A Dangerous Summer and Fall Ahead – Walter Scott Shooting and The Baltimore Six….

“DangerWill Robinson, danger!” is a catchphrase from the 1960s’ American television series Lost in Space.  The Robot,  acting as a surrogate guardian, says this to young Will Robinson when the boy is unaware of an impending threat… Consider the information below a similar warning of potential consequence.

The decision by South Carolina’s Ninth Judicial Circuit Solicitor, Scarlett Wilson,  yesterday to charge Officer Michael Slager with murder in the shooting death of Walter Scott is the impetus for the alert.

Wilson presented only one charge, only one option, to the South Carolina grand jury; a charge of murder:

Walter scott- slager indictment

Within the indictment you can see the broad framework of the three elements needed to convict a person of Murder.  They are:  ¹) The unlawful killing of another human being, ²) with malice aforethought (ie. depraved heart); and ³) specific intent to kill.

While it might play well given the current tone and climate within media -and within the consuming public as a whole toward police officers- to charge murder, getting a conviction on that charge, and that charge alone, is an entirely different matter.

scarlett wilson

Scarlett Wilson has never charged a police officer with murder before.  Hence, and with a great deal of contemplation, it becomes evident she also has never achieved a conviction of murder against a police officer.

The Walter Scott shooting, and any consequence of a non-conviction of Officer Slager, is dangerous in the extreme.

Think about what a low-information mob would do with an announcement of not guilty.   We say think about the consequences, because it is entirely probable that will be the outcome if the only option to the jury is guilty of murder, or acquittal thereof.

Just looking at the surface facts, and ignoring for a moment the considerable research we have already conducted, it is easy to see a strong defense.  The initial contact between Officer Slager and Walter Scott as evidenced in the Dash-Cam footage is innocuous at best.  At no point does Slager reflect any behavior of concern; he is polite, courteous and professional.

Despite a rather sketchy story from Scott about ownership of the vehicle, and an inability to provide a registration, and the license plate not matching the vehicle, etc. Slager just begins a process of validation the same as he would with any other motorist.

Then Walter Scott takes off running from the vehicle, leaving his sketchy occupant, Pierre Fulton, sitting alone.  Officer Slager takes off on foot after him, while calling for backup.

walter scott dash cam 1

Moments later the dash-cam audio catches Slager shouting “Taser, taser, taser“; a warning for the first deployment of his Taser gun to halt Scott.

That is followed by a long period where Slager and Scott are in a physical struggle, a continued foot chase, and another physical struggle where both are seen rolling on the ground fighting over the Taser.

Everything between Walter Scott running, and the struggle visible when the cell phone video begins, is a felony in progress, actually numerous felonies.

Putting yourself in the position of Officer Slager, and considering current law as it pertains to LEO using deadly force when engaged with a fleeing felon, you begin to deconstruct the very first element of the indictment: “the unlawful killing“.  This is where Tennessee v Garner comes in to play regarding allowable use of force.

Considering “malice aforethought“, when exactly can the prosecution prove that a polite, courteous and professional officer (moments prior to flight), turned into a depraved heart murderer?  Can they argue ‘as a consequence of Walter Scott’s violence toward Slager’?

That approach will not work based on prior legal precedent where jurors are not permitted to apply the “common person” standard to police conduct.   Jurors must consider what another LEO, and only another LEO, would do under the same or similar circumstance.  The standard of contemplation for lawful behavior is different for a person who is acting within their jurisdiction of a law enforcement officer apprehending the lawless.

Considering “specific intent to kill“; if Slager was predisposed with intent – he could have shot Scott in any of the numerous moments during the chase and struggle.  Arguably, if anything, the shot in the buttocks and the shot in the leg -like the deployment of the taser- reflect an attempt to ‘stop’, not kill.

But the jury will not have an option of considering lesser charges.  They’ll have to find all three elements present beyond a reasonable doubt.

Perhaps the prosecutor, Scarlett Wilson, has something we are unaware of.  Perhaps all of the elements are visible given information she possesses that has not been released.  However, it’s quite apparent a reasonable defense for Officer Slager exists, and he has one of the best defense lawyers in the state representing him.

Ultimately the seemed weakness of a depraved heart murder case is ultimately what makes this case so dangerous.

