Michael Slager Arrest Warrant – And Statement from South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) – Walter Scott Shooting

By now you have heard a frequently espoused national media claim that the “initial incident report” filed by Officer Michael Slager -in the shooting death of Walter Scott- contains falsehoods or lies. Allow me to say directly THAT CLAIM IS 100% MEDIA BULLS**T.

No-one has seen the initial incident report filed by Officer Slager because it has not been released. EVERY SINGLE media outlet making this claim of a discrepancy between his report, and the video released, is absolutely 100% wrong. Most of them intentionally wrong.

Regardless of the sentiment a person may hold about the released video of the shooting, there is no reason to manufacture false information just to advance a false narrative. The Truth Has No Agenda. Therefore here is the actual Arrest Warrant and Statement from SLED in reference to Officer Michael Slager.

Arrest Warrant:

Media Lying

Advertisements
This entry was posted in media bias, Notorious Liars, Police action, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized, Walter Scott Shooting. Bookmark the permalink.

83 Responses to Michael Slager Arrest Warrant – And Statement from South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) – Walter Scott Shooting

  1. doodahdaze says:

    WOW. He killed the perp with malice aforethought? OMG. What a joke. He needs a goo lawyer on the quick. Is that their probable cause???

    Liked by 1 person

    • canadacan says:

      I’m not a lawyer but we talked about this earlier there is nothing premeditated about this this was in the heat of the moment so malice aforethought is crazy.
      If he can get a decent lawyer Slager should be able to slice this like Swiss cheese.
      I have a serious major headache because of this

      Liked by 4 people

      • doodahdaze says:

        No doubt. This is worse than Zimmerman. That perp took off like a Jackrabbit. Right there is PC for the cop to assume a fleeing felon. Then when the cop finally catches him hi fights and grabs the cops weapon. Shoot him!!! Before he hurts some innocent citizen.

        Liked by 1 person

        • alan says:

          nonsense. you cannot assume a fleeing felon. you CAN assume that he didn’t want to talk to the police, and he is resisting arrest…but fleeing felon??? not a chance.

          Like

          • Sandra says:

            I’ll bet more times than not a person who flees the scene after being pulled over has an arrest warrant, has just committed a crime, is holding drugs, or is otherwise in legal hot water. You don’t think so? Do you make it a habit to flee the scene when you are pulled over for a traffic stop? I stay in my car as instructed.

            Like

          • sam says:

            He committed at least one felony by the time he was shot. Assulting an officer.

            Like

        • canadacan says:

          I like that phrase took off like a Jackrabbit.
          This was a case of flight and fight.

          Like

        • Chip Bennett says:

          The desire to avoid arrest does not constitute probable cause that someone is an imminent threat to anyone.

          Like

        • jayHG says:

          No, it isn’t…just cause someone runs away from you, you can shoot them in the back.

          Like

      • Chip Bennett says:

        Malice aforethought requires no more than a matter of seconds. The state must prove it, but the circumstances certainly don’t preclude it.

        Like

      • LEE JAN says:

        Don’t trust the police in this jurisdiction. They fired the officer to prevent rioting. That is not justice. Will the taser show Scott’s fingerprints or will all that be scrubbed.

        Like

    • BertDilbert says:

      MALICE AFORETHOUGHT, pleadings. In an indictment for murder, these words, which have a technical force, must be used in charging the offence; for without them, and the artificial phrase murder, the indictment will be taken to charge manslaughter only. Fost. 424; Yelv. 205; 1 Chit. Cr. Law, *242, and the authorities and cases there cited.
      2. Whenever malice aforethought is necessary to constitute the offence, these words must be used in charging the crime in the indictment.

      Without Malice Aforethought it is only manslaughter. It had to be added in order to make the murder charge.

      Liked by 1 person

      • canadacan says:

        Then it should be a man slaughter charge not a murder charge.
        I don’t like most D.A. ‘s, this one should burn in hell.
        (D.A.’s are about politics not justice).

