Posted on 06/08/2015 8:32:20 AM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
More and more cop killings seem to be done as punishment, as them administering their own personal judgement on the individual for attitude, or for him being difficult or unpleasant.
My understanding of 1st degree murder is that you go into a confrontation planning to murder someone. My understanding of 2nd degree murder is when someone is murdered “in the heat of the moment.” Unless my premises are wrong, the video looks to me like 2nd degree murder.
Did you watch the video?
...
Is there video that includes the fight on the ground?
“My understanding of 1st degree murder is that you go into a confrontation planning to murder someone. My understanding of 2nd degree murder is when someone is murdered “in the heat of the moment.” Unless my premises are wrong, the video looks to me like 2nd degree murder.”
Let the jury decide. If they wind up debating which degree, they will have already decided it was murder.
“the police will be no where to be found”
I’m assuming they will still expect their paychecks even if they decide to not do their job.
Taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for their own defense, plus provide a paycheck and a retirement to those who get all passive aggressive when one of them gets indicted for shooting someone in the back.
Premeditation or not, it was right to indict the cop. He had a couple of options to bring this guy down without shooting him in the back.
Tackle the guy, follow until backup arrived, tase the dude, take out a night stick and tune on him or shoot him in the leg. The officer pumped several rounds into this guy and took his life...for a traffic stop.
The cop made a bad decision and unfortunately will have to pay the price.
My only problem with 1st degree murder in this case is there is no motive for the cop wanting the person dead.
Not defending the cop or what he did, just hoping for actual justice, not retributive justice.
Again I’ll ask: is this really 1st degree murder?
I was not aware of that...seems like he is going to go down on this one. Better cop a plea to a M2
In South Carolina it's homicide, period. They don't have first degree murder or second degree murder, just aggravating circumstances that can affect the sentence. And since homicide is defined by their laws as the killing of any person with malice aforethought, either expressed or implied, then the charge is certainly warranted in this case.
Ok. That answers my question. Thanks.
Message to Charleston cops, don't shoot fleeing, unarmed suspects in the back five times and you don't have anything to worry about.
That justifies shooting him?
So you would sentence a homeowner to death if they shot a trespasser who was unarmed? The person presents no threat! They’re unarmed!
Threat assessment is based on reasonable belief. It’s entirely appropriate at times to shoot people who are not a threat if they’ve done something to present a reasonable belief that they are a threat.
When he brought his pistol up, seeing the guy run away, he should have holstered and pursued.
Premeditation need not be drawn out. When he looked down his sights at Scott, he had a moment where he had to decide. If he started firing at retention, I could see the “heat of the moment “ argument. But no. He had time. He acted purposefully.
I don't agree that that is the sole criterion. In practice it appears to be based entirely on whether the LEO perceives a threat, whether or not it's based on reasonable belief.
Do you always answer a question with a question?
When he brought his pistol up, seeing the guy run away, he should have holstered and pursued.
...
Hadn’t he already pursued him and tried to use a non-lethal weapon to stop him?
Watch the video, it was an ugly killing, and you can see him rearranging the crime scene and handling evidence and the body in a way that would transfer DNA.
Now, if this person just committed a violent crime, that would be a defense to the prosecution. Still does not guarantee a no bill from the grand jury.
When a person begins to flee and distance gets greater as he runs, the “fear for my life” defense begins to evaporate. If the fleeing person stops, turns around as if to reengage, then firing may be justified especially at night or late dusk.
Not sure about other states, but in Texas a law enforcement officer is justified firing his weapon at a person attempting to flee the scene of a felony. As a civilian, we have the right to defend life AND property. If someone if breaking into your home, attempts to carjack you..that sort of thing. If someone is breaking into your car at night, you walk out and catch the guy in the act and he begins to run...you shoot him, you will go to jail.
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.