Posted on 12/08/2016 4:44:16 AM PST by Kaslin
As a kid, when I got up in the morning, there was no more welcome a sight than a box of donuts on the kitchen table. Of course, I liked to eat donuts, but that was not the reason I welcomed their arrival. No, what the donuts told me was that while I was sleeping, my father had arrived home safely.
My father was a police officer in Newark, New Jersey, a city in which bad things routinely happen to good cops. As South Carolina police officer Michael Slager has learned the hard way, today, bad things can happen to good cops just about anywhere.
The lead sentence in a CNN report on Monday of this week tells us why Slager is in a jam (italics added): "A prosecutor vowed Monday to retry a white former police officer charged with killing an unarmed black motorist in North Charleston, South Carolina, after the jury failed to reach a verdict following 22 hours of deliberation."
The insertion of racial qualifiers would lead one to believe that the incident had something to do with race. It did not. CNN just wishes it had. A media willing to roast white cops who do everything right – Ferguson's Darren Wilson comes to mind – yearn to condemn those cops who have done something wrong.
Slager would appear to be one such cop. Those running the state of South Carolina certainly think so. By placing him in the cell next to Dylann Roof, the man who wantonly murdered nine black churchgoers, they signaled to the community that Slager was just another racist killer, equally deserving of a life in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Good article.
“Good article.”
VERY good article. Unfortunately pigs don’t fly.
Is Slager charged with a Federal crime?
You don’t calmly shoot a man in the back while he is running away. At that point the officer was not in fear of his life.
Good article? Um, no. He shot a man that was unarmed and running away. Secondly, Parta Huff is the thug that attacked the officers, not the female officer.... I do agree that Obama is largely responsible for this racial climate though. ‘Trayvon could have been my son’ etal.
A bizarre and rambling essay. Shooting a man in the back for running away is simply murder.
No, it’s not. Eleven of the twelve jurors voted to convict Slager too. He’s probably not going to get one single person to bail him out the next time.
He shot a fleeing, unarmed man five times in the back from a distance of 20 feet or more. If that is an acceptable shoot then why not let the police just shoot anyone they stop right off the bat?
Oh, and Obama can’t free him because he’s being held on state crimes, not federal ones.
The “reasonable officer” standard appears to be somewhat different from the “reasonable man” standard, for better or worse. I wish there were fewer differences.
That arrogant pos wouldn’t free him anyway, even if he could.
He's charged with federal civil rights violations but that trial isn't till some time next year.
Thank you.
I would hope that no rational president or governor would consider freeing the likes of Officer Slater.
“You don’t calmly shoot a man in the back while he is running away. At that point the officer was not in fear of his life.”
As an 18 year veteran officer I wanted to say I agree with you. Not that you need me to back you on your comment but you said exactly what I was thinking. This kind of thing makes it more difficult for other officers. This guy should have been found guilty immediately.
per the article...
In cases like these, Slager’s included, the defense often relies on a 1985 Supreme Court ruling. The ruling posits that if the officer “has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.”
In Slager’s case, Scott had already shown his willingness to attack a police officer and resist arrest. In the second or two after Scott broke free, Slager had to decide whether Scott posed a threat to those in the neighborhood.
There is zero evidence that Scott posed a threat to the officer or anyone in the surrounding area when he was shot. If anything, firing at an unarmed fleeing suspect posed more of a threat to innocent people in the area since there was a greater chance that one of his three errant shots might have hit a bystander.
I don’t see any justification for this shooting, but don’t know whether it is murder or manslaughter.
“As an 18 year veteran officer I wanted to say I agree with you. Not that you need me to back you on your comment but you said exactly what I was thinking. This kind of thing makes it more difficult for other officers. This guy should have been found guilty immediately.”
When I first saw this video shortly after the incident I thought the officer was certainly headed for prison. Seems like some defense attorney found a technicality in the law that might get him off.
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.