patrick.net

"I believe he didn't want to go to jail again," Walter Scott Sr. told TODAY. "He just ran away."

You seem to keep posting this, as if its some additional piece of information that adds to understanding the issue at hand. A piece of the puzzle that leads to more complete knowledge.

I dont give a shit if he had bags of crack and a gun. Lets assume the guy is the biggest piece of shit on the planet. Maybe he has a couple young girls locked up in a storage unit somewhere.

Do you still want the police shooting him eight times in The back as he slowly attempts to run away?

These days, poor people are target #1 for fees and fines - and they know they can't pay 'em back, so they get to impound their shit and sell it for even more money at auction, plus they still owe the fine, AND maybe go to private prison, which makes money for those gangsters too.

Thanks, bill clinton!

errc says

"I believe he didn't want to go to jail again," Walter Scott Sr. told TODAY. "He just ran away."

BLACK! BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK!

In conclusion: Black.

Shoot 'im, boys!

Hanging around some of these idiots too much might be making me stupid, but i still dont understand why his back child support is being made an issue. When the cop goes to trial, will the jury be instructed to consider that information?

Cept taint splain that,,,,Says law

Call it Crazy says

errc says

Hanging around some of these idiots too much might be making me stupid,

No, smoking so much pot is making you stupid...

Amazingly, anyone who disagrees with you is drunk, stoned or a tweaker.

Such people will wake up tomorrow morning sober; you'll wake up tomorrow morning as a low-voltage authoritarian wingnut douchebag.

No. It informs you as to why the perp ran away.
It has nothing to do with whether it is OK or not OK to shoot someone in the back.
Don't you have any interest at all as to what motivated the perp to run??

tatupu70 says

SoftShell says

it provides motive for the perp running away while in his car

wtf does that even mean? If I have a "motive" to run away, it's OK to shoot me?

SoftShell says

No. It informs you as to why the perp ran away.

Motive usually only comes up when we're considering whether or not an act was committed.

Since we have footage of the guy running away, it seems weird that we must explore motive, because nobody's arguing that he wasn't running away.

Call it Crazy says

HydroCabron says

you'll wake up tomorrow morning as a low-voltage authoritarian wingnut douchebag.

And you'll just wake up tomorrow continuing to be an ass!

The idea of the last word is that you say something inventive or scathing which makes people feel sorry for your opponent, instead of something which just makes people feel sorry for you.

Motive to run appears obvious, so no need to explore.
I don't know why making this observation upsets so many...
It's an open and shut case. cop will go down for it. it's on video.
Time to fill in the cracks to complete the picture...
why would anyone run away from their car for a simple traffic stop?
SOME inquiring minds would like to know...

HydroCabron says

it seems weird that we must explore motive,

Rashard Brown, 30, said he had been pulled over twice in less than two months, including one instance when an officer trailed him for about three miles. “If I broke down on the side of the road with a flat tire, he’d ride right past like he didn’t even see me,” he said. “But if I look like I’m riding clean and I’ve got a lot of money, next thing you know you’ve pulled me over and you stick your head in the car, smell and see what’s going on and see if you see anything.”

Doris Brown, who lives in Charleston but owns a hair salon in North Charleston, said she, too, was pulled over for a broken taillight but believed she may have been stopped because she was a black woman driving a luxury car. “After I left, my friend went behind and there was nothing wrong with my taillight,” she said. “Everything was working with my car, so I felt as though I was being profiled.”
...
After the shooting on Saturday, Mr. Scott’s older brother, Anthony Scott, 52, went to the crime scene. He stood taking pictures of his brother’s covered body with his phone when police officers and detectives approached. Three of them surrounded him, telling him to turn over his phone, he said.

“So, are you going to kill me, too, now?” Mr. Scott said he asked them.

He eventually handed them his phone. Hours later, Chief Driggers arrived, returned Mr. Scott’s phone and offered his condolences.

You bet those officers wanted his camera.

