S.C. cop murders man. No kidding!

[l921428x]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sc-co...t-man-in-back/

Just shoots a running away man to death.
The cop is charged with murder and someone
videoed the incident.

I really cannot believe this.
What the hell Funky?

[1 Patriot-of-many]

If it wasn't for the video, there would be no charges no doubt. This is why some cops have a fit when they see themselves being taped. Granted at the beginning of the video it looks like some altercation occurred, but sorry if you got your feelings/authority hurt, doesn't give you the right to shoot people in the back. If you think it does you shouldn't be a police officer, and you don't get to lie about it afterwards and get a paid vacation.

[Schuetzenman]

If one of us no uniform civilians shot somebody running away it would get us a murder charge, now wouldn't it. They guy had nothing in his hands and he's running away, and not all that fast I'd opine. This clearly is a senseless killing by a LEO based on this very clear video.

[N/A]

I thought we had decided that if people would just obey the directions of the officer, none of this would happen.
Stopped on traffic violation, wanted on warrants, fights with officer and tries to escape. Could have been a fleeing child rapist...or he could have been smart and lived.

[Altarboy]

I just saw the video. I wish the video started at the beginning of the traffic stop.

[ltorlo64]

I just saw the video. I wish the video started at the beginning of the traffic stop.

The MSM will never show from the beginning of the incident as it will not mesh well with the narrative they are trying to establish, that the police office shot the man in cold blood. So, there is not discussion of the man fighting with the officer, nor is there mention that the man was reportedly tazed but it did not stop him (you can see what looks like a tazer being dragged after the man). Just like in Ferguson there is not enough information to make a judgment. The information provided would lead people to declare the cop guilty of murder, but it is one sided and only a few seconds of a much longer event.

[FunkyPertwee]

Like my mom said, if you would stand still this wouldn't hurt so much.

He pulled the taser out and ran, so guess what, the gun comes out.

You can see at the begining of the video that the cop draws the instant that the tazer is thrown down. He should have had the sense not to shoot, but oh well. I ain't sweating this guys death.

In fact I'm pissed about the memorial. Had the guy died in a car accident, no one would care because he was a peice of shit. But because a cop shot him, now hes a little angel just like Trayvon and Mike Brown.

Also, this took place in North Charleston, not Charleston. North Charleston has MUCH worse crime problems than Charleston.

[FunkyPertwee]

After my second viewing of the video, it looks a lot worse. Guy was limping way too fucked up to actually get anywhere or do anything from what I could tell.

I guess I'll have to leave this up to the jury and find out what happened in the minutes before the camera showed up.

I'm not down with rioting, so I hope nobody tries any fucked up shit like rioting/protesting downtown, or stirring up locals on the islands.

[Krupski]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sc-co...t-man-in-back/

Just shoots a running away man to death.
The cop is charged with murder and someone
videoed the incident.

I really cannot believe this.
What the hell Funky?

[blue comments added by me]

A South Carolina [job irrelevant] is facing a murder charge after shooting a [race irrelevant] man in the back at least eight times.
The Post and Courier reports that not only did [title irrelevant] Michael Slager shoot Walter Scott in the back multiple times, as Scott was running away, but the entire incident was caught on video. This is a screengrab the paper released from the video, which is expected to come out later:

I thought the only time to shoot is if a person's life or the life of someone else is in immediate danger and there's no other alternative?

I don't see how the shooter was justified in shooting. The perp was running away... obviously the shooter was not in any danger, let alone immediate mortal danger.

If the shooter doesn't get life in prison for first degree murder, then it's time to declare war.

Can you imagine if it wasn't on video? The shooter would have gotten away with it simply by lying and/or planting a weapon in the dead man's hand.

[Krupski]

I thought we had decided that if people would just obey the directions of the officer, none of this would happen.
Stopped on traffic violation, wanted on warrants, fights with officer and tries to escape. Could have been a fleeing child rapist...or he could have been smart and lived.

Still no excuse to shoot. Shooting is justified only as the last resort when protecting your own or someone else's life from immediate mortal danger.

Anything less is murder, plain and simple.

[Krupski]

The MSM will never show from the beginning of the incident as it will not mesh well with the narrative they are trying to establish, that the police office shot the man in cold blood. So, there is not discussion of the man fighting with the officer, nor is there mention that the man was reportedly tazed but it did not stop him (you can see what looks like a tazer being dragged after the man). Just like in Ferguson there is not enough information to make a judgment. The information provided would lead people to declare the cop guilty of murder, but it is one sided and only a few seconds of a much longer event.

No need for me to post the same thing a third time. The shooter was not justified. There is no judgement to make. There is no circumstance that justifies murdering someone by shooting them in the back as they are running away.

If the guy was a child molesting, bank robbing, dope dealing criminal... doesn't matter if he runs away. They know where he lives and hangs out. They could capture him within minutes or hours. Murder was not justified.

IF the perp was a terrible, horrible person the cop may have done society a favor, but letting it slide on that premise is a dangerous, slippery slope.