You’ll also note how the case was broadcast 24/7 for the first two weeks of April, then poof – it disappeared from visibility until yesterday June 8, two months later.  This too makes the case dangerous, because opinion(s) will be, heck, “ARE” already cemented.  Imagine a mid-October trial and finding of “not guilty”.  All of those who tuned out, because it disappeared, in early April will stand jaw agape…. and then guess what happens.

Danger, Will Robinson, danger.

You combine that possibility, with an almost greater probability the Baltimore Six will be acquitted easily based on the ridiculous construct of the Marilyn Mosby charges, and we have a seriously toxic media cycle.

Danger, Will Robinson, danger.

We are left to wonder, if, well, maybe, somehow, this is actually exactly what the destroyers of the judicial and justice system want to see happen.

Remember, when we discussed the strategy of winning by losing?

Danger, Will Robinson, DANGER !

baltimore hs fire 2

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, A New America, Abusive Cops, Agitprop, Anti-White Intifada, BGI - Black Grievance Industry, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, CRS, Cultural Marxism, Death Threats, Dept Of Justice, Fire Crime, Freddy Gray Death, media bias, Notorious Liars, Occupy Type Moonbats, Police action, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Professional Idiots, Racism, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, Walter Scott Shooting. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to A Dangerous Summer and Fall Ahead – Walter Scott Shooting and The Baltimore Six….

  1. mazziflol says:

    Don’t forget Cleveland and Tamir Rice…

    Like

  2. Not to mention the fracas in Dallas. If that wasn’t an intentional act of rabble rousing I don’t know what is. The thugs in America are feeling empowered and it’s only going to escalate. “Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!” indeed!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jett Black says:

      I had the misfortune to hear a snippet about McKinney on a Moody Radio online station (Christian radio, at least nominally). It was pure BGI misinformation. Not a shred of truth or balance. Really disappointing! McKinney and the HOA absolutely must take the offensive on this to expose the scumbags and their profit/rabble-rousing agenda, before the BGI coopts the entire narrative (which they’ve done, but it’s still reversible, I think).

      Liked by 1 person

  3. rashomon says:

    Sundance, once again I am amazed at your tenacity. You are truly an investigative reporter from the olden days, now very much needed and missed in this new media requiring a “headline-a-minute-regardless (of the consequences?)”.

    Kudos, man. You deserve some award, one that has not been diminished by how frivolously such formerly prestigious notations of one’s value are now handed out in these last decades like Boy Scout merit badges. I don’t want to see your face on the cover of Time magazine as “Person of the Decade or Year” as it would diminish your value.

    One only has to step back from this site for a few days, weeks, to understand what you and yours contribute to cutting through the c##p delivered by those paid to….

    Liked by 15 people

    • dginga says:

      I would like to second your kudos to Sundance. I was first introduced to the Treehouse by a friend who told me, “If you want to make sense of the whole Trayvon Martin case, go to the Treehouse.” It was only here where we could learn the truth. It was only here, learning “the rest of the story” that things finally began to make sense.

      Since that time I come to the Treehouse several times a day, because only here will I get the in-depth information I need to make real sense of the controversial stories I hear and read in other media.

      I do have to mention though, that it is soooo frustrating to try to convince people who are being brainwashed by the MSM that there is a whole lot more to these stories than they are being told. Too many people say, “Then why haven’t I heard that on CNN (or NBC, etc)? I then respond, “Yeah. Why haven’t you? Maybe because they are vested in only giving you one perspective, instead of telling you the whole story and letting you decide.”

      Liked by 9 people

    • Excellent comment, rashomon.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. shirley49 says:

    We have a bunch of cowards in this Country not willing to stand up against these thugs to appease them. They now feel they can do anything they want.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Kitty Smith says:

      I’m willing. I only need others to stand with me.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Elspeth says:

      And it all started with Holder dropping charges against the Black Panthers. That sent a clear message to black thugs that they were free to commit crimes without repercussions.

      Liked by 2 people

      • OP says:

        In some respects, but also add the media not holding Rev. Wright accountable for his hate speech, the “Cops Acted Stupidly” and the Panthers…then the unwillingness of media to report the thousands of wilding blacks attacking whites all across America, the unwillingness to “describe” a suspect police are looking for in horrendous crimes….

