South Carolina Officer Is Charged With Murder of Walter Scott

What is stupid about obey the officers instructions and don't run away when the officer has a reasonable suspicion you have committed a felony?

- - - Updated - - -

My comments were not limited to you.

 

How could you even have a strategy when you can't even keep the facts straight?

Show me where I said you were a race baiter.

What does Ruby Ridge have to do with this?

 

...And also placed restrictions upon WHEN a suspect can be executed. If you bothered to read you'd know that. The SC ruling was effectively called to stop the possible abuse of the public by the police, because the Tennessee law didn't have any restrictions on when someone can be shot while fleeing.

Oh, this was summary execution. 1. You have no evidence the vehicle was stolen. It could be borrowed, rented, test driven. Don't even give me some rhetorical BS about a black man driving a Mercedes being unable to afford it, it's agitprop nonsense. 2. If I am driving a borrowed or rented car, or test driving a car, OF COURSE I CAN'T PROVE OWNERSHIP, which shows simply that if IF this was even a shred of the reason the guy was summarily executed, the cop was in the wrong. Because he can't simply -assume- a vehicle is stolen, he has to gather -evidence first.- Being borrowed or rented or test driven is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE SO likely then stolen. Moreover, quit your nonsense. "Inflammatory rhetoric." What a joke. You repeat the same tired, sickening arguments in excusing democide by the state in every instance a cop kills a suspect (OR innocent bystander.)

Trigger happy = emptying a clip at someone who is fleeing. That's THUG activity. What's baseless here is the excusing and white washing of this cops actions. The videos are QUITE CLEAR.

Oh, no. I am totally sick and tired of your contrived BS arguments, the same old pathetic logic that results in nonarguments and acceptance of abuse.

Oh and BTW - I'll gladly wait to see if we get some "abused cop" photos for the beat down this guy put on that LEO. I guess I shouldn't hold my breath, because they won't be forthcoming.

This was summary execution. Democide. Death by state. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Or perhaps it was borrowed, or rented, or being test driven? Of course, for some reason, you will automatically assume that it's stolen, instead of even considering for a second it could be something else.

You fail us.

 

OK then. You obviously were mistaken.

 

They were both in the Coast Guard. Cops deal w/bad and good people. Scott may have been a deadbeat dad, but he wasn't a deadly threat to the cop......that's obvious. That video clearly tells the whole story.......

This cop literally threw his life away. Heard that he's going to be a daddy soon.......

 

I find it difficult to believe that a judge would accept a plea in this case. With the evidence they have and the reputation of the public servants on the line.

 

So if the cop says 'scratch your ass' and I refuse, I should die? I mean, what the hell, I may be a felon for not scratching my ass when the murdering cop told me to do it.

So was Ruby Ridge was a good shoot using your logic.

 

Nothing I've read about the law suggests that is enough...but I'm not a lawyer. But Mark Levin is and he agrees.

 

There is an aggressive move shown on the video, we don't know what aggressive moves occurred between that and the first video, we do hear the officer telling him to stop, they warning about the TASER and the witness account the fight went to the ground. THAT is aggressive don't you think?

Why did it take a full clip to bring down Michael Brown? Bringing up that same stupid argument. Officers are trained to empty the clip.

It most certainly can. That's why it is a good idea not to do so. Once again, all the suspect had to do was remain in the car. Instead he multiplied the already reasonable suspicion the officer had when he could not turn over a registration or insurance on the car he was driving.

 

I agree. Hands are tied here.

 

Spare me you inane responses, if you don't understand what obeying the lawful order of a police officer taking you into custody means I can't help you.

 

Does the judge decide? I always thought it was up to the prosecutor.

 

It is, initially. The prosecutor can offer a plea deal to the defendant but the judge has the final say. They can reject the plea in the end. Happens a lot. If the judge thinks it's unjust.

 

Don't be so sure, this could come down to a charge of excessive force or manslaughter at the worst. Murder is probably out after the second video turned up.

 

I think he's already been charged with murder...do you mean convicted.

 

My facts are simple. Cop committed murder. So says the municipality hat charged him.

Never said you did. Just asked a question.

LOL! Are you kidding? Those killed at Ruby Ridge were considered threat worthy of death. They were treated as such. Same as the victim in question. So what's the difference if any?

 

He gave the officer EVERY reasonable suspicion to believe he was in BIG trouble and would do anything to avoid arrest. That puts him and other officers and the public at danger. We'll see if the DA and a grand jury thinks that danger was high enough to justify the lethal force. Again we don't know how much he struggled during the period it was not being video'd or what he might have said to the officer.

 

Anything to get the murderer off. I understand.

 

We should at least know by know if he had warrants or if drugs were in the car. You would think.

 

The point is, the ONLY justification for shooting, at all, is imminent threat of serious injury or death. You, as the shooter, must show that a reasonable person would believe there was that danger, else you are not justified in shooting. If there is imminent threat of death or serious injury, you can NEVER reasonably shoot to maim, else there is cause to believe (and the victim's lawyer will prove) that the required danger did not exist, and that the shooting was unjustified. This isn't the movies, cops don't ever fire warning shots.

As a shooter, you need to do your level best to make sure that every bullet you fire hits your target, because bullets that don't hit your target go on to hit something else. It is nearly impossible to hit a non-vital area (like flailing legs or arms) on a running target. You have almost 100% certainty that you will miss. The best shot in the world can't hit those targets. Cops that fire their weapons, are trained to fire at center mass and keep firing until the threat is neutralized. The pistol is a deadly weapon of last resort, and there is no safe and non-lethal way to operate it when firing it at someone.

Again, I am in total agreement that, based on the currently available evidence, this case did not meet any reasonable criteria for lethal force. This officer should have left his weapon holstered, and given chase.

 

Most likely he wouldn't be dead, but maybe he thought he would be dead. There's quite a bit of hysteria in the black community in regard to cops. Not always undeserved.

 

And?????? The cop can lawfully demand many things you may refuse. Should non compliance get you killed by the cop?

So you good with the Ruby Ridge shoot?

 

Negative. The SC state policies and procedures for UNARMED suspects (taken from CNN's legal analyst today)
-If the suspect is unarmed, the P.O. must radio for backup in pursuit. This is a clear violation as captured on film, and as detailed in his termination of employment.

That along right there makes the DA and GJ's life SO easy.

Dude is fried.

 

So the prosecution should just say "hey he was charged so he must be guilty"...... what a joke.

Look to see if I said it was you. That will answer your question.

Still has nothing to do with this case.

 

If the officer has been charged with a crime why would there be a grand jury?

- - - Updated - - -

Because of all the race baiting. Show proof where they should be afraid of cops.