*Update* Game Changer OR Paradigm Shift ? – Walter Scott Shooting: Enhanced Video Shows Officer Sl

originally posted by: soulwaxer
The fact that Slager went back to pick up the taser and plant it next to Scott does not prove that Slager is the one who shot it. It could very well be that Scott shot him with it and that Slager was afraid that he wouldn't be believed. To make sure, he placed the taser near Scott.

I'm also not defending the actions of Slager, as I think he should be charged in this case but there's another angle to the taser relocation.

He could have been relocating the taser so responding officers wouldn't accidentally run over it or so it wouldn't get lost in the fray, stepped on, etc.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

I think you missed the part where Person 1 takes off running. The point Scientific was making was that if this person was no longer tasing you and running away, they are no longer an active threat.

Do you have a CHL or other type of concealed / carry license (not sure where you're located).

There were numerous scenarious in my CHL class where it was pretty much hammered home that you have to be in fear of your life. That would be difficult to prove if someone had 5-8 bullet holes in their back, and they were at least dozens of feet from the taser (how can they still tase you if the taser itself is on the ground).

Keeping with the hypothetical, it would be a lot easier to justify if that person came back for the taser and was shot going for it to attack you again OR (at least here in Texas) if I was Person 3 and came up on someone being tased / assaulted by someone, I could draw my pistol and yell for the assualter to stop (or if I had reason to believe the victim's life was in danger) to engage the assaulter.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

The darts can only be shot once.
The cop shot the darts so he would have had to reload then the car thief would have had to take it from him in order for it to be a threat to the cop.

Unless there was already a dart in the cops leg, but I don't think that's the case.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Stormdancer777

This might clear that up:

Feidin Santana: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

Feidin Santan is the video recorder, these are the five facts he has expressed his desire for everyone to know. One of those points is that Slager used his taser on Scott, when Scott loped away, he was still dragging the taser lead.

Santana told NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt:

"They were down on the floor before I started recording. I remember the police had control of the situation. He had control of Scott. And Scott was trying just to get away from the Taser."

The video begins with Slager and Scott in close range. An object falls to the ground and Scott can be seen running away from Slager with the strings from the Taser prongs hanging from his body. As he gets a few feet away from Slager, Scott opens fire, shooting seven times as Scott runs farther away. He then pauses and fires an eighth time. Scott then drops to the ground. Scott’s family said he was shot five times.

This "Conservative Activist" is attempting to spin this around, wanting us to believe that the barb/lead was in Slager and not Scott. It's nonsense. Someone is just trying to appease the RW crowd who refuse to believe a cop would shoot an unarmed black man in the back.

Someone who can be heard saying "F#cking abuse" on the video before he knows ANY of the facts is not a credible eyewitness.

Yeah I caught that bias too when I viewed it. He didn't tape the part just before that, or he didn't show it. How was he loping away when the officer had his left hand out in defense and had to toss the taser behind himself to go for his gun while the car thief was clearly facing him with forward momentum, then turned to run after the officer went for his pistol?

At that point the witness had it all wrong but then the officer unloaded so he is going to get convicted in my view. He had help seconds away and was aware from his radio, no reason to fire despite the obvious bias from the witness.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: doompornjunkie

I agreed with the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson decision. Brown charged at Wilson.

However, there is absolutely zero excuse for shooting someone in the back as they're running away. Imagine a scenario:

Person 1 has a Tazer.
Person 2 has a firearm.
Motives are irrelevant.

Person 1 tazes Person 2. Person 1 then takes off running.
Person 2 fires his weapon at the running person 1. Killing them

If this happened between two civilians, person 2 would be in jail and there would be no 24/7 media coverage.
But because this person is a cop people are trying to defend him for some reason. And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

This was murder.

I'm sorry but you are absolutly wrong.

I have openly discussed this with lawyers in a public forum.

As a civilian if you are in danger for you life. you are legally allowed to use lethal force against an individual.