        WORKDSTARHIPHOP woke some people up.

        Liked by 2 people

        • jackphatz says:

          “Cops Acted Stupidly” The man and this comment is destroying America and yet We The People no longer have a recourse to fight this evil. (rant off)

          I really don’t understand why the charge of murder was issued and not manslaughter, if you seek a conviction. Weird.

          Like

    • zigmister says:

      I cant believe the statement was made that if the cop in Carolina was not charged they would be afraid of what the mob would do. Are we afraid to do get military vehicles and troops and take action against the mobs and lock them out. What’s wrong with this country.

      Like

      • Judgy says:

        I often wonder if that’s part of the reason we can’t impeach as well.

        Isn’t it just as “racist” to assume certain groups will react to certain things in certain violent ways?? (I’m not saying they WON’T. What is “racism”, and what is “predictive accuracy”? Boy, are we poochscrewed!).

        Like

  5. smiley says:

    amazing…..
    no strategy re IS….
    but strategy in play re US…

    danger, America, danger

    Liked by 2 people

    • bofh says:

      Oh, there’s an ISIS strategy all right. And so far it’s ticking along nicely. Look how we’ve managed to generously provide them with weapons, both directly, and more recently through the Iraqi “army”. Look at how we have passed up numerous “duckshoot” opportunities to destroy them en masse while they parade their troops. If these aren’t part of a strategy, then those ISIS dudes must be the LUCKIEST mf’ers ever born!

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Kitty Smith says:

    I think what’s been said here is true. Chaos is the result. The over-arching question is will the police stand tall or will they stand down, bowing to the BGI and the fed’s war on police and whites.

    Now may be the time for all good people to begin writing and making themselves visible in their support for the police and begin calling out weak police chiefs, city councils, state representatives and federal representatives with point-blank questions and demands as to what, specifically they are doing to stop the undermining of law and order in this country. These actions don’t have to be specifically be about race. if blacks want to raise the demographic issue, let them. We can talk about that, too, if they do. Statistics and demographics prove the truth.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bonny Alba says:

      Hi Kitty. I really liked your comment until you said: “These actions don’t have to be specifically be about race. if blacks want to raise the demographic issue, let them.”

      This immense problem, no less than a war on whites, is caused by acquiescence on the part of whites. Whites need to call out the anti-whites, including anti-white whites in the media and elsewhere. Whites bending over backwards to prove that they are not racists is a big part of the problem. Avoiding the issue is the main problem. There is immense anti-white racism in the Western World now. Blacks are overwhelmingly racist anti-whites and they have admitted as much in poles.

      The very fact that whites, and whites only, are always and constantly suspect, always suspected of racism IS racism of the anti-white variety. This is known as “Critical Race Theory” which itself is anti-white racism.

      Frankly, things have gotten to the point where Whites and Western Civilization is under such a vicious attack that whites need to stop worrying about appearances and defend their people. Think about what will happen to our children and grandchildren if we do not do so.

      We need to holler from the rooftops: Blacks are committing enormous amounts of racist violence against white people and we will not put up with it. Forget about proving how not racist you are by harping about how many blacks are killed by blacks or about how welfare supposedly caused blacks to behave the way that they do. We need to state: Blacks are pursuing a race war against whites, whites are not truly defending themselves, the corporate media are also persecuting whites and pursuing a race war against whites, and the corporate media is composed of anti-white racist liars, practitioners of anti-white racist fraud on a massive scale.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Kitty Smith says:

        I agree wholeheartedly with all you say and then some. I’ve said the same things here many, many times. Those familiar with my posts will know that is true. I’m simply saying let THEM make OUR protest about the undermining of law and order about race, a diversionary issue we can point to as them initiating, thus featuring them as the racists undermining law and order. I strictly intended that as a strategic maneuver, not a full or final position. 🙂

        Like

  7. Will says:

    The introduction to the strategy was the “Beer Summit” This was how the game would be played. The criminal element has long resented police interference, and they now had a representative at the highest level. My hope is that there are those within the system who at some point in the future be able to expose what’s transpired these past years.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jett Black says:

      Yep! As soon as <0 maliciously, stupidly, ignorantly, and irresponsibly blathered, “The police acted stupidly….” regarding the idiot prof’s suspicious and antagonistic behavior in Cambridge, it was game on.

