Posted on 04/12/2015 3:58:09 AM PDT by IChing
On the first day we saw the North Charleston, South Carolina, shooting video of Walter Scott by Officer Michael Slager we were as shocked as everyone. However, as research now indicates there is much more to the story.
What we cover here in the latest update might just change the entire way the story continues…
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
Apparently you have yet to take in the posted analysis.
So, you choose to adhere to an Animal Farm worldview.
Ok, I got it.
You likely believe it ok for a drunk driving cop to be given a pass by fellow officers while the great unwashed are cuffed, hauled away and sit in a tank for 48 hours.
Where did you get your Conservative card? The grocery store bubblegum dispenser?
I havent seen what the object was yet...if the report states it was a taser then it should be painfully obvious that he was planting it.....the question remains why would slager move anything at the scene of a shooting in the first place...I dont care if it was a pair of sunlgasses.
Same here. It shouldn’t take 30 seconds and running to get to a link. I gave up. So many links are a slow walk grind for me, and I have a new desktop. Go figure. It’s like the dang thing arrived with a virus.
Serious question — have you assessed what is posted at the link? And no, I never said those who find fault with Slager are unfair. I definitely say those who condemn him without doing due diligence are unfair. What’s fair is to assess all factors and apply the law.
There is no logical reason to move anything at a shooting scene.
And I asked you...as an ex cop....not a blog post.
Please explain why an officer would move anything at a shooting scene before it’s been logged and photographed.
The standard this officer will be judged by will be Garner v. Tennessee, not a state fleeing felon statute.
Name calling is a poor excuse for an inability to have an honest discussion. Unfortunately, a common issue in these parts.
Personally, I think it ought to be standard policy that if you flee from a police officer, you will be shot. That way there is not uncertainty of the outcome. There is no justifiable reason for someone to flee police. This officer was polite and not threatening in any way while he was questioning Mr. Scott.
Seeing as you were there throughout the entire thing, and inside Slager’s mind, maybe you should notify the authorities, media, and everyone else that he does not get a robust defense at trial. It’s your duty to end this charade.
Guy assaults and attempts to/disarm(s) an officer. I wouldn’t want to bet my life by chasing him that he wasn’t heading for a bigger/better weapon and cover to use it from.
“No, it’s far more complicated than that, the old fleeing felon rule went out the window in 1985, but if you pay attention to the analysis at the link Slager has some defense points.”
Aw, jeez. Now it’s all complicated again! ;)
Seriously though, all the info is not yet in and I have no idea whatsoever about the state, county and local laws. Nor have I any idea of what the local police procedures may be.
I shall continue to reserve judgement and let the professionals fight it out.
Even in the Old West, shooting a man in the back was considered the slimiest thing anyone could do. Taking your time, planting your feet, assuming a proper target stance and squeezing off rounds at a fleeing and unarmed individual is distasteful and quite simply wrong. The nonchalant walk up to the downed man is equally distasteful.
If that is too hard for you to swallow, then you should seriously look deep within yourself to determine why many others do find it abhorrent.
Thank you.
If these new revelations are correct, then your contention is wrong.
Taking the cop’s weapon puts the perp into assault to a police officer, regardless if the weapon is used. Once it is used it’s instantly turned into attempted murder of a police officer. Hot pursuit is to prevent the perpetrator from further assaults.
Can you guarantee that “Mr.” Scott would do no further harm? The cop did.
Good post. The comments on the article are also worth reading. When will we learned to not trust the media’s narrative?
With bystanders around maybe it’s better to leave one’s taser or whatever else laying everywhere. I still say without assessing the analysis presented you become increasingly annoying
That does not mean I think the cop was justified in shooting the guy. But things are a lot murkier now.
If I got in a struggle with a cop after being ordered to surrender, and then got the cops tazer and tazed him, then I started running away, should I be surprised if the cop shoots me? I think not.
Really?
You honestly believe that anyone stopped, at any time, who may or may not, depending on the officer(s) or citizen(s) involved, can be summarily executed based upon whether or not the officer(s) claim they were fleeing is valid or invalid?
You really believe that any officer can be trusted to be judge, jury and executioner???
I am speechless.
This forum has truly gone to Hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.