Posted on 04/17/2015 10:33:50 AM PDT by IChing
“If there was a struggle beforehand, it should be manslaughter.”
If he shot him during the struggle I wouldn’t have an issue. He shot the guy in the back as he was running away. Right before he planted evidence.
He didn’t even hesitate before running back to get the taser.
Want to bet on the outcome? I was 100% accurate in my predictions about the Zimmerman and Wilson cases, btw.
Bear in mind that criminal trials involve due diligence and deliberative analysis of the type found here, not knee-jerk reactions to sensational video clips, without careful scrutiny based on the law.
Then you didn’t comprehend it, if you think it’s only about murder charges.
“I don’t think Slager planned to kill Scott.”
What do you imagine he thought would happen if he shot him 8 times in the back?
ahh once again you start with that.
yeah all I need to understand is that you’ll excuse any and every use of deadly force by police
So was that the taser, or Scotts hat? If it was the taser, well, that kind of seals it.
You understand what premeditation means, right?
Sorry...your theory would have some credibility...IF Slager had not tampered with evidence and planted the taser next to Scott after the fact.
That one little act of Slager’s shows his state of mind....he murdered Scott, he knew he murdered Scott, and he attempted to stage the crime scene to make the shooting appear justified.
The video I saw was a taser. He threw he right after Scott started running to free up his hands for his gun. Then he went back to the same spot and picked up a taser. Then he threw that taser right next to Scotts body.
Regardless of whether it was a taser or a hat, what rational explanation could there be for moving evidence? A couple of posters on FR have suggested it was to secure the evidence. A laughable excuse under these circumstances.
You think that can be proved? Have you not encountered the arguments as to other reasons why he moved it, then holstered it?
You want to condemn a man on a charge for which there’s reasonable doubt. How nice.
What reasonable person would try to justify placing a potentially dangerous weapon next to a suspect? I mean the taser is the whole premise for your justification of the shooting. Why take it and place it next to Scott?
A reasonable person would not buy your fiction.
If it was the hat, maybe it was a knee jerk thing due to shock. It would not materially change the facts. If it was the taser, it is hard to excuse that.
Sorry....the evidence speaks for itself.
Slager staged evidence and manipulated the crime scene for what other reason than to clear himself?
So the cop isn’t trained on how to secure a crime scene? His first reaction is to run back and get something to throw next to the man he just shot?
I wouldn’t buy that.
The key message here is to be able to run fast.
BTW...I would argue that Slager’s staging of the crime scene is evidence that he did in fact deliberately murder Scott.
Exactly. And note that he didn't have to go looking around to find the Taser - he knew exactly where it was.
I don’t buy that you’ve not read arguments as to other reasons he may have had for moving it. Tell me, in your limitless omniscience, why he almost immediately holstered it?
I don’t buy that you’ve not read arguments as to other reasons he may have had for moving it. Tell me, in your limitless omniscience, why he almost immediately holstered it?
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.