Posted on 04/08/2015 4:02:10 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The outcry over the death of Walter Scott stems from a video, taken by an anonymous bystander,
that depicts police officer Michael Slager shooting at Scott eight times as he flees. In an interview with Time, however, Scott’s brother says that the video may not have come out if the police hadn’t initially tried to paint Slager as innocent.
Anthony Scott told Time that he found the circumstances surrounding his brother’s death, caused after a routine traffic stop, highly suspicious. “When I got there somebody told me that he was gone. And I was like what in the world? What happened? What happened? How did you get killed in a random stop? It just didn’t make any sense to me.”
Slager initially said that he shot Walter Scott out of fear for his life, claiming that he had taken his stun gun, and police performed CPR immediately on the shooting victim. The video, which Scott said he received at a wake earlier this week, showed otherwise:
“He wanted to see what reports were coming from the North Charleston Police Department because of the fact that they may have told the truth,” Scott said in an phone interview from home with TIME Wednesday. “And when they continued with the lies, he said, ‘I have to come forward.’”
…“I was angry. Shocked,” Scott said. “I said, ‘We have to have that.’ So that we could prove it was innocent.”
Scott credits the bystander and the video with getting Slager charged with murder. “I think that if that man never showed the video we would not be at the point that we’re at right now,” he said. “The video tells the truth. It would not be so hard for us to prove that this man was running away when you get shot in your back. I mean how can you defend that?”
The man who filmed the video has not yet been named.
Murdered by the state - it could happen to any of us.
Yep.
By the State? That would be the case if these were Federal Cops, which is exactly what the Sharptons of the world are calling for.
Then you really will have “murder by the State.”
““Federal law defines voluntary manslaughter as the unlawful killing of a human being without malice [u]pon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.””
I’m pretty sure since murder is a state crime, not Federal, manslaughter is defined by the state not the federal government.
Thats what I want to see. The vid from the cop car. It would also be extremely interesting to read the m
Cop’s report he filed before he knew there was a video outside police control. Any report made by the other cop on the scene would be interesting as well if he failed to mention the other cop moving the taser. If so, he’s an accessory to attempting to obstruction of justice.
Your scenero might be plausible in a military situation, but that is not what this was. Everybody knows you dont mess with a crime scene. Especially cops. If his report documents that he moved it, he should be given the benefit of doubt. Otherwise, not.
I believe I’ve heard that he was delinquent on child support payments and that there may have been a court warrant for him.
*****************
That’s what I’ve heard ... we do have a debtors prison system in America ... civil payments ... child support , parking tickets , anything can land you in jail if you’re broke... and the police love to pull their pretense stops and go fishing.
Is it ridiculous? This incident had put Ferguson right back into play. Now even more will question the Police’s version of events.
*********************
In my lifetime I haven’t known one internal investigation in my city that has done anything but “lose” evidence and exonerate any involved officer... and my city is far from the most corrupt in my state.
No, child support is a parent’s financial responsibility. It doesn’t absolve you of all other responsibilities.
“And it took courage to keep staying visible when you think about how the cop could have turned on the video taker to take the camera.”
Yeah, especially since the video taker didn’t know how many rounds the cop had left. He could have had at least 7 more if it was a 9mm.
See Post #67
Not only does it look like an unjustified shooting, it looks like the officer tried to plant evidence by throwing his taser next to the mans body to support his story.
It's obvious he picked it back up only after he saw he was being video taped.
If this video is accurate and there are no extenuating circumstances (and I can think of one), , this cop needs to spend a long time in jail, possibly followed by a trip to an execution.
“I really don’t buy the excuses that “it’s just a few bad cops” anymore. There are systemic issues going on here, because we see the same problems over and over again, in departments across the country. “
I completely concur with everything you’ve posted here. Too many of them see the Constitution as a “hindrance to doing their jobs.” I might even be persuaded that “too many” should be changed to “most.” The lesson here today though, is that the fight should begin in court, because if you give a cop ANY reason to abuse you, he’s going to do it and you’ll be lucky if you survive. BTW, in my view, the other piece of this “unholy alliance,” are the district attorneys, but their abuse is more subtle. I see the mounting use of cameras by citizens as a good thing. The cops now need to get the message that their actions are quite likely to be recorded as is the case here.
Would it not be worth it? To save the entire country from another Ferguson?
Don’t see any sign of Scott’s wallet. Did he have ID out?
If he had been zapped then that could explain why he is running so slowly. Or he may well have been high. At my age I could probably run as fast as he was.
Wish phone guy had panned around the scene and got the cars located.
If the prowl car had camera and audio running it might have caught the whole voice and struggle noises.
Convenient question if one wants to help propagate murder by cop - anyone who runs is fair game for 8 shots to the back....
Me too.....in fact, if I were standing on my front porch shooting at a guy running down the street who had just tried to break into my house, I don't think the Castle Doctrine law would protect me from murder charges.
I frequently wonder why, if a man can’t afford to support his child, he goes to jail; but if a woman can’t afford to support her child, the government gives her food, medical care, and free housing?
Sure it does, at least as far as the law is concerned. As long as you pay whatever fines the government mandates, you are free to go on with your life and never lift a finger to help your children in any other way.
I used the federal definition because it is a bit more clear. The state law simply states, “the unlawful killing of another without malice, express or implied...”
I think it will be hard to prove malice since the shooting comes in direct succession of some sort of altercation (evidenced by flying gear). In other words, the shooting was clearly WRONG but it would be easy to argue that it was a heat of the moment event, not the direct result of malice.
But, bear in mind, my original comments were relying on the assumption that a video posted by another Freeper was the “raw” video, when in fact, it was not. Regardless, I still see this case pleading to [voluntary] manslaughter with a term of 10 years, commuted to 5. That’s the way the system works.
Excellent point about whether or not he admits to moving the taser. If he self-reported moving it, I’d call it an instinctual retrieval of potentially dangerous items in an open area where a crowd might potential gather. If he claims not to have moved it, then he was covering himself.
Good point. +1 for you.
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.