SC Man Shot in Back by Officer on Video-FAKE?!?

originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: Char-Lee

You're wasting your time debating these people. They seem to think it's perefctly plausible that someone can get shot 5 times at close range and not shed a drop of blood.

(The coroner confirmed 5 gunshot wounds, even though Slager fired 8 shots)

Apparently he missed 3 times it would stand to reason then.

Well for anyone interested here is the dispatch audio from that night...

soundcloud.com...

Seems they are involving a lot of people to pull this off if it's a hoax.

a reply to: raedar

Yea, I realized the resolution on yours sucked after I watched. I couldn't see anything in that version either. The one I linked is substantially clearer.

My bad. I didn't realize there was such a difference in clarity between versions, and was perplexed as to how people couldn't see that.

Glad I could help

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: thesmokingman

So you've proved nothing whatsoever, and now the onus is on me to prove something?

Makes sense.

How about stop with the proof at this stage and go with the investigate. People just need to have the ability to keep their eyes open to deception, it is not as though it has never been proven to happen. Why is it so many get angry when some look into theses things?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Why you expect to see a gout of flame and a billowing cloud of smoke from a modern firearm in daylight, I don't know.

Because I see it happen in the movies, so it has to be that way for real.

originally posted by: jimmyx
the more this thread goes along, the more I want to use the word "troll".....

It’s a sign of weakness in your argument if you name call

www.thepostnewspapers.com...

a reply to: thesmokingman

You lost me at 'Dutchsinse'


ZERO credibility.


Seriously, we don't need to try this hard to find fault with our government. We don't need to make things up. Trying to deny very real happenings does no one any good.

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: thesmokingman

You seriously expect to see shell casings in that video? You can barely see the smoke when the weapon is discharged.

Exactly. You kinda answered your own question....

Not really. More like I dismantled yours. What you're expecting to see from a handgun in a daylight shooting is perplexing. Looks pretty standard to me

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

SMOKE

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22

You mean like actual knowledge of how WITSEC is run, what it takes to get in to it, what happens before you get in to it, what happens when you're put in to it, and what it takes to stay in the program? Yea, I do have that.

Do you? Or is it just based off a wiki page and TV shows?

LOL nice try. You always make unprovable claims like this. You've done so in many such threads. You have no real credibility in my eyes.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: thesmokingman

So you've proved nothing whatsoever, and now the onus is on me to prove something?

Makes sense.

How about stop with the proof at this stage and go with the investigate. People just need to have the ability to keep their eyes open to deception, it is not as though it has never been proven to happen. Why is it so many get angry when some look into theses things?

Why? Because they're part of the deception.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: thesmokingman

So you've proved nothing whatsoever, and now the onus is on me to prove something?

Makes sense.

How about stop with the proof at this stage and go with the investigate. People just need to have the ability to keep their eyes open to deception, it is not as though it has never been proven to happen. Why is it so many get angry when some look into theses things?

Why is it so many equate disagreement and discourse to anger?

Keeping one's eyes open to deception is one thing. Hypothesizing deception and presenting it as fact or proof is another.

A couple things....

Do I think this video is fake...No

But, it fits the white Police Department in a Black Community.

White Cop commits outright murder shooting a poor black guy in the back.

It does remind us of Feguson. Credit the Cops for immediately turning over the video.

Credit the Community for not going out and burning down the town.

But to discuss it. To inspect every bit of information. Hell yes we should dig into this.

Here's a couple of screen shots I just took from the video which show blood (circled in blue).

link to larger image
link to larger image

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: jimmyx

if you can't see buttons on the shirts, you are not going to see the bullet holes themselves.

But on white you should see spreading red.

the man killed had on a blue shirt, and the vid was shot thru a fence, at approx. 30 to 40 yards, with the body lying on it's side, and "seen" for only a few seconds of the video.

I would have expected to see at least a tiny bit of spreading red here. Shootings with multiple shots that you read about often mention many thousands of dollars to clean up the blood for homes or apartments.

The portion of the video where that screenshot was taken shows that cop pull up this guys shirt and there's no blood. Think about this - it's his lower back and waist we're seeing. He was shot while running so obviously he was standing. He was shot and continued to run, so his blood continued to pump. One would think that blood would start to pump thru the wounds and run down and gravity kind of works that way. So no blood around his waist. No blood on the white shirt and no blood on his bare back.

a reply to: Bilk22

Look at the video again. You can see the dark patches when the black officer flips him over and also when the shooter is standing over him and bends down to check his pulse.

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22

You mean like actual knowledge of how WITSEC is run, what it takes to get in to it, what happens before you get in to it, what happens when you're put in to it, and what it takes to stay in the program? Yea, I do have that.

Do you? Or is it just based off a wiki page and TV shows?

LOL nice try. You always make unprovable claims like this. You've done so in many such threads. You have no real credibility in my eyes.

Lol cool brah lol same to you lol

Lemme know when I'm wrong and I'll do the same for you, k? Like when you said 9500 families have entered WITSEC. That would be incorrect. It's about 9900 family members have entered WITSEC. About 8500 actual witnesses have entered the program.

Verifiable facts and such lolz

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: thesmokingman

So you've proved nothing whatsoever, and now the onus is on me to prove something?

Makes sense.

How about stop with the proof at this stage and go with the investigate. People just need to have the ability to keep their eyes open to deception, it is not as though it has never been proven to happen. Why is it so many get angry when some look into theses things?

Why is it so many equate disagreement and discourse to anger?

Keeping one's eyes open to deception is one thing. Hypothesizing deception and presenting it as fact or proof is another.

I think you may have missed the question marks (?) in the title of the OP...Maybe you should go back and start from the beginning again.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22

You mean like actual knowledge of how WITSEC is run, what it takes to get in to it, what happens before you get in to it, what happens when you're put in to it, and what it takes to stay in the program? Yea, I do have that.

Do you? Or is it just based off a wiki page and TV shows?

LOL nice try. You always make unprovable claims like this. You've done so in many such threads. You have no real credibility in my eyes.

Lol cool brah lol same to you

lol

Lemme know when I'm wrong and I'll do the same for you, k? Like when you said 9500 families have entered WITSEC. That would be incorrect. It's about 9900 family members have entered WITSEC. About 8500 actual witnesses have entered the program.

Verifiable facts and such lolz

You really like to show how much you don't know.

Q: How many people are in the program?
A: Over 7,500 witnesses and 9,500 families have entered the program since its inception. It's hard to give an exact number because�well, they're hiding.

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: jimmyx

if you can't see buttons on the shirts, you are not going to see the bullet holes themselves.

But on white you should see spreading red.

the man killed had on a blue shirt, and the vid was shot thru a fence, at approx. 30 to 40 yards, with the body lying on it's side, and "seen" for only a few seconds of the video.

I would have expected to see at least a tiny bit of spreading red here. Shootings with multiple shots that you read about often mention many thousands of dollars to clean up the blood for homes or apartments.

The portion of the video where that screenshot was taken shows that cop pull up this guys shirt and there's no blood. Think about this - it's his lower back and waist we're seeing. He was shot while running so obviously he was standing. He was shot and continued to run, so his blood continued to pump. One would think that blood would start to pump thru the wounds and run down and gravity kind of works that way. So no blood around his waist. No blood on the white shirt and no blood on his bare back.

The guy did not even react properly to the shots "hitting" him in the back. Also, the shots clearly sound like blanks to me.