I’m curious why the City of North Charleston settled with the family for 6.5 million before the trial even started.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
quote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherPut away your cop love and your white pride for one minute. This ass hat shot a man in the back 5 times who was running away. Then planted a tazer to try to get away. This man needs to burn. Hands down. I don’t care if the man ran or not…
As I already stated when the video first cam out I could see (barely) the suspect shoot at the cop with the taser. Go watch the video again and look at it with a more open mind or eyes.
Usually I’m right there with you. Tons of POS cops get away with shooting people just because they are cops and general abuse of power. The cops that shot up the two old Chinese ladies in Cali while looking for a big black guy that killed a cop and his wife would be in jail if it were up to me. They were in a different color and make of truck delivering newspapers and got unloaded on. THAT was BS that they got away with it. This case is different.
First, Most, Biggest
quote:
Originally posted by CaptFritzI’m curious why the City of North Charleston settled with the family for 6.5 million before the trial even started.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
X2. Had a similar case up here in Charlotte where the accused cop was found not guilty, but the city awarded the family like $2.5 million before the criminal case was heard. Talk about potential bias…[:0]
“I’m not a hundred percent in love with your tone right now…”
GW i never saw the guy shoot at him with the tazer. Even so there is no justification for shooting a man in the back 8 times running away. Even in the old West you would be considered a “yellow belly” coward for that.
quote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherGW i never saw the guy shoot at him with the tazer. Even so there is no justification for shooting a man in the back 8 times running away. Even in the old West you would be considered a “yellow belly” coward for that.
Back in the day, If a cow or horse thief was running away and got shot in the back a hundred times the shooter would have gotten patted on the back for a job well done.
Come back to modern day and after seeing the video, what ever lead up to Scott thinking he needed to run from the police, Slager should not have shot him like that according to Police training. Scott did not possess a deadly weapon intending on doing more harm. He was just doing a stupid thing by running from the law. He should have stood down and called it in, I’d say personal pride rather than fear made Slager shoot Scott.
I know one thing, I could never be a law officer. God bless them all and keep them safe and thinking straight.
“If Bruce Jenner can keep his wiener and be called a woman, I can keep my firearms and be considered disarmed.”
What if Scott was armed and ran about 50ft away and then grabbed his weapon and killed Slager? That scenario happened and it wasn’t good for the police officer.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
What if you were walking down the street and someone shot you in the back? Was it was justified since you could have shot them first?
All of you need to remember the definition of MURDER. Listen the jury foreman’s own words. YOU were not there to hear ALL of the evidence…the what ifs have been settled, and are the reason the man is not in jail TODAY.
Get over it. The prosecution didn’t do their job well enough to get a conviction…and might not be able to next time either.
Tennessee v. Garner. Go do some reading.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
So you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
quote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherSo you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
I agree that in today’s day and age, if you’re a black man, and you decide to fight and run from a white cop, you’re a ****ing idiot. PERIOD. Hell, I’m as white as they come and I wouldn’t do it.
No one is saying the man did no wrong. Or that he shouldn’t be in jail. The point is, by the definition of the law, the prosecution cannot prove “malice aforethought,” therefore no murder conviction. Take your emotion and all out of it, and think about the LAW, because that’s the ONLY thing that matters in the court of law.
If they had not folded and listened to the public, and charged him for what it actually was (voluntary manslaughter), then he would be in jail RIGHT NOW for 30 years, in my opinion.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
After thinking and talking this over. two things.
Slager should be punished for the following two reasons.
- Slager did not verify that Scott had the taser. I understand the situation but Slager is the trained professional.
- Firing eight rounds in a consecutive fashion is not how officers are trained. Constant and control should have been used.
This is a LEO, trained and educated. He will and should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen.
Scott, however, is the responsible party for breaking the law, attacking a LEO, fleeing twice, escalating this event to the need for deadly force. If it were not for his multiple and continuous actions Slager would have never been put in the situation to act.
Time served, and never hold an active LEO position again.
quote:So food for thought here:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherSo you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
I agree that in today’s day and age, if you’re a black man, and you decide to fight and run from a white cop, you’re a ****ing idiot. PERIOD. Hell, I’m as white as they come and I wouldn’t do it.
No one is saying the man did no wrong. Or that he shouldn’t be in jail. The point is, by the definition of the law, the prosecution cannot prove “malice aforethought,” therefore no murder conviction. Take your emotion and all out of it, and think about the LAW, because that’s the ONLY thing that matters in the court of law.
If they had not folded and listened to the public, and charged him for what it actually was (voluntary manslaughter), then he would be in jail RIGHT NOW for 30 years, in my opinion.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
There was a period of time between the scuffle and when Slager began unloading on Scott. He was 18 feet away before he started shooting. You don’t think it’s conceivable that Slager had some malice about the fight, and therefore forethought that he was going to kill that guy before shooting him in the back? There’s no restriction on how “long” you have to have malice and forethought.
quote:
Originally posted by ReelShockAfter thinking and talking this over. two things.
Slager should be punished for the following two reasons.
- Slager did not verify that Scott had the taser. I understand the situation but Slager is the trained professional.
- Firing eight rounds in a consecutive fashion is not how officers are trained. Constant and control should have been used.