        Liked by 2 people

  2. canadacan says:

    I’m not a lawyer but we talked about this earlier there is nothing premeditated about this this was in the heat of the moment so malice aforethought is crazy.
    If he can get a decent lawyer Slager should be able to slice this like Swiss cheese.
    I have a serious major headache because of this

    Like

  3. doodahdaze says:

    Let’s peel this onion.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. BitterC says:

    Sorry, #blacklivesmatter Case closed

    Like

  5. carterzest says:

    Drip, Drip, Drip…..

    Darn you doodahdaze……them onions make me tear all up.

    and the plot thickens…

    Liked by 1 person

    • doodahdaze says:

      This smells like another miscarriage of justice. It stinks to high heaven.

      Liked by 2 people

      • justfactsplz says:

        The fact that Ryan Julison is involved makes the stench even worse. The facts and evidence don’t support the BGI narrative in this one when all is said and done so the fixer makes his debut. I question everything because of this and the media lies are already being pedaled. Many of us remember Julison visiting this site when he was exposed for what he is. What he did in the Zimmerman case should have been criminal.

        Like

  6. James F says:

    They threw him to the wolves to avoid a ferguson. They decided to just overcharge him and let the courts sort it out.

    Liked by 10 people

    • sundance says:

      THIS I agree with.

      The initial optics looked horrible. To avoid a Ferguson 2.0 they quickly put Officer Slager on the chopping block as the ultimate tamp down approach. Exceptional political expediency.

      However, if they maintain the murder charge they are intentionally throwing the case. A jury will never overcome the three hurdles without reasonable doubt:

      1.) The unlawful killing of another, 2.) with malice of forethought, 3.) and with specific intent to kill.

      The cop was of polite disposition prior to the chase; if he had specific intent he would never have needed to deploy the taser; and nothing currently available proves malice or intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Liked by 10 people

      • BertDilbert says:

        Exactly the malice aforethought is not going to stick and thus no murder. His charge is only to save the city from the cost of potential demonstration control and riot damage. This is purely political.

        Liked by 3 people

        • BertDilbert says:

          The problem with overcharging in this case is that it leads to elevated expectation and when the expectation is not met we get riots.

          Liked by 2 people

          • yep, but either way the OFE would/will riot

            Like

          • deqwik2 says:

            And it doesn’t help that the media esp CNN is saying he will get life or the death penalty for this. ( I can plainly see that it says murder charge is 30 yrs to life…not Just life )
            If it’s dropped to manslaughter after all the hype there’s going to be trouble.

            Somebody needs to do a public service message & tell or warn people to not resist arrest or run from LEO. (That would involve telling the truth & not creating controversy so we know that won’t happen).

            Liked by 1 person

      • Nailed it, you did. It’s going to come down to the question of malice, express or implied, and if the jury has the option of going for voluntary manslaughter (I have to assume they will, lest Slager walks completely), reasonable doubt about malice should evade the murder conviction but he’ll still get a loong term. Now having said that, there remains the allegedly “cold-blooded”(to some) demeanor afterwards and moving the taser, and whatever he said and put in is report afterward. That stuff could be dealbreaking on the vol. manslaughter angle for him but we’ll see.

        Like

        • BertDilbert says:

          “there remains the allegedly “cold-blooded”(to some) demeanor”

          Beats the hell out of an emotionally out of control cop. Just because the officer kept his cool throughout is a good sign not a bad one. I am going to guess he is probably a vet with combat exp.

          I had an incident with an emotionally out of control cop that jumped out of the patrol car yelling and totally emotional over a non issue to get excited about. After the incident I went to the station and had a sit down talk with the shift supervisor and told him that she was unfit duty as an officer.

          Like

          • He was in the Coast Guard and did part of his stint on a boarding team.

            The problem is that he doesn’t look to be in fear, as he is quoted as having said was why he shot, and afterward there’s no “my God, this is not good” type stuff from him that would make jurors believe he just made a very bad mistake.

            Like

            • Justice_099 says:

              Why would he still be afraid after the fact? Threat suppressed. Scott was on the ground and handcuffed already. Other cops have arrived.

              Like

      • canadacan says:

        This

        Like

      • Chip Bennett says:

        And the act of moving evidence at the crime scene could very well constitute evidence of malice aforethought. The prosecutor will also play up Slager’s demeanor at the time of the shooting, and immediately after.

        There’s potentially ample fertile ground here, depending on what the full body of evidence eventually shows.

