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 ...
Actually I think all that has happened is they’ve announced the state is seeking a grand jury’s indictment. I may be wrong on that.
I don't know about that! Either should you without proof.
Huh? Who said anything about an potential drug connection justifying shooting the driver? NOT ME!
But, if Scott and passenger were involved in a drug transaction, it might explain the flight from Slager. Please notice my speculative “IF”. I do not claim that this is the cause, but it is reasonable to wonder why he decided to flee from a minor traffic offense, wrestle with the officer, try to grab his taser, etc.
Some of you people appear to miss the whole picture of this tragedy in a desire to reach a premature “ejaculative” conclusion. Sorry about how I see your eagerness to render a verdict, but it is how it comes across.
One man lost his life, and another lost his career, might be in jail, could lose many years of love and support to his family and unborn child, while all of you “hang ‘em high” folks are salivating for mob justice, without all the evidence is in, and before the case has been tried in a court of law.
Shame on you for that, and for attacking those of us who disagree with your rush to justice.
I have been here for many years, and am appalled at how low we have fallen in our discourse. I guess it is the downside of success, but will go out on a limb and posit that FR will eventually fail if we abandon reason for emotional band-wagons.
Sorry but no.
Just because the perp broke the law does not mean the cop gets to break the law.
past experience, Karl. I have been on the ‘net for many years, and am quick to nail websites that are “dodgy”.
The Conservative Treehouse, so far, has been reliable in their efforts to research the facts, not taking media reports as gospel.
Free Republic is being dragged down these days, by an effort by some to browbeat us into an alternate version of conservative group think. Let’s not fall off the horse on the other side.
Proof is all I am looking for, which is why I do not rush to premature conclusions from stuff presented by the MSM..
It is clear to me that had the officer actually ran after the perp, he would have stopped him. Add in the factor of backup being so close, as evidenced by the tape, the death could have easily been avoided. As much time as was taken to stop, set, aim and fire repeatedly, at such a slow and clumsy target fleeing, this appears to be a fish barrel shoot.
I think the thing that the Slager defenders are ignoring is the "contempt of cop" and "Confrontation Uber Alles" thingees.
Slager had his details, and his passenger, and his car.
Let it go - you'll get him later. But, NO! - Scott RAN!
"Contempt of cop"- GUILTY!
Attempting to avoid "Confrontation Uber Alles" - doubly GUILTY!
I guess I just think differently. I would have considered that I had the package neatly wrapped up, in due time. But I'm patient.
If the police officer, Slager, was assaulted, it appears to me that he created the conditions for the assault by seeking confrontation with Walter Scott at all costs.
Slager had Scott's details, his car, and his passenger.
Why did Slager seek out a confrontation?
I mean, what you're saying is that all I would have to do is get in your face till you swung on me, then you're my meat, in whatever way, shape or form I choose to dine on you...
Slager is either dense, or he's a predator.
No matter what, even after a court of fact finding, if Slager is found guilty of murder, by any degree, many here will still defend and honor and glorify the shoot.
http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/2a05/73drqszybffb7fx6g.jpg?size_id=5
Taser is well behind Slager in this still.
I want to see the police reports filed by Slager and his partner.
At the 1 minute mark Slagor jogs back to retrieve the taser...at 1.30 he drops it by scott..
At the 2 minute mark you can clearly see him pick up the taser that he tossed down and holster it on his left side.
There is no way that was done by accident.
Coroner: Walter Scott died from multiple gunshot wounds to the back
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3278555/posts
Quote :
(mayor)Summey said Scott was hit with the officer's Taser weapon, and they know that, Summey said, because one of the Taser projectiles was still attached.
So what you posted from the treehouse now falls into the Conspiracy theory catagory as is not supported by hard evidence.
I will be waiting for treehouse to issue a correction(as soon as hell freezes over)
Info on the use of the taser here.
Coroner: Walter Scott died from multiple gunshot wounds to the back
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3278555/posts
And on what’s being done with the case (see “inconsistencies,” etc.).
SLED: Video confirmed investigators’ early suspicions of Walter Scott’s death
http://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3278558/posts
I posted a couple of new articles as linked in my last comment. Should shed a little more light.
What “truncated video”?
Every time a policeman initiates an arrest or pursues a suspect it is in some sense “pursuing a confrontation”. That’s what we pay the police to do.
New police procedure is to drop evidence in custody, into the dirt. Yea...
+1
Yeah, it was pretty obvious to me that CT was wrong about Slager getting hit by the taser. What is correct in their analysis is that the pursuit and subsequent struggle took place over quite a bit of time and distance, and that Scott had managed to get hold of Slager’s taser. It was the latter that set the shooting in motion.
Prior to 1985 and the Garner case, the law, in the form of the fleeing felon rule, would have been squarely on Slager’s side. It said that cops can shoot fleeing felons. Garner narrowed the law by requiring an officer to have probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat to himself or others. It gives considerable leeway to the fact that police have to make snap decisions in the heat of the moment by allowing the officer’s perceptions at the time to be considered rather than 20/20 hindsight.
This is where I think there’s a grey area. Can it be said beyond a reasonable doubt that Slager, in the moment after fighting with Scott and after Scott had tried to get hold of his weapon, did not have probable cause to believe that Scott was a danger if he were allowed to flee?
I think this case is going to come down to applying the Garner guidelines, and I think there’s enough space in there for the defense to argue its way out of a murder conviction.
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.