I asked a specific question:

"If someone tries to fight you, and has a reasonable ability to render you unconscious after being notified you are armed, is it legal to use lethal force?"

The answer was YES. If someone knows you are armed (a cop(or otherwise)) and tries to knock you out, you CAN SHOOT THEM. Whether it be it fatal or non-fatal.

If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: doompornjunkie

I agreed with the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson decision. Brown charged at Wilson.

However, there is absolutely zero excuse for shooting someone in the back as they're running away. Imagine a scenario:

Person 1 has a Tazer.
Person 2 has a firearm.
Motives are irrelevant.

Person 1 tazes Person 2. Person 1 then takes off running.
Person 2 fires his weapon at the running person 1. Killing them

If this happened between two civilians, person 2 would be in jail and there would be no 24/7 media coverage.
But because this person is a cop people are trying to defend him for some reason. And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

This was murder.

"If someone tries to fight you, and has a reasonable ability to render you unconscious after being notified you are armed, is it legal to use lethal force?"

(Emphasis Mine)

I didn't know that people running from you had reasonable ability to render you unconscious.

If the officer had shot the suspect DURING the struggle for the Tazer, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during the time the suspect supposedly had the tazer in his possession, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during even an unarmed struggle, I would side with the officer.

But the officer shot a man who was running away from him. At that point, the suspect had ZERO "reasonable ability to render the officer unconscious" unless he was secretly professor X.

The officer committed murder. It may have been a heat of the moment, "I just got assaulted" crime of passion, but murder is murder.

originally posted by: butcherguy
If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

Because CNN/DOJ/Obama asked for it..
Because it fires the hate...
Because it furthers the White vs. Black Agenda
Because it = Profits.

Take you pick!

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: doompornjunkie

I agreed with the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson decision. Brown charged at Wilson.

However, there is absolutely zero excuse for shooting someone in the back as they're running away. Imagine a scenario:

Person 1 has a Tazer.
Person 2 has a firearm.
Motives are irrelevant.

Person 1 tazes Person 2. Person 1 then takes off running.
Person 2 fires his weapon at the running person 1. Killing them

If this happened between two civilians, person 2 would be in jail and there would be no 24/7 media coverage.
But because this person is a cop people are trying to defend him for some reason. And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

This was murder.

"If someone tries to fight you, and has a reasonable ability to render you unconscious after being notified you are armed, is it legal to use lethal force?"

(Emphasis Mine)

I didn't know that people running from you had reasonable ability to render you unconscious.

If the officer had shot the suspect DURING the struggle for the Tazer, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during the time the suspect supposedly had the tazer in his possession, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during even an unarmed struggle, I would side with the officer.

But the officer shot a man who was running away from him. At that point, the suspect had ZERO "reasonable ability to render the officer unconscious" unless he was secretly professor X.

The officer committed murder. It may have been a heat of the moment, "I just got assaulted" crime of passion, but murder is murder.

Please go back and read my first comment in this thread.

To me it looks as though Slager was looking down as the tazer was thrown. He very well may not have know the tazer was no longer in Scott's possession as he shot.

originally posted by: doompornjunkie
Uhh yes.. just like Butcher please FREAKING LEARN BEFORE POSTING!!!!

They keep on firing as long as the wires are attached and the trigger is pulled.. til the battery run out.

Thanks for trying, please try again.

The witness who took the video said Scott was on the ground tased. Slager is on audio deploying a taser. This rather supports that Scott was the one who got prongs stuck in him and was tased.

Yet, you want to argue that Slager was the one who got tased. How did Slager allegedly get tased from the above evidence?

Slager would have to have reloaded the taser, no?

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: butcherguy
If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

Because CNN/DOJ/Obama asked for it..
Because it fires the hate...
Because it furthers the White vs. Black Agenda
Because it = Profits.

Take you pick!

