Posted on 12/05/2016 9:44:58 PM PST by Trump20162020
Michael Slager, the officer who faced murder and manslaughter charges for shooting an unarmed black man in the back, will face a re-trial after the jury deadlocked over his case on Monday — and experts say there's still a strong case against him.
While eleven jurors backed convicting an officer for the shooting at one point, according to a note written by one of the jurors, a holdout juror said he felt he could not vote to convict the officer in "good conscience."
Prosecutors swiftly announced they would re-try the case, which is a legal option after any jury deadlocks.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
“unarmed black man”
other phrases:
man who fought/wrestled officer
man who tried to take officer’s gun
man who took officer’s taser
man who used taser on officer
“a holdout juror said he felt he could not vote to convict the officer in “good conscience.””
That juror would have voted not to convict even if the prosecution showed a video of Slager shooting a man in the back and then planting a weapon right next to the dead man.”
Man who was shot in the back as he was fleeing.
Are you saying Slager had malice aforethought?
That’s the problem with the jury system. All it takes is one guy who actually pays attention to facts and circumstance to screw up a perfectly good political lynching.
We all saw the video, so the usual pro-police do-no-wrong spin ain’t going to cut it with this one.
Isn’t there something in law about double jeopardy and trying someone twice for the same crime....?
Someone with a legal background want to comment?
“Are you saying Slager had malice aforethought”
The video seems to show that Slager went to the spot where the altercation took place, picked up his Taser and then dropped next to Scott.
Oddly, Slager did not mention that in his report, but he did mention that the police performed CPR on Scott, but the video shows that CPR was not performed on Scott.
“Isn’t there something in law about double jeopardy and trying someone twice for the same crime....?”
That would be incorrect.
A hung jury does not mean someone can’t be tried again. It’s not double jeopardy.
So its okay for a cop to shoot an unarmed man who is running away?
Double jeopardy comes into play once a decision is reached by the jury.
I asked, “Are you saying Slager had malice aforethought?”
Are you?
“Are you saying Slager had malice aforethought?”
I’m saying that after shooting Scott, Slager walked away from Scott, picked up the Taser and then placed it next to Scott, and then reported that Scott was in possession of the Taser when he was shot.
That takes thought, and it is a thought that in no way is honest or truthful.
Therefore he should be convicted of murder?
There certainly is law about double jeopardy...which doesn’t apply since no resolution has yet been reached.
Isn’t there something in law about double jeopardy and trying someone twice for the same crime....?
______________________________________________
If he was found ‘Not Guilty’, he couldn’t be tried again.
“Therefore he should be convicted of murder?”
I was not on the jury.
But, the evidence in the video shows that he shot Scott in the back and then planted a weapon next to Scott. We also know that Slager lied in his report.
Typically, if you shoot someone in the back and then lie to the police about the events prior to, during and after the event, you will get convicted.
“There certainly is law about double jeopardy...which doesn’t apply since no resolution has yet been reached.”
The state could put him on trial until they get a conviction or he is found to be innocent
Now, Slager faces a new state trial and a federal trial.
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.