« First « Previous Comments 65 - 104 of 157 Next » Last » Search these comments
This video does make a good case for no filming police officers with in a few hundred yards.
This video was shot about at about the out of bounds mark. At a wide angle like this, you do get a better perspective of what is going on, rather than just a vignette of the victim only. There's definitely nothing out of context, it is what it is. I think if the photog was closer he wouldn't have caught the dropped taser then the cop retrieving it and placing it by the guy.
Doesn't matter since his union will get him reinstated with full back pay.
Probably if he's tried for being a blood thirsty racist monster, instead of a incompetent cop guilty of first degree murder or any garden veriety of Murder for that matter. But the race angle will be more sensational and many Liberal city officials will get about 10 to 22 months of good policial play out of charging him for killing while white, rather than for what it is. After two years of that, and Obama weighing in during his Democrat campaign whistle tour stops, lolly gagging about race inequality and all of the cracker cops. We'll forget all about what was on video and his lawyers will be able to prove that he didn't pull the trigger because he was a nyi... uh black guy. But because he was incompetent and stressed at work and probably had no business on the force in the first place.
The prequel: "Dash cam video shows the moments before South Carolina police shooting." Although the dash cam video does not excuse what happened later, it does establish the context: how these two imperfect people met that day, and how the situation began to deteriorate.
And, none of them even touched on the question, how did a guy who was stopped for a broken tail light end up dead in a grassy field?
Uh, perhaps because we have a video that shows exactly how that happened. He was shot multiple times in the back and those wounds caused his death. I don't think that's really a question anyone is asking.
Any chance, if Mr. Scott decided to sit in his car and follow the directions of the officer, he might still be alive today?
Any chance if you let an armed thug rape your family, you'd be alive today?
Any chance, if Mr. Scott decided to sit in his car and follow the directions of the officer, he might still be alive today?
Any chance that if a police officer 20+ft away from him and under no threat whatsoever hadn't shot him in the back multiple times he might still be alive today?
Dash cam shows moments before shooting of Walter Scott
Upon further review I have decided that the allegations that Mr Scott was a feeble runner have been exagerated.
I can guarantee he wouldn't have been shot in the back if he was sitting in the seat of the car!
Which isn't the point. Did the police officer have cause to shoot him? That is the point. And I know you are just trolling on this issue. You saw the video. The man was shot down without justifiable cause and then the crime scene was tampered with. If that was your child who had been shot, then you wouldn't be on here making your irrelevant arguments. Why should it be any different if it's someone else's son, someone else's father?
I'll leave you with one additional piece of the puzzle, you do know that it is a felony to commit assault and battery on a police officer, right?
And the actions of the police officer have been considered deserving of prosecution for murder by the justice system, and he has already been sacked by his own police department. Presumably they know more about the circumstances of what happened than you or I, though the video is more than sufficient to realize that the man was gunned down without justifiable cause.
Any chance, if Mr. Scott decided to sit in his car and follow the directions of the officer, he might still be alive today?
Two things must happen for a crime to take place: 1) a criminal must be present, and 2) there must be an opportunity to commit a crime. In this particular case, Mr Scott unknowingly gave the opportunity to commit crime to the criminal disguised as a police officer and that criminal took the opportunity.
Alpo, it was CIC that said that, not Bigsby. I'm sure Bigsby would appreciate a correction.
some white collar crime does not require presence...
Two things must happen for a crime to take place: 1) a criminal must be present,
Blind obedience to armed authority is a recipe for disaster. The police are accountable to the citizenry, not vice versa. These are public servants. The one thing that will save this and any country is a citizenry that will stand up for its rights, and not blindly obey. A country that is ruled by criminals (e.g. Hank Paulson, Robert Rubin, Jon Corzine) has no law.
So if I understand this correctly, the real problem is that it's currently illegal to off a thug that's running away from the police.
this is the commonality between all these sensationalized shootings.
Also, running from authority, resisting arrest and physically assaulting ARMED authority is a recipe for disaster.
So if I understand this correctly, the real problem is that it's currently illegal to off a thug that's running away from the police.
The issue of who is the thug is up for discussion, but yes, fleeing suspects may only be shot if they are deemed to pose a threat to others. I suppose the deceased SC victim could have posed a threat to other partners when he stopped paying child support.