        Like

    • canadacan says:

      That is exactly right he is a sacrificial lamb out there to appease political interests.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. art tart says:

    It’s ridiculous for the investigators to think they will glean any viable information from Santana except for the video.

    Liked by 1 person

    • lurking2014 says:

      If Santana keeps talking to the press he is going to trip himself up. He already is on record as saying that Slager had Scott under control when clearly we can see that they were wrestling over a Taser that had been recently deployed. Santana also says that Slager certainly saw him and that Santana kept filming so that Slager would know he wasn’t alone. Presumably knowing he wasn’t alone would preclude Slager from trying to plant evidence, no? Santana can bring no good to himself by talking to anyone but investigators, under oath.

      This brings to mind all the various accounts the Michael Brown witnesses gave to the media were brought to bear in the grand jury testimony. Santana is going to have to survive intense impeachment efforts.

      Like

    • LEE JAN says:

      A video that may well have been doctored.

      Liked by 2 people

  8. yakmaster2 says:

    Sleepless here in the South so I’m puzzling through the documents and a statement in the probable cause strikes me. To wit: he shot a fleeing Scott after an “altercation.” Doesn’t the nature of an altercation with a cop differ from one with a regular person? Will who tased whom and who wound up with the taser as Scott fled the second time make a difference in this case?

    Like

    • Justice_099 says:

      In the aftermath videos, remember the cop had his pant leg up. I am going to assume he was shot with the taser (if he was shot by the taser) in the calf which might be why he was not incapacitated by it.

      Like

      • VegasGuy says:

        Valid presumption. Could also have affected the determination not to institute a second foot chase. May not have been incapacitated but could have been temporarily handicapped if injuried.

        Like

  9. herdgadfly says:

    If it turns out that Scott tasered Officer Slager in the moments before Scott was shot – then Sean Hannity and others screaming “murder” because of the cellphone video will be sorely embarrassed.

    An officer with taser wires stuck in his chest has to be hurting badly and his suspect had just broken free from a wrist hold by the officer and Scott was now escaping at high speed. The only way Slager had to stop the now obvious felon was to fire his pistol.

    Trying another shooting by cop in the media instead of in the courts just continues the liberal appetite for blood and guts through thumbs up or down by the audience as was the tradition in the Roman times,

    Finding a venue for this quickly arranged trial will be be difficult.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. True Colors says:

    Speaking of media BULLS***

    When this story first broke, several members of the media were saying that Scott was killed during/after a “routine” traffic stop.

    Seriously? By what stretch of the imagination is it considered “routine” for someone with no vehicle registration or insurance to take off running in the middle of a police stop?

    TC

    Liked by 3 people

  11. nivico says:

    The attorney representing the witness, South Carolina State Representative Rutherford, has some curious businesses listed on the SC .gov site…

    803 Trucking
    WasteSouth
    T.I.S. Consulting and Auto (aka T.I.S. Auto Transport)

    They all have the same address and they all seem to provide the same service (general freight and hauling). It also seems to be just a single truck and a single driver?

    Why would someone register one business as three separate businesses?

    And is the Michael Caldwell listed as the principal on Rutherford’s WasteSouth business the same Michael Caldwell who just pleaded guilty for his involvement in gambling and money laundering this past December?

    “Caldwell pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of transporting illegal gaming machines across state lines.”

    And it gets even more weird… a multi-hundred million dollar gambling and money laundering ring case goes to mediation rather than trial, and this Caldwell guy gets off with a simple misdemeanor charge…?!

    “Mediation is just not something that happens very often.” Long-time prosecutor and criminal justice professor Warren Mowry says it’s extremely rare for federal criminal cases to wind up in mediation. He adds, “That is not a common practice. It is not out of the realm of possibility, but it’s just not something that happens very often at all.”

    http://www.wyff4.com/news/Men-charged-in-gambling-bust-to-forfeit-20-million/30006832

    http://www.wyff4.com/news/the-journey-of-the-biggest-gambling-ring-bust-in-the-sc/28206380

    Like

    • yakmaster2 says:

      He’s representing a client while holding office in the SC Legislature? Busy, busy, busy with the money making and the politicking.