      Like

  8. archer52 says:

    Good luck proving murder. He’s screwed up. Higher function/lower function problem.

    Two lives are ended because of many reasons, including bad laws and bad thought processes.

    Sad. But reacting because you don’t want black protests isn’t the answer.

    You should read the article about Darren Wilson and his lawyer after he was found innocent. Darren said he was happy he could go back to work. The lawyer told him- and I paraphrase- “Son, you can never go back to work as a policeman.” Darren was shocked and didn’t understand. “Because the first call you get will be down a blind alley and they will execute you.”

    THAT is the new America. THAT is Islam in jails. THAT is two generations of black social justice studies in colleges. THAT is the end result of allow PC to run our lives.

    Welcome to my youth boys and girls, where targeting and killing cops for political gain was all the rage. “Fort Apache” in the Bronx wasn’t just a movie, it was their lives.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jun/30/news/adna-fortapache30

    Liked by 10 people

    • doodahdaze says:

      Black Social Justice. Yep.

      Like

    • Jett Black says:

      That’s a strong perspective–what’s your view on how things changed between the “Fort Apache” days and the period of reducing crime rates prior to 2008? Can we fight our way out of the current mess in the same way? Or was the peaceful or at least moderating crime period just a lull produced by placating the miscreants? I think Islam, at large and in prisons, as well as the almost overwhelming propaganda war against all decent western values and people are differences from the past that create monumental challenges. Sadly, I am not very optimistic about our nation’s ability to recover and win the propaganda war.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Judgy says:

        Hi Jett. I realize your question was specifically directed towards Archer, but am hoping you don’t mind if I stick my little white-privileged nose in here. While I’m pretty much at a loss as to how we can reverse this terrifying crash-course we seem to be forced to travel, I think there may be one seemingly tiny battle that we perhaps CAN win. That would be to void or nullify the dreaded R-word. I can think of only one actual occasion in which someone called me “racist” (an INCREDIBLY stupid occasion, as I was only about maybe 8-9 years old–my camp counselor shamed me in front of our whole tent, because at the time, I honestly did not understand that it was not okay to use the phrase “Indian giver”). Yet, I can still remember the white-hot shame and guilt like it was yesterday. I felt like the worst person in the world!

        I also did not realize then that if I TRULY was such a horrible person, I wouldn’t have felt so awful–“bad” people don’t care if they’re accused of being hurtful. I feel like the innate decency in many who post here works against us sometimes, but if we can manage to muddle through, and to spread the truth of what’s happening in a practical way, devoid of much emotion, just purely factual, maybe, just MAYBE we can drain that word of its power.

        It is not RACIST to expect EVERYONE to follow the SAME rules (ie; not resisting arrest)–in fact, it IS racist to make different rules based on skin color. We need to stop being afraid of that word.

        Like

  9. doodahdaze says:

    It was not unlawful.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. standlow says:

    Will the world see the video of the officer with two taser darts embedded in his body?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Akela says:

    Will the world see the video of the officer with two taser darts embedded in his body? The world doesn’t care. A negro was killed by a white police officer. THAT is all that matters.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Sentient says:

    I agree that the case was over-charged, that he’s likely to be acquitted and that that acquittal (along with that of all six officers in Baltimore) will provoke more street violence. The only thing I’m not sure of is whether Scarlett Wilson is “in on it” with the liberal race baiters. From what little I’ve gleaned from the inter webs, she seems to be a Republican (not that they’re always trustworthy). Black Lives Matter, Charleston had wanted her off the case. Maybe she charged “murder” in the case to either redeem herself in the eyes of the BGI or say “you want a murder charge? Ok here’s your murder charge. “

    Like

    • Rurik says:

      Possibly with deliberate cunning, knowing the officer cannot be convicted, and she still “gets credit for trying”.

      Like

  13. manickernel says:

    South Carolina seems to be ambiguous on “lesser included defense” although the defendant may request it.

    http://groselawfirm.com/2014/03/blog/who-decides-whether-the-jurors-consider-the-lesser-included-offenses-trial-judge-or-defendant/

    Like

  14. Spar Harmon says:

    I think this a good place to ask if anyone else is thinking about the Waco matter and how it may tie into this pattern of barely masked , i.e. deliberate, manipulations promoting break down of public trust in our justice system, economic system, our fellow citizens. I imagines the hoots and high-fives amongst the planners, tacticians, and strategists as they rack up success after success.