This is a LEO, trained and educated. He will and should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen.Scott, however, is the responsible party for breaking the law, attacking a LEO, fleeing twice, escalating this event to the need for deadly force. If it were not for his multiple and continuous actions Slager would have never been put in the situation to act.
Time served, and never hold an active LEO position again.
Hvae you been through police firearms training? They’re taught to stop firing when the threat is neutralized. …what does “constant and control” mean?
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
quote:
Originally posted by Edistodanielquote:So food for thought here:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherSo you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
I agree that in today’s day and age, if you’re a black man, and you decide to fight and run from a white cop, you’re a ****ing idiot. PERIOD. Hell, I’m as white as they come and I wouldn’t do it.
No one is saying the man did no wrong. Or that he shouldn’t be in jail. The point is, by the definition of the law, the prosecution cannot prove “malice aforethought,” therefore no murder conviction. Take your emotion and all out of it, and think about the LAW, because that’s the ONLY thing that matters in the court of law.
If they had not folded and listened to the public, and charged him for what it actually was (voluntary manslaughter), then he would be in jail RIGHT NOW for 30 years, in my opinion.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
There was a period of time between the scuffle and when Slager began unloading on Scott. He was 18 feet away before he started shooting. You don’t think it’s conceivable that Slager had some malice about the fight, and therefore forethought that he was going to kill that guy before shooting him in the back? There’s no restriction on how “long” you have to have malice and forethought.
Doesn’t matte
quote:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by Edistodanielquote:So food for thought here:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherSo you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
I agree that in today’s day and age, if you’re a black man, and you decide to fight and run from a white cop, you’re a ****ing idiot. PERIOD. Hell, I’m as white as they come and I wouldn’t do it.
No one is saying the man did no wrong. Or that he shouldn’t be in jail. The point is, by the definition of the law, the prosecution cannot prove “malice aforethought,” therefore no murder conviction. Take your emotion and all out of it, and think about the LAW, because that’s the ONLY thing that matters in the court of law.
If they had not folded and listened to the public, and charged him for what it actually was (voluntary manslaughter), then he would be in jail RIGHT NOW for 30 years, in my opinion.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
There was a period of time between the scuffle and when Slager began unloading on Scott. He was 18 feet away before he started shooting. You don’t think it’s conceivable that Slager had some malice about the fight, and therefore forethought that he was going to kill that guy before shooting him in the back? Th
quote:We know this in hindsight, but Slager testified in court that he believed that Scott still had his taser in possession.
Originally posted by Fred67Scott did not possess a deadly weapon intending on doing more harm.
quote:Are you just making stuff up? How many times does the handbook say to shoot?
Originally posted by ReelShockFiring eight rounds in a consecutive fashion is not how officers are trained.
I was always told that you only use your handgun if it’s a matter of life or death. Once you make the decision to use the handgun, you would NOT stop shooting until the threat has been eliminated. I’ve never heard of any training where cops shoot warning shots.
That being said, the ONLY thing to debate about is whether lethal force was justified and we ALL KNOW that is questionable. But as far as HOW MANY times he pulled the trigger, I think you are on the wrong side of that argument. He kept shooting until the “threat” dropped. And THAT is likely what training tells you to do.
quote:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by Edistodanielquote:So food for thought here:
Originally posted by leadenwahboyquote:
Originally posted by freedomfisherSo you agree that the penalty for running from a cop is greater than shooting a man in the back?
I agree that in today’s day and age, if you’re a black man, and you decide to fight and run from a white cop, you’re a ****ing idiot. PERIOD. Hell, I’m as white as they come and I wouldn’t do it.
No one is saying the man did no wrong. Or that he shouldn’t be in jail. The point is, by the definition of the law, the prosecution cannot prove “malice aforethought,” therefore no murder conviction. Take your emotion and all out of it, and think about the LAW, because that’s the ONLY thing that matters in the court of law.
If they had not folded and listened to the public, and charged him for what it actually was (voluntary manslaughter), then he would be in jail RIGHT NOW for 30 years, in my opinion.
Wadmalaw native
16’ Bentz-Craft Flats Boat
There was a period of time between the scuffle and when Slager began unloading on Scott. He was 18 feet away before he started shooting. You don’t think it’s conceivable that Slager had some malice about the fight, and therefore forethought that he was going to kill that guy before shooting him in the back? Th
Yep, a Taser, can kill you! Just hold down that trigger, or pull it enough!
quote:In the USA people are "innocent until PROVEN GUILTY"... You are arguing it exactly in reverse. It's not up to the prosecution to show that it's "conceivable" that Slager had malice aforethought. It's up to them to PROVE "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Slager had malice aforethought.
Originally posted by EdistodanielSo food for thought here:
There was a period of time between the scuffle and when Slager began unloading on Scott. He was 18 feet away before he started shooting. You don’t think it’s conceivable that Slager had some malice about the fight, and therefore forethought that he was going to kill that guy before shooting him in the back? There’s no restriction on how “long” you have to have malice and forethought.
And that is where the jury was hung. We all know it’s “conceivable” that he had malice aforethought. But to get a conviction of murder, you have to PROVE it. Thus, the BURDEN OF PROOF lies on the prosecution.