      Like

    • sundance says:

      Did you read the earlier thread connection between Rutherford and Benjamin Crump? It’s obvious how Rutherford was selected to represent Witness Santana. And how Chris Stewart was put in touch with Ryan Julison.

      Beyond Obvious, it’s Crumptastic.

      Liked by 3 people

      • yakmaster2 says:

        I missed that so I need to find the thread.
        Crump keeps popping up like a tunnel maze gopher.

        Liked by 2 people

        • justfactsplz says:

          It’s a must read and puts a whole another angle on this having Julison involved. If this is so cut and dry according to the video then Ryan Julison wouldn’t be needed to control the media narrative. Something big is afoot here.

          Even though the video looks bad we need to dig a little farther into the players in this case. Someone needed an image do over for Julison to be involved. Just like St. Skittles.

          Like

      • nivico says:

        There’s also a pic of Rutherford and Obama from March 6th on Rutherford’s Facebook page.

        Like

      • Justice_099 says:

        Santana being a non-native U.S. Citizen has not been fully indoctrinated yet. He is a wild card for the BGI. He may just bust loose and expose their background attempts at manipulation. He didn’t seem extremely anti-cop in his comments while he was recording or show much signs that what was happening was wrong.

        Like

        • Sandra says:

          CNN just showed video of Santana visiting Scott’s relatives. They welcomed him with open arms … and dollar signs in their eyes. They just wanted an arress, and that’s what the video provided.

          Santana, on the other hand, is in for a wild ride. If there is a trial he will be a star witness. The DeeDee, except known to everyone from the start. His story had better be accurate.

          Like

      • Dr. Bogus Pachysandra says:

        tea and crumpettes anyone?

        Like

    • Lauren says:

      The Rutherford Law Firm, LLC, undertook to represent Feidin Santana after Feidin witnessed the horrific shooting of Walter Scott on April 4, 2015.

      “As I was walking to work, I saw a scuffle ensue between two men (who have since been identified as Officer Michael Slager and Walter Scott) in a grassy, open area. After observing the two men struggle on the ground and hearing the sound of a Taser gun, I began filming the altercation with my cell phone. The video shows Officer Slager draw his gun and fire eight shots at Mr. Scott as Mr. Scott attempted to run in the opposite direction. When I later learned that Mr. Scott died from the gunshot wounds inflicted by Officer Slager, I mustered up the courage to show the recording of the incident to Mr. Scott’s family. While I initially thought about erasing the video, fearing that my life would be in danger if I came forward, I soon realized I needed to take a stand against such brutality. I realized the importance of serving as a voice for Mr. Scott and the many others who no longer have one.”

      Feidin was born and spent most of his childhood in the Dominican Republic. At the age of thirteen, he moved to the United States when his grandmother—who was a permanent resident—petitioned for her children and minor grandchildren to join her in New Jersey. His family lived in New Jersey for a year and a half before relocating to New York. After spending a year in New York, Feidin’s parents decided that Rhode Island was a better location—as residing there would allow for more comfort and better opportunity—and uprooted the family once again. When Feidin turned eighteen years old, he elected to move back to the Dominican Republic to pursue a baseball career. At the conclusion of his baseball career in 2013, Feidin returned to the United States, making his home in North Charleston, South Carolina. He currently resides there and supports his family, some of whom still live in the Dominican Republic—by working as a barber. Unfortunately, Feidin does not have a vehicle to travel to and from his place of employment. As such, any donations received would be used for the purchase of a vehicle and the continued support of his family. Thank you, in advance, for your kindness and your generosity. ( ok this is the direct info from sanatas funding page who again. ..great get him a car….buy why again is the shady RUTHERFORD names linked to setting it up. More shady one sided stuff happening with this case) shame on gofundme and this site as well for shutting down Slagers account when all we have seen is a very biased video and we dont know the facts. Santana did a good thing. Sure.but the politics in the case are very alarming! I just want the unbiased truth. Thats what is important. No more politics charleston AND AL SHARPTON….STAY away. The thinking people and the truth will prevail whatever it maybe.