[skorpion]

As already stated, shooting an unarmed fleeing perp in the back was obviously the wrong move on the officer's part. I would love to know the details that led up to this, though. If there was a struggle not captured by the video and the perp attempted to grab the officer's pistol, then deadly force was met on the force continuum scale only at that particular moment. However, with the perp mitigating the immediate danger to the officer by fleeing, the officer actually firing his weapon when he did was clearly very poor judgement. Verbal commands to stop, followed by re-holstering and pursuing, would have been better actions than opening fire.

[Krupski]

After my second viewing of the video, it looks a lot worse. Guy was limping way too fucked up to actually get anywhere or do anything from what I could tell.

I guess I'll have to leave this up to the jury and find out what happened in the minutes before the camera showed up.

I'm not down with rioting, so I hope nobody tries any fucked up shit like rioting/protesting downtown, or stirring up locals on the islands.

If the murderer gets away with it, there will probably be riots. And, could you blame the rioters?

Look at the Rodney King incident. If the people didn't riot, the cops who assaulted King (criminals) and the cops who watched a crime in progress and did nothing (also criminals) would have gotten away with it.

I know cops have a tough job, and I know they get sick and tired of dealing with the scum of the earth on a daily basis, but that's no justification for shooting or even an assault.

[Krupski]

The video makes the cop look pretty bad, and shooting an unarmed fleeing perp in the back was obviously the wrong move on his part. I would love to know the details that led up to this, though. If there was a struggle not captured by the video and the perp attempted to grab the officer's pistol, then deadly force was met on the force continuum scale [b]only at that particular moment[b]. However, with the perp mitigating the immediate danger to the officer by fleeing, the officer actually firing his weapon when he did was clearly very poor judgement. Verbal commands to stop, followed by re-holstering and pursuing, would have been better actions than opening fire.

IF the guy was struggling to get the cop's gun and the cop shot the guy AT THAT TIME it would be completely justified. But not 30+ feet away and in the back.

[skorpion]

IF the guy was struggling to get the cop's gun and the cop shot the guy AT THAT TIME it would be completely justified. But not 30+ feet away and in the back.

Agreed.

[TEN-32]

Krupski-Factually wrong as usual. Landmark use of deadly force decisions by SCOTUS make clear the law in this regard.

Under the Fourth Amendment, police may use only such force as is objectively reasonable under the circumstances. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 397, 109 S.Ct. 1865, 1872, 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989); Scott v. Henrich, 39 F.3d 912, 914 (9th Cir.1994). To prevent the escape of a felony suspect, a police officer may use deadly force only when it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious harm, either to the officer or others. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 3, 105 S.Ct. 1694, 1697, 85 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985).

Where 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. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.

Having considered the above...We do not know all the factors surrounding the arrest. Initial reports indicate he was stopped for a minor traffic offense and had a warrant for failure to pay child support. Additionally, it appears that there were alternatives to deadly force to prevent the escape of this guy. If this all proves to be accurate, the shooting is definitely bad. The officer made a very poor decision and he has been charged criminally with murder. What the fuck else to you want? Charge him twice? LOL.

[FunkyPertwee]

If the murderer gets away with it, there will probably be riots. And, could you blame the rioters?

Look at the Rodney King incident. If the people didn't riot, the cops who assaulted King (criminals) and the cops who watched a crime in progress and did nothing (also criminals) would have gotten away with it.

I know cops have a tough job, and I know they get sick and tired of dealing with the scum of the earth on a daily basis, but that's no justification for shooting or even an assault.

Holy shit. So you're totally on board the left's social justice bandwagon.

How in the hell will it be justified that local businesses get burned/looted and families like mine (white) have to deal with harassment for what a police officer did?

[TEN-32]

We just had one not too far from me recently. 17 year old black kid shot twice in the back by local police. Kid met a guy to buy a gun but tried to rob the guy and at least one shot was fired in the struggle. Cops responded and shot the kid. Its being referred to by local blacktivists as the next Ferguson. I know guys on that department. Its a rough town. We'll see.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburb...406-story.html

[skorpion]

If the murderer gets away with it, there will probably be riots. And, could you blame the rioters?

Yes. There is no excuse for the looting and burning of innocent homes and businesses.

[alismith]

Well, no matter what anyone, who wasn't involved, thinks, this incident is vastly different from Skittles Kid and the Gentle Giant. Obviously, there had to be enough evidence for the shooter to be charged with murder.

Now, I'm not sure if this is normal procedure in SC, but, even so, someone higher up thought the evidence justified the arrest and charge. Conversely, with Skittles, and the Giant, there was enough evidence NOT to charge the shooters and arrest them (regardless of how the CMSM did their best to taint the cases).

Whether a justifiable charge or not, we'll have to wait and see what shakes out at the inquest and trial, if it goes that far.

From the video, it doesn't look good for the officer. (But, there may be other evidence than what that video shows that hasn't been made public yet.)