    In the first week after the Waco Massacre, II, some evidence was surfacing that the Waco LEO may have been deliberately faked out of position by warnings, misinformation, false intelligence from sources they normally rely on for heads up. Also, I bet that SWAT team is one of those being offered, turn-key, by the feds; you know where communities that accept them tend not to think of the implications embedded in the fine print.

    Sadly, I see, by the intemperate thoughts expressed here about blacks-in-general, that the manipulators are very successful at pushing white buttons to trigger blindly prejudicial reactions. Consider :: It is increasingly clear that these shadowy manipulators are focused on one clear goal. They intend to exploit every opportunity to break down the functional coherence of the elements of our society. As a measure of their success, think how close we are to open warfare between component groups where YOU live. Indulging in prejudicial thinking plays into their efforts.

    Allow me to suggest that learning to think like an intelligence analyst would help. This site is a rare source of reliable intelligence and judicious analysis. The increasing frequency of, frankly hysterical fear and anger outbursts amongst commenters is a failure for us, a triumph for them. I remember the chill that froze my heart to read well, I guess its time to lock and load folks… here in the midst of one of the more frenzied comment sets. That commenter was one usually more measured.

    I have been searching for ways to express these concerns not from an accusatory standpoint, but rather from that point where I exert some discipline on myself. Controlling fear and anger and struggling toward clear thinking is something I actually attempt to do. For all our sakes, folks, let us reason together and support one another.

    Liked by 10 people

    • smiley says:

      agree with you.
      “class warfare” is being stoked.
      not just between “haves” and “have nots” but also between all factions of our society, including our relationship with “law and order” and LE.
      and, as I’ve mentioned in another thread, we conservatives are also becoming too divided by some of these bizarre “events” for our own good.
      divide & conquer.
      we have to step back from the manufactured fray…so we can see the bigger picture(s).
      what this is leading to…what’s down the road if dangerous precedents are allowed to be set.
      choose “battles” carefully.

      Liked by 1 person

    • bertdilbert says:

      The populace needs something to talk about, least they have spare time to talk about government and what they are doing. Having a myriad of distractions serves their purpose.

      Like

    • Jett Black says:

      Completely agree! Thanks for saying it well and positively!

      Like

    • jackphatz says:

      You are correct. After the devastating results of the 2012 election I realized I needed to step away from all of the minutia (obsessive, I was). We all need to sit back and watch carefully and stop OMGing to everything. Think smart.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. doodahdaze says:

    There is a common thread in all of these cases. Blacks resisting arrest and fighting with the cops. If none of the belligerent blacks had resisted arrest none of this would happen.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. jke456 says:

    Scarlet Wilson is a worthless piece……… Check out Charleston thug life. For all you need to know about her. She and the judges in that circuit are the reason for many violent crimes and deaths in Charleston. She allows a catch and release program for the thugs with the help of some worthless judges. Examples on CTL. Thugs almost always pled down to lowest misdemeanor charge and given probation on probation. In her area getting arrested is like a get out of jail free card as after judge unicorn reduces bail so low they out first day and free to commit any crime short of murder and all charges will be dropped but lowest one . its a real Eye-opener if you have never been to CTL.

    Like

  17. Ziiggii says:

    “Scarlett Wilson has never charged a police officer with murder before. Hence, and with a great deal of contemplation, it becomes evident she also has never achieved a conviction of murder against a police officer.”

    A great deal of contemplation? SD…. c’mon don’t burst a blood vessel while doing your great deal of contemplation! I’d hate to loose you to an aneurism

    Like

  18. czarowniczy says:

    Will the summer actually be that much more dangerous than what passes for a regular summer? Do the fulminating thugs and thugettes really need that much more of a push to act out and destroy that they are too…disengaged…to earn for themselves? Might they just be looking for any excuse to let crack that thin veneer of civilized restraint that heavily armed LEA hold them to?
    We’ve made alcohol addiction a viable disability under the ADA, why not cut to the chase and make polite and well-mannered behavior when ethnically aggrieved one also. Obamacare should cover that…

    Liked by 2 people

  19. doodahdaze says:

    If he was justified there is no offense at all. He will use the affirmative defense.

