Posted on 04/11/2015 10:43:37 AM PDT by EveningStar
CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — In stories April 7 and 8 about the shooting of an unarmed black man by a white police officer, The Associated Press erroneously reported that Walter Scott was honorably discharged from the Coast Guard. Scott was granted a lesser discharge, known as a general discharge under honorable conditions, because of a drug-related incident.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Agree. I guess that makes it OK for a cop to murder the guy.
“I guess that makes it OK for a cop to murder the guy.”
Why would you think that?
You got it. That’s my point.
Yeah, but the cop is still an a—hole.
Being a former Puddle Pirate that is usually the reason you get a GD under Honorable is for a drug related offense.
I’ve also read that Slager was a former Coastie too. Sad day in Cape May.
That's a possibility but it's far too soon to be *certain*.Today we discover that the dead guy had a drug history.Do you,for example,think that it's at *all* possible that the three autopsies that will surely be done (South Carolina,DOJ and Reverend Al's pathologist) will show drugs in his system? And if,by chance they do will you still be *certain* that the cop's an a-hole?
Just askin'....
Based on what I’ve seen thus far about this shooting (no more or less than what other Freepers have seen), it doesn’t look good for the officer. However, it is important to remember that we are not yet privy to all the evidence. We know that there was a struggle, off camera. It may yet turn out that Scott’s prints are on the officer’s gun and/or taser, and the object dropped at Scott’s feet may indeed have been sunglasses. In addition, Scott may well have been high as a kite when the tragedy was unfolding.
There were also at least two potential witnesses - the person who made the videos and the passenger in Scott’s car. We have no idea at this time what they’ve told investigators.
It’s hard to imagine evidence sufficiently exculpatory to exonerate Flagler from blame for shooting a fleeing suspect multiple times in the back, but who knows what may turn up.
I do know this, however. If the officer is acquited, America’s cities will burn this summer.
IOW, he couldn’t pay his child support because drugs were more important. The cop will go to prison on this but Scott was a waste of air.
He fired 8 rounds at a fleeing suspect. The danger to the cop had passed and there is no evidence at all that the deceased was a danger to anyone else. The taser which supposedly was fought over had been used and its wires are clearly seen training the deceased. Officer Slager called in that there was a struggle for his taser and he was forced to shoot. Clearly if there was a struggle for the taser it happened some time before the shooting. From the cell vid we see Scott leave the car and call to the officer. Slager tells him to get back in the car which he does. Had there been a struggle is it even possible that Slager would not have handcuffed and arrested Scott for assaultin a P.O.? Yet Scott was unrestrained in the car and Slager was at or in his cruiser. The after some seconds he bolts the car. Slager follows, yells “Taser Taser” and uses it to no effect. He draws his weapon and fires 8 shots at the deceased’s back. I don’t know why he did this, but this is IMO at least what we call in NY murder with depraved indifference.
What kind of radical are you?/sarc
I agree that we are in perilous times, possibly on the edge of the abyss and it's all being directed by the WH, coordinated with soros funded groups.
Just heard another "White officer shoots unarmed black man in back" story on Fox radio followed by a brief story about Officer John Moynihan of Boston being shot in the face.
Needless to say they neglected to mention that the officer was White and was shot by a black gang member, ex-con on parole for previously shooting at police, illegally in possession of a gun.
Just an oversight, I'm sure.
Meanwhile, since this happened, statistically 11 Crackers have been murdered by blacks but we don't know the name of a single victim.
Just askin’
How can the presence of drugs in the guy’s system make the cop any less of an a-hole?
Does he have some magical ability to gauge the extent to which a suspect is acting under the influence? Is there some obscure SC law that authorizes SC cops to gun down people running away if they’ve got drugs in their system? When did having drugs in your system become a capital crime? Even if it were, shouldn’t we require a trial?
The cop shot an unarmed man in the back.
That's the bottom line. There is no excuse for that...
When the police saw the video a couple of days after the shooting, they charged the cop with murder.
What kind of cop goes to pick up evidence from one edge of the crime scene, and then drops it into the most important part of the crime scene, and then thinks better of it, and picks it up and places it back on his belt?
1. Stopped for a tail light out - not a problem
2. No registration papers for the vehicle - Makes me wonder
3. No insurance papers - still wondering
4. Exits vehicle but sits back when told - getting nervous now
5. Exits vehicle and runs, Taser doesn’t stop him - is this a felon/robber/rapist
6. Do you let him go or stop him? Protect innocent civilians is the job.
No, the job is go home at night when shift is finished.
I don’t. Read all the comments then get back to me. :-)
Yes,but why?
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.