Call it Crazy says

What happened during that period of time that would have made the cop go from calm and professional at the traffic stop to needing to pull his gun and shoot Scott?

Also, the cop was in the Coast Guard (this matters, for some reason).

We need to know why the cop (once in the Coast Guard) shot a fleeing, unarmed man in the back. Otherwise we must assume the cop is innocent.

Coast Guard.

And unless we can firmly establish motive for the man fleeing, we will have to assume that this Coast Guard shooting was justifiable.

Call it Crazy says

It does matter, as he would have been trained in following protocol, would have been regimented and disciplined...

Really?

Interesting how the whitest person in every encounter gets the benefit of the doubt.

Call it Crazy says

Interesting, that YOU are the only one injecting "race" into the discussion...

What the fuck is wrong with you?

I don't know what comes over me.

A white South Carolina cop shoots a black guy in the back, and I can't help injecting race into the discussion!

Call it Crazy says

Skin color had NOTHING to do with this situation except to help sensationalize it for "entertainment" value in the news.

Yes, if a cop had shot a white guy in the back, we wouldn't be hearing about it.

I'll give you one thing: since you love firm, jack-booted authority so much, you'd still be looking at the Coast Guard background to justify the cop's actions. So in that one way you're not racist.

Well, scott tried to run away, and shlager fired eight bullets at him. Seems like shlager is 100% responsible for scott dying. Wouldn't you?

Call it Crazy says

responsible background

This reminds me of when judges spare white gang members prison time, because they're from "good families".

WTF is a "responsible background"?

Why does CiC fail to mention that scott was also in the coast guard.

Hell, i think both guys were both stationed in baltimore, years apart.

Coast guard brother, having his coast guard brethrens back

Slager also received four traffic tickets for speeding

Oh noes!

This changes everything

What if:
Siager had a bomb on him, the cop saw it, and siager started running towards a group of kids saying he was going to blow himself and the kids up...
what's the cop supposed to do then??? Let the kids die? He wasn't going to catch him...shooting justified then?
Just saying, wait for the facts to emerge before passing judgement.

I love how everyone jumps to conclusions without the facts.
It's a libby thing...just like passing obamycare without reading it..

errc says

Well, scott tried to run away, and shlager fired eight bullets at him. Seems like shlager is 100% responsible for scott dying. Wouldn't you?

Call it Crazy says

Scott covered some ground before the cop caught up with him.

Like I said I think the story that Scott was a feeble runner is highly embellished.

Scott enticed the officer. It is an impulse that cannot be restrained by many white men. No thought even registers in these males' minds, they just see the black blur, and Blam! Blam!

If a citizen does not have a healthy fear of the Trigger Happy Peace Officer then something just ain't right.

indigenous says

Like I said I think the story that Scott was a feeble runner is highly embellished.

IMO this is the most scandalous aspect to the story.

I can't imagine any aspect of this story which is more outrageous than this: the underestimation of the criminal's running abilities.

you...said....
HydroCabron says

the underestimation of the criminal's

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Jbsut4ttpgo&list=PL1E2965C8C6D472BC

HydroCabron says

I can't imagine any aspect of this story which is more outrageous than this: the underestimation of the criminal's running abilities.

Ok so you are with me then.

SoftShell says

why would anyone run away from their car for a simple traffic stop?

People panic and do stupid shit sometimes.

Doesn't mean they deserve bullets.

I can recall one time when I was young and stupid I was pulled over, and I jumped out of
the car as soon as I stopped so I could talk to the officer. Fortunately the guy who
stopped me wasn't Sean Groubert and it didn't end for me, like it did for Levar Jones:

http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/10/03/3351267/longer-video-has-more-details.html

Vicente says

why would anyone run away from their car for a simple traffic stop?

People panic and do stupid shit sometimes.

Doesn't mean they deserve bullets.