    Like

  20. dsb steve says:

    Good article on the Scott shooting by someone who says they have worked as a police officer. http://pjmedia.com/blog/walter-scott-shooting/

    “… He made a series of poor decisions, the most consequential of course being his decision to open fire on Scott, but I am not convinced he is a cold-blooded killer. …”
    “… A more likely explanation for the shooting is that Slager was unprepared — mentally or physically — for an encounter with a resisting individual. When that encounter came, he panicked and fired out of mistaken but not altogether unreasonable fear that he would be harmed if he did not. …”
    “… I think when Slager drew his weapon, he truly believed Scott still had the Taser. He had made the decision to fire, and he was unable to process the change in circumstances that made the use of deadly force unreasonable and therefore unlawful. …”
    “…. Whatever Slager’s crimes, there is still a moral distinction to be made between a cop who errs, even as catastrophically as he did, and someone who kills in the course of a robbery or a gang feud or some other act of depravity. …”

    Like

    • Judgy says:

      “There is still a moral distinction to be made between a cop who errs, even as catastrophically as he did, and someone who kills in the course of a robbery or a gang feud or some other act of depravity….”

      As unbelievable, and enraging as it may be, I honestly think the cow is WAY out of the barn on this–no matter HOW valid your point here is. To the BGI, and their deadly insane cheerleaders, the MSM, the only moral distinction/ problem in these recent cases is that some racist white cop (or a “white hispanic”) has killed an “unarmed” black man, and to hell w/ any mitigating context or details. Heck, I’m beginning to think their outrage, and vitriol might hold firm even if the “victim” (or perp) IS armed.

      The sense I get from the self-appointed arbiters of socially acceptable behavior, and “morality”, is that it is NEVER okay for ANY white to kill, hurt, attack, or even insult a black person, pretty much NO MATTER WHAT. Because………slavery, segregation, Emmett Till, etc. And every time another cellphone video of a white vs. black altercation pops up, still another notch is added to the Grievance Belt, thus making it even MORE dangerous for any white to react to black misbehavior, or aggression, in a way that WOULD likely be understandable w/ any other segment of society.**

      **(Except maybe an altercation w/ a Muslim, too……….but hey, THOSE two groups seem to be MELDING. Additionally, in any case of a gay white male versus, say……..a straight black youth, odds are that being Black trumps being Gay any day. Now, Muslim woman vs. black male? I’m not sure about that one. But I bet we’re gonna find out soon enough!
      Kinda wish I had bought the domain for “Victim Olympics”). “Moral distinction”, my Aunt Fanny…….

      Like

  21. everlastingphelps says:

    Here’s the problem with your defense theory — none of it is relevant.

    Anything that happened up until the moment that Scott began to flee is irrelevant. Just like in the Zimmerman case, each encounter is examined de novo. Whatever use of force Slager was entitled to while Scott was resisting goes away once Scott begins to flee. The same way the everything else was irrelevant (like “who started it” or whatever) once Martin started slamming Zimmerman’s head into the concrete, everything before Scott started running away is irrelevant.

    Slager shot Scott in the back until he was dead while Scott was fleeing. It’s on camera. It’s not in the heat of a fight, and Scott is clearly fleeing.

    The state is not overreaching here. This is a slam dunk case, and I really don’t expect the jury to be out more than an hour or two deliberating (which is nothing for a murder case.)

    Like

    • dsb steve says:

      It is not a slam dunk if he says he was confused and made a split second mistake. Did Scott strike any blows on Slager? That would cloud a persons judgement. He could also have been out of breath.

      Like

      • everlastingphelps says:

        Right, the Dindu Nuffin defense. It doesn’t work either way, sorry. Shoulda woulda coulda, the problem is, he shot a guy in the back as he was running away.

        Like

    • davsel says:

      https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5843997099226288287&q=deadly+force+shooting+fleeing+suspect&hl=en&as_sdt=6,28
      “It is not, however, unconstitutional on its face. Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. As applied in such circumstances, the Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • everlastingphelps says:

        I’m not sure what you think you are reading — the SCOTUS held in Garner that it was a BAD SHOOT and found the Tenn. law allowing deadly force against all fleeing felons unconstitutional. Garner set limits on the use of force, not a blanket allowance.