The officer was arrested before the video hit CNN/DOJ/Obama.
There is no reason to believe it was a hate crime of any sort.
There is no "White Vs. Black" agenda. The argument could be made there is a "Cops Vs. Black" agenda, but no "White Vs. Black" Agenda.
How would anyone profit from an arrested officer? If the officer were free, it would generate just as much, if not MORE ratings for news agencies.

originally posted by: butcherguy
If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

because no matter how good his reason may be he still shot him in the back.

And if they don't charge him after that video you better lock the windows and Katie bar the door because all hell would break loose.

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: doompornjunkie

I agreed with the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson decision. Brown charged at Wilson.

However, there is absolutely zero excuse for shooting someone in the back as they're running away. Imagine a scenario:

Person 1 has a Tazer.
Person 2 has a firearm.
Motives are irrelevant.

Person 1 tazes Person 2. Person 1 then takes off running.
Person 2 fires his weapon at the running person 1. Killing them

If this happened between two civilians, person 2 would be in jail and there would be no 24/7 media coverage.
But because this person is a cop people are trying to defend him for some reason. And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

This was murder.

"If someone tries to fight you, and has a reasonable ability to render you unconscious after being notified you are armed, is it legal to use lethal force?"

(Emphasis Mine)

I didn't know that people running from you had reasonable ability to render you unconscious.

If the officer had shot the suspect DURING the struggle for the Tazer, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during the time the suspect supposedly had the tazer in his possession, I would side with the officer.
If the officer had shot the suspect during even an unarmed struggle, I would side with the officer.

But the officer shot a man who was running away from him. At that point, the suspect had ZERO "reasonable ability to render the officer unconscious" unless he was secretly professor X.

The officer committed murder. It may have been a heat of the moment, "I just got assaulted" crime of passion, but murder is murder.

Please go back and read my first comment in this thread.

To me it looks as though Slager was looking down as the tazer was thrown. He very well may not have know the tazer was no longer in Scott's possession as he shot.

A lapse in situational awareness does not excuse an officer for shooting an unarmed man in the back.

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

originally posted by: butcherguy
If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

Because CNN/DOJ/Obama asked for it..
Because it fires the hate...
Because it furthers the White vs. Black Agenda
Because it = Profits.

Take you pick!

Annnd there we have it, we all knew it was only a matter of time before blaming Obama somehow worked its way into the conversation.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

Too bad video spoiled that. Are you for lapel cams?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

Too bad video spoiled that. Are you for lapel cams?

I'm for body cams, yes. They should be requirements for all LEOs.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

And I NORMALLY side with the cops in matters like this.

Too bad video spoiled that. Are you for lapel cams?

I'm for body cams, yes. They should be requirements for all LEOs.

Imo, that would have spared this mans life. It shouldn't be a matter of believing anybody.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: butcherguy
If Slager had such a great reason for shooting Scott, and the video supports that, why was he arrested for murder?

because no matter how good his reason may be he still shot him in the back.

And if they don't charge him after that video you better lock the windows and Katie bar the door because all hell would break loose.

Well that...
and the video shows him murdering Scott and planting the Taser next to the body.

originally posted by: Stormdancer777


can't get this to post right

Change your original post with the new URL from here.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: doompornjunkie
Uhh yes.. just like Butcher please FREAKING LEARN BEFORE POSTING!!!!

They keep on firing as long as the wires are attached and the trigger is pulled.. til the battery run out.

Thanks for trying, please try again.

The witness who took the video said Scott was on the ground tased. Slager is on audio deploying a taser. This rather supports that Scott was the one who got prongs stuck in him and was tased.

Yet, you want to argue that Slager was the one who got tased. How did Slager allegedly get tased from the above evidence?

Slager would have to have reloaded the taser, no?

Watch the video?!?!

It's much more telling that the audio that you have been forced to resort to, to defend you standing.

The tazer is thrown backwards.. from Scott towards Slager.

Truth hurts, that's why they invented Vaseline!