I can recall one time when I was young and stupid I was pulled over, and I jumped out of

the car as soon as I stopped so I could talk to the officer. Fortunately the guy who

stopped me wasn't Sean Groubert and it didn't end for me, like it did for Levar Jones:

http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/10/03/3351267/longer-video-has-more-details.html

This video is a typical example of police in the Carolinas. They have nothing better to do than harass everyone for stupid non-moving violations. BTW, they are also the #1 cause of accidents on the roadways with their constant presence everywhere. These two states are about as close to martial law as you can get, if they aren't already there now?

HydroCabron says

Interesting how the whitest person in every encounter gets the benefit of the doubt.

The whitest or right-est is always who they defend. Makes me think they have few real principles.

He pulled him over, for being black and driving a mercedes. The murderer alleged that his 3rd break light was out, but those usually aren't even required to be operational. Either way, this coupled with his reaction, ( shooting him eight times in the back while jogging away), is the definition of harassment.

For any freedom loving American, that doesn't like the idea of being harassed to death, by big government, union thugs.

errc says

For any freedom loving American, that doesn't like the idea of being harassed to death, by big government, union thugs

Especially when it is painfully clear who law enforcement targets, in many cases, most brutally, and who gets to break the law constantly and face no retribution.

Call it Crazy says

Apparently you didn't watch the dash cam video. Watch it, then report back if you think the cop was "harassing" Scott during that stop.

The harassment was in stopping Scott in the first place. Don't be a numbskull.

The pig thug unions will ask Obozo to pass a Patriot act style law to make it illegal to film cops in any way. Will coat it in security and anybody who films a cop under any circumstance will magically disappear with no trial -all for national security of course.

Oh probably another raise in pension to cull the population.

I still can't wrap my head around why all these right wing morons, who always rail against big, over-reaching government, and worse still, public unions, are lining up to defend a murderer.

They should focus on something more important, like the fact that the cop was dangerously negligent of his duty (to protect and serve). It appears that of the eight shots slager fired at close range, slow moving target, only 50% hit his mark. Wheres the outrage over all the waste? And the danger that the murderer put the public in, by being so terrible at his job, that he wound up firing four errant bullets into public space, in broad daylight.

Hell , what if one of those would have hit his backup, who emerged seconds later from the direction slager was firing? Taxpayers would have been on the hook for the medical bills of the other cop, lawyers, disability, physcological therapy, drugs etc.

The reason being that no one is actually trying to defend the cop. Not even CIC..
You are extrapolating fact finding posts into preliminary defense strategies...

errc says

I still can't wrap my head around why all these right wing morons, who always rail against big, over-reaching government, and worse still, public unions, are lining up to defend a murderer.

Why rehash the obvious?? It's boring...

errc says

They should focus on something more important, like the fact that the cop was dangerously negligent of his duty (to protect and serve).

This proves that rednecks aren't as gun obsessed as the left thinks...they don't give a shit about wasted bullets.
errc says

It appears that of the eight shots slager fired at close range, slow moving target, only 50% hit his mark. Wheres the outrage over all the waste?

Add those charges to the murder one...

errc says

And the danger that the murderer put the public in, by being so terrible at his job, that he wound up firing four errant bullets into public space, in broad daylight.

Dan would have baked a cake and eaten it too.

errc says

Hell , what if one of those would have hit his backup, who emerged seconds later from the direction slager was firing?

We are on the hook for everything else...just another drop in the bucket.

errc says

Taxpayers would have been on the hook for the medical bills of the other cop, lawyers, disability, physcological therapy, drugs etc.

The reason being that no one is actually trying to defend the cop. Not even CIC..
You are extrapolating fact finding posts into preliminary defense strategies...

This might be the most dishonest post ive ever read on this site, and that's saying something.

errc says

This might be the most dishonest post ive ever read on this site, and that's saying something.

Please link a post where somebody is actually trying to defend the cop..

All rightwing comments prior to this are defending the pig and blaming the victim. And it's all entirely predictable that you would.

Slager fired eight shots
Four hit Scott in the back
One hit scott in his ear

Three shots missed the target altogether, putting the public at great risk, of the dangerous actions of the murderous Big Government Union thug.