        Held:…
        (b) The Fourth Amendment, for purposes of this case, should not be construed in light of the common-law rule allowing the use of whatever force is necessary to effect the arrest of a fleeing felon….

        (c) While burglary is a serious crime, the officer in this case could not reasonably have believed that the suspect – young, slight, and unarmed – posed any threat. Nor does the fact that an unarmed suspect has broken into a dwelling at night automatically mean he is dangerous.

        Under those standards, this shooting fails the Garner test. The majority opinion continues:

        Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead.

        (Emphasis in both quotes mine.)

        When you are unarmed and running away, you are no longer a threat. The end.

        Like

        • goodwi57 says:

          It’s hardly the end, but you are entitled to your opinion, I suppose. But the circumstances leading up to the actual shooting will be closely examined and will have a bearing on the outcome of this case; if he already exhausted the option of stunning Walter Scott with the Taser twice (and the second attempt ended with them on the ground fighting, with Walter apparently in control of the Taser) and he warned Walter that he would shoot him prior to actually shooting, then I personally can’t see how this case could possibly be a slam dunk.

          Again, I respect your opinion. But there is nothing open and shut about this case.

          Like

          • everlastingphelps says:

            He couldn’t have shot him twice with the taser — they fire from a cartridge that is cumbersome to reload. There’s no feasible way to chase/scuffle with a suspect and reload a taser. It’s not quite as bad as a muzzle loading pistol, but closer to that than a traditional firearm.

            Two points on this, though — 1) it shows how much assumption is being made about the presumed struggle before the video — for all we know, it was one continuous foot chase until the video starts. Assumptions are dangerous, and they aren’t exculpatory. 2) The circumstances leading up to the actual shooting don’t matter, because all that matters is the threat that the officer is facing when he decides to shoot.

            It’s like me chasing you out of my house and then shooting you. I might or might not have been justified shooting you while you are in my house, but once you are running away and are out, I’m certainly not justified shooting you (assuming you are unarmed.)

            It’s also worth expanding a little here on what reasonable doubt means. Reasonable doubt doesn’t mean “anything I can think up.” That’s just doubt. Reasonable doubt means that there is some sort of evidence, even circumstantial, to back up the doubt. Making bald assumptions with no evidence doesn’t get you there, especially when we have the direct evidence of Slager shooting him in the back as he runs away on camera.

            Like

        • art tart says:

          everlastingphelps ~ thanks for your comment. I’ve read this explained many times, imo, this has been the clearest explanation I’ve read yet.

          I so badly want Slager to go home to his wife/baby, but it’s worrisome it may not happen. It seems unreasonable, IANAL, that there are no lesser charges, that sucks.

          Like

    • sundance says:

      Sounds like you will be one of the torch-bearers upon acquittal.

      Like

      • everlastingphelps says:

        Hardly. I would rather 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man be convicted. The thing is, there’s no reasonable doubt here. The video is what it is what it is. He shot a fleeing man in the back.

        Like

  22. Just Sayin says:

    Could the over-charging be deliberate?

    IOW, the prosecutor knows, politically, she MUST charge the guy. Afterall, he killed an unarmed black man. But she also knows the rest of the story and has seen the video and seen the taser darts imbedded somewhere around the officer’s torso.

    She knows the law on police use of force. She knows she has no choice but to charge with something.

    Charging with Murder 1 (and only murder 1) is unlikely to result in a conviction but it also prevents the jury from playing Samson and splitting the baby by acquitting on the serious charge but convicting on a lesser one.

    Jury acquits? Hey, I did my job. Them’s the breaks. Can’t win ’em all, but I gave it the old college try, amiright?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Just Sayin says:

      Middle paragraph should read, “She knows the law on police use of force. But she also knows she has no choice but to charge with something.”

      Like

  23. goodwi57 says:

    That last part of the document sticks out to me: and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.

    In the enhanced version of the video (where the audio is amplified and the video is stabilized), we here someone shouting, with the last part being “…to shoot you.” Having read plenty of the forums on this subject, I personally believe that it was Officer Slager who made that statement; he was giving a warning to Walter Scott after he had taken his Taser that if he didn’t comply with orders, he would have to shoot him.

