got away?

 

We dont know any of that. We dont even know they guy went after the cops tazzer.

 

We cant just start adding in things we dont know and just assume. Same thing as i said before.... You cant add in whats happen to you and then say...  Well ive had a knife pointed at me .. so this is what the cop felt because thats what you felt. Its nothing near the same thing.

 

 

Cmon now.... Of course a cop shouldnt drop his belt and go fist to fist.  That has nothing to do with anything.

 

Again there is nothing that says there was any assult. And again why wouldnt the cop say it.  Eh the guy ran and i caught him he punched me in the face and tried to grab my tazzer. Then id agree there was an assult. These guys are trained to add in detail when making a report... thats an odd thing to leave out.

 

Even the other cops on the scene are being looked at for writing false reports to what actually went on.

[The Unknown Poster]

So everytime the police attempt to make an arrest, a person should fight and run.  Every single time.  Because the police cant do anything about it.  Dont fight a cop, dont get shot.  That's the simplicity of it.

 

It's tragic, moreso because the victim was the architect of his own demise.  The cop didnt murder anyone.  Whether he acted in accordance with his training and proper procedure is yet to be determined.

[New_Earth_Mud]

So everytime the police attempt to make an arrest, a person should fight and run.  Every single time.  Because the police cant do anything about it.  Dont fight a cop, dont get shot.  That's the simplicity of it.

 

It's tragic, moreso because the victim was the architect of his own demise.  The cop didnt murder anyone.  Whether he acted in accordance with his training and proper procedure is yet to be determined.

 

People that know more then you and i have charged him with murder. Held without bond yet.

 

I havent watched not one cop or anyone for that matter say that.

 

Maybe a jury will say its not murder ,,, but the fact is hes been charged with it and not only that but held with no bond.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

So everytime the police attempt to make an arrest, a person should fight and run.  Every single time.  Because the police cant do anything about it.  Dont fight a cop, dont get shot.  That's the simplicity of it.

 

It's tragic, moreso because the victim was the architect of his own demise.  The cop didnt murder anyone.  Whether he acted in accordance with his training and proper procedure is yet to be determined.

 

People that know more then you and i have charged him with murder. Held without bond yet.

 

I havent watched not one cop or anyone for that matter say that.

 

Maybe a jury will say its not murder ,,, but the fact is hes been charged with it and not only that but held with no bond.

 

Police often over-charge.  It's a technique.  That's why you will read about people being charged with multiple counts relating to the same offense and then end up pleading to one of them or only one or two actually remaining when it goes to trial.

 

Keep in mind as well that this was an extremely fast arrest.  Video surfaced and he was immediately charged.  Murder would be the reflex charge.  manslaughter would be a charge you'd consider after investigating.  Again, as I wrote earlier, CNN reported that "Murder" in that location requires pre-meditation (or, if I recall, some other factor which I think they thought of as a race-based killing in this case).  No one is arguing the cop planned it and the longer this goes the more it seems it was not racially motivated.

 

I dont believe the officer has had a court date yet.  We'll see if the charge sticks.  If it does, you watch, the DA will ask the judge to let the jury consider manslaughter as well.

 

But we're talking opinion.  We dont have all the facts, only what has been released.  Was that murder?  No.  Was it murder when the 73 year old volunteer accidently shot a suspect?  No and no one is suggesting it was.

[WBBFanWest]

 

 

So everytime the police attempt to make an arrest, a person should fight and run.  Every single time.  Because the police cant do anything about it.  Dont fight a cop, dont get shot.  That's the simplicity of it.

 

It's tragic, moreso because the victim was the architect of his own demise.  The cop didnt murder anyone.  Whether he acted in accordance with his training and proper procedure is yet to be determined.

 

People that know more then you and i have charged him with murder. Held without bond yet.

 

I havent watched not one cop or anyone for that matter say that.

 

Maybe a jury will say its not murder ,,, but the fact is hes been charged with it and not only that but held with no bond.

 

Police often over-charge.  It's a technique.  That's why you will read about people being charged with multiple counts relating to the same offense and then end up pleading to one of them or only one or two actually remaining when it goes to trial.

 

Keep in mind as well that this was an extremely fast arrest.  Video surfaced and he was immediately charged.  Murder would be the reflex charge.  manslaughter would be a charge you'd consider after investigating.  Again, as I wrote earlier, CNN reported that "Murder" in that location requires pre-meditation (or, if I recall, some other factor which I think they thought of as a race-based killing in this case).  No one is arguing the cop planned it and the longer this goes the more it seems it was not racially motivated.

 

I dont believe the officer has had a court date yet.  We'll see if the charge sticks.  If it does, you watch, the DA will ask the judge to let the jury consider manslaughter as well.

 

But we're talking opinion.  We dont have all the facts, only what has been released.  Was that murder?  No.  Was it murder when the 73 year old volunteer accidently shot a suspect?  No and no one is suggesting it was.

 

I wasn't going to continue to discuss this with you because I really don't see any point, but I will point out one obvious thing.  For a criminal charge, the intent of the suspect is in almost all cases, critical to determining what, if any, charge is to be laid.  In the case of the 73 year old, it would appear, on the face of it, that he had no intent to cause death.  He thought he was going to discharge his taser.  In the case of the SC officer, he knew he had his gun in hand and he fired at a fleeing suspect, not once, not twice, but eight times.  Clearly his intent was entirely different.  

 

By the way, in law, it is not just what a suspect thinks that is important, but also the reasonableness of his or her decision.  For instance, if the officer says he had fears for his or others safety and that is why he chose to fire at a fleeing, unarmed suspect, the reasonableness of such a belief will be examined.  Would a reasonable person have thought the same?

 

I'm not going to bother commenting further because from what I can see, your intent is to argue for the sake of arguing, so it really is pointless to try and convince you of any other view.  I just wanted, for the sake of accuracy and for the benefit of others who might be reading this, to try and insert a little information that might prove useful.

[The Unknown Poster]

Im pretty even keel but what a crock of a post.  And cowardly to boot.  Flame away but I enjoy debate.  I've had my mind changed to a degree by the information coming out.  I easily admit when Im wrong or if someone makes a great point.  This isnt arguing, it's discussing and its enjoyable to me.  I certainly enjoy the points Earth has made.  But you come in with the intent of jab and move.  Great, your contribution means nothing then.  See ya