But, "he was a loving father of 4 children".
CIC-you are making a bigger idiot of yourself than you usually do. The bottom line is that a man was shot in the back multiple times while running/walking quickly away from a police officer. There is absolutely no rationale that can justify it. NONE. There was no imminent threat to anyone.
That was a quote from your favorite MSM sources... Apparently shirking responsibility for child support for years is OK with your favorite liberal media sources..
Great job trying to shift the story to the deadbeat Dad. Do you ever think about why you are sticking up for a cop that shot an unarmed man that was running AWAY from him?
It's pretty obvious the cop is guilty and will be strung up accordingly.
However, that does not give the perp a free ride for initiating the sequence of events.
Put all the facts on the table. Then string up the cop.
Fuck being "PC"....
That was a quote from your favorite MSM sources... Apparently shirking responsibility for child support for years is OK with your favorite liberal media sources..
Great job trying to shift the story to the deadbeat Dad. Do you ever think about why you are sticking up for a cop that shot an unarmed man that was running AWAY from him?
Do you ever think about why you are sticking up for a cop that shot an unarmed man that was running AWAY from him?
Would you like to show ONE instance where I said that here in this thread?
Where you said what?
Do you ever think about why you are sticking up for a cop that shot an unarmed man that was running AWAY from him?
Because if all cops did that, we would have a lot less crime, and less people in prison too.
Because if all cops did that(*), we would have a lot less crime, and less people in prison too.
(*)THAT == shoot all fleeing suspects
Many right-wingers are insane. It is as simple as that. They have no morals, no understanding of justice, do not support the rule of LAW, and have no understanding what freedom is.
What does being behind on child support, have to do with the matter at hand?
it provides motive for the perp running away while in his car....MAYBE scuffling with the cop....and finally just trying to get the fuck out of there.
it completes the picture.
It gives a better understanding of why the events unfolded as they did from the perps perspective...
What does being behind on child support, have to do with the matter at hand?
What does being behind on child support, have to do with the matter at hand?
It's all Obama's fault!!!
What does being behind on child support, have to do with the matter at hand?
It speaks to the character of the summarily executed.
1) Pat.net member - an innocent victim of flagitious and rebarbative family law courts - owing back child support --> Respectable and completely justifiable (women are crap!)
2) Black dude in South Carolina behind on child support --> Repulsive disgusting bad father
Simple enough to understand.
CIC-you are making a bigger idiot of yourself than you usually do. The bottom line is that a man was shot in the back multiple times while running/walking quickly away from a police officer. There is absolutely no rationale that can justify it. NONE. There was no imminent threat to anyone.
Certainly not ~$7k in Child Support, the $18k is probably with penalties and interest. Wow, a guy on the margins couldn't always find employment - something Matriarchy I.H.L. run Courts don't care about.
"I believe he didn't want to go to jail again," Walter Scott Sr. told TODAY. "He just ran away."
I don't want to go to jail either. Does that make it OK to shoot me in the back as I run away?
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?
And you wonder why I call you an idiot?
No, I'm well aware of why you call me an idiot--it's your reflex action when you've been shown to be wrong...
the $18k is probably with penalties and interest.
How about back payments?
His last payment was on July 20, 2012
What is the issue with reading comprehension here??
Let's see, guy hadn't made a payment since 2012, probably couldn't find a job. We aren't exactly short of unskilled black guys desperate for any kind of work. Probably the same reason his tailight was busted.
In the old days, if you kept your head down, they generally didn't fuck with poor people unless you were really unlucky and a white chick claimed you raped her after she came on to you. 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.
"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!
« First « Previous Comments 65 - 104 of 157 Next » Last » Search these comments
Cold blooded murder.
--------
South Carolina cop charged with murder after video shows him shooting black man dead
White South Carolina police officer will be charged with murder over the shooting death of a black man who appeared to be fleeing from him, local authorities said on Tuesday.
A video of the Saturday incident, in which North Charleston police officer Michael Slager appeared to shoot a man identified by local media as 50-year-old Walter Scott, was viewed by state investigators, and a decision was made to charge Slager with murder, North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey told a news conference.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/04/south-carolina-cop-charged-with-murder-after-video-shows-him-shooting-black-man-dead/