      Like

  12. Luna says:

    http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2014/11/17/woman-trying-to-commit-arson-grabs-officers-taser/19157197/
    INVERNESS, Florida — A Citrus County woman is dead after the sheriff’s office says she stole a deputy’s taser, and pointed it at him.

    The sheriff’s office says deputies responded to a disturbance call around midnight at Inverness Park on W Independence Highway.

    When deputies arrived, they say Dawn Cameron, 46, met them near the entrance of the neighborhood and tried to attack one of them, grabbed his taser, and that’s when the deputy shot her.

    “All of the sudden it was like bam, bam, bam,” said neighbor Karen Wisenbaker as she gave her account about what happened.

    Like

    • Chip Bennett says:

      …which is completely different from what happened here. If Slager had shot Scott during the altercation, we would have an entirely different conversation.

      Liked by 2 people

      • manickernel says:

        Which is pretty much how I see it. in the space of 2.5 seconds it went from a legally justified shooting situation to a Raylan Givens Justified shooting situation. Manslaughter at best.

        Like

        • Luna says:

          Exactly. Which is why I posted the comparison. 2.5 seconds. how possible it is to train cops to shift their reactions in such heated situation?

          Like

  13. The prosecutors are clearly intentionally overcharging him. Are they doing it because they want to see an acquittal and this is the best way to achieve that goal? Typically they overcharge in order to get the perp to plea something less. Surely they know this case is going to trial. So a cynic would say they are doing the officer a huge favor by overcharging.

    Besides, they know damn well that not many SJWs will be brave enough to call them on it. And of course overcharging also has the advantage of playing to emotions of the baying crowds.

    The thin blue line is transitioning to the big fat blue overcharge!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. alan says:

    Prediction time: the officer gets 2 years, voluntary manslaughter. The family gets 2 million, before Crump takes his 30 percent. Crump makes out like the bandit he is, and goes on to find more train wrecks. Plea deal…never gets to court. Money makes things better.

    Like

  15. dsb steve says:

    Was Slager tazed by his own Tazer? Does being tazed temporarily cloud your judgment?

    Like

    • mimbler says:

      Yes, it reduces cognitive ability and memory for up to an hour according to livescience article,
      Mike

      Like

    • jason says:

      I don’t think so, no indication the officer has stated or implied the taser was used on him, only that either Scott attempted to take it from him, or actually took it away from him (I believe he’s stated the latter, but w/o police report, only statement from Slager is the radio call ‘he got my taser’ or something to that effect)

      Like

  16. dodo says:

    Does anyone know how big Scott was? He looks threatening to me.

    Like

  17. How does a tazer work as far as if the cord(s) were stuck in Slager? Could it continue to administer a shock if thrown down? Would a shock feel like it’s being ‘pulled’ by the user (or the other way around)?

    Like

  18. Sandra says:

    Is anyone else bothered by the press release stating “murder scene”? And yet SLED says it’s still investigating? Then why the hurry to charge Slager? Cart before horse?

    Like

  19. Nation says:

    There seems to be some misconception about what “malice aforethought” requires. Malice aforethought is a legal term of art, and it can be proven in four ways: 1. intent to kill, 2. intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, 3. reckless indifference to the value of human life, 4. intent to commit a felony. So the prosecution does not have to proof that Slager had the specific intent to kill Scott. Merely proving that Slager intended to shoot Scott is enough, because it satisfies 2 and 3 above.

    This is just like the GZ case in regards to Second Degree Murder. There, all Bernie needed to proof to get Second Degree Murder on the table was that GZ shot TM. Shooting someone without justification or excuse IS reckless indifference to the value of human life. That was why GZ’s self-defense claim was so important, because Bernie proved beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ shot TM.

    Now will Slager be convicted of murder? I don’t know. We still do not have all the facts yet. The events leading up to the shooting might raise a justification or excuse for Slager that could get him manslaughter or a full acquittal.

    Like

  20. fred says:

    Is it me or does sean Hannity seem like a complete moron. So proud to put this case to bed almost like Nancy Grace. Geesh there is a lot of facts to come out before a big time media guys starts running his mouth. He should join CNN.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Peppino says:

    There is no legal specific time frame for malice aforethought. It only requires time enough to form the conscious intent to kill and then act on it. It could be anywhere from seconds to hours.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s