    Though we obviously don’t know for certain what was said at this point, regardless of who said it, it works to the benefit of Officer Slager: either he was giving a warning to Walter prior to shooting because Walter was threatening him with his Taser, or Walter was threatening to shoot Officer Slager after all. In either scenario, it benefits the defense.

    I’ve been following this forum a lot recently, and sincerely believe that Officer Slager deserves a fair trial so that all the facts can be realized; at its worst (and this is without knowing all of the facts), this is a case of a good man making a decision after a series of unfortunate circumstances.

    Like

  24. Stephen Mac says:

    Here is the problem. Similar to Darrin Wilson. We did not hear from Wilson. Even though the lying narrative had him guilty and a murderer of Gentle Giant Mike Brown. Jeeze, can’t we wait until we hear Officer Slager’s side of the story. Did the truth in the Brown case destroy the lying narrative……..yes it did. We all know all the other officers reports were made public, except for one.

    And don’t forget the why. Whose goal is the economic and cultural ruin of the Constitutional Republic of the United States? The opposing political view, Communism. Let me remind you of just three of the communist planed goals (45 goals) for the USA. We now have a marxist POTUS and a marxist party – Democrats. And half of the GOP.
    1.#16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights
    2. #29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
    3. #42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups (minorities) should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
    Over all goal: Plunging the United States into a paralyzing depression with economic collapse, moral degeneracy, anarchy, complete civil breakdown requiring……………….martial law.
    Danger Will Robinson Danger!
    Extreme Danger Will Robinson Danger!

    Liked by 3 people

  25. everlastingphelps says:

    Just to bring things back to reality — I a lot of people here instinctively defend the cops, but on this one, you should take another look.

    This one doesn’t have to be about race. It’s not about class. It’s not about narrative.

    It’s about a cop shooting a guy in the back as he runs away over an unpaid bill.

    You want to fight the good fight? Do it, but that fight doesn’t exist here. All you do by defending someone who shot someone in the back as they ran away is make yourselves look like sycophants.

    Keep your powder dry. This isn’t the hill to wreck your credibility on.

    Like

    • jke456 says:

      “It’s about a cop shooting a guy in the back as he runs away over an unpaid bill.”

      He wasn’t shot for an unpaid bill. Straw man.

      Like

      • everlastingphelps says:

        He was running away over an unpaid bill. The cop didn’t write the law, but he was sure as hell enforcing it.

        You want to really help cops? Stop tasking them as bill collectors and tax assessors for the state, and let them focus on actual crime.

        Like

        • Agreed. Let the repo man or the bill collectors do their job. However, did you watch any of the video? Did you not see the guy fighting with the cop over the taser?

          Like

          • everlastingphelps says:

            I saw a scuffle that may or may not have been over the taser. I then saw:

            1) The private citizen turn his back and run away
            2) The cop draw his weapon and take aim, and
            3) The cop shoot until the private citizen fell dead.

            In that order. That’s murder. Without some sort of justification (of which there is none in the video) that’s evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of a depraved mind.

            Like

  26. famousprince says:

    I’m not completely convinced of the win by losing scenario. I really think law enforcement officials, mayors, governors, and prosecutors just don’t know how to deal with long standing strife that is now exacerbated by 24 hour news and social media, and they just move one step at a time, hoping it somehow all works out ( self-promoting Marilyn Mosby & husband [strategy] excluded, of course) Even before those media and info changes, there was still the rioting and the rabble rousing. Decades ago it was a powder keg. Now it’s a powder keg going off in the Twilight Zone.

    Like

  27. Millwright says:

    Won’t be too long and all the “good cops” will find other employment. And its increasingly obvious that’s the objective by some group – in or directing government – to their ends.

    Like

    • everlastingphelps says:

      I would say that we passed that point long, long ago.

      When people talk about “bad apples” remember that the entire axiom is “one bad apple spoils the barrel.” When something like this comes up, ask yourself — where are all the “good cops” who have a legal and moral duty to report the bad cops? Why hasn’t this bad apple been reported before? Why are they still covering up for him?

      Because the bad apples spoiled the entire barrel long, long ago.

      Like

  28. Pingback: Charleston Mother Emanuel AME Church Shooting – Discussion Thread… - Rage and War

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