Asclepias
Diamond Member
They know the racists will do everything in their power to get the skinhead cop off. Just like I called Wilson walking I'm predicting this guy will not be convicted of anything do with murder or manslaughter.
Southern cop shoots man running away in the back..
- Thread starter guno
- Start date
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
thanks
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
and what no buddy sees at this point
is what happened between the the two
to cause the stun gun to go flying
No a bunch of Millennials did though.
How dare you show the pre CNN edited video!SlowMo gif frame by frame before shooting
What do you see?
No he was trying to grab his taser.
Maybe CNN should visit USMB to learn about reporting.How dare you show the pre CNN edited video!SlowMo gif frame by frame before shooting
What do you see?
Last edited:
enough said
Missourian
Diamond Member
Haven't read the Huff-Po article, but the Daily Beast, though totally biased, has a nugget of good information. First it goes into Tennessee v Garner, which we have already covered...but then it goes on to report another Supreme Court case with relevance to deadly force actions by police officers:
The second relevant Supreme Court case is Graham v. Connor and it is here that Slager’s defense will likely prevail against the prosecution’s representation that Slager murdered Scott, since Graham gives wide latitude and the benefit of the doubt to the police in the use of force, particularly deadly force.
Graham holds that any determination of the “reasonableness” of a particular “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than with the vision of 20-20 hindsight” (of say, a non-police officer sitting on a jury). Graham also mandates that the “seizure” (of Scott), be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer who might have been at the scene of the shooting, and not some otherwise reasonable person who does not share the law enforcement pedigree and worldview.
Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott Here s Why - The Daily Beast
Graham holds that any determination of the “reasonableness” of a particular “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than with the vision of 20-20 hindsight” (of say, a non-police officer sitting on a jury). Graham also mandates that the “seizure” (of Scott), be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer who might have been at the scene of the shooting, and not some otherwise reasonable person who does not share the law enforcement pedigree and worldview.
Michael Slager Is Not Going to Prison for Killing Walter Scott Here s Why - The Daily Beast
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,545
- 2,165
- Banned
- #689
But the Slager case does not meet either of the findings.
The guys is never going wear anything but prison clothes for at least 20 years, as long as he can stay two steps ahead of the bad boys in the gray-bar hotel.
The guys is never going wear anything but prison clothes for at least 20 years, as long as he can stay two steps ahead of the bad boys in the gray-bar hotel.
Last edited:
EverCurious
Gold Member
As I understand it a tazer can be used directly after the barbs have been deployed, I don't know about that model, or even what model the officer had (so far all I've seen is presumption based on what /other/ stations use, yes?) In any event, I've heard you can fire off whatever range charge, but it can also be used in "hand to hand" as it were.
I'm not sure it matters if the suspect actually had the tazer or not frankly. IF the suspect tried to take the tazer and the officer THOUGHT he had it, then that is enough for the officer to believe that the suspect is now a danger to the public or other officers.
The fact that the officer has been arrested is NOT necessarily an indication of anything more than the police station felt there were serious questions about his actions, and given recent national events they chose to err on the side of caution and placation - the first thing they said after arresting/detaining him was in relation to riots in Ferguson. I do however think they have questions given the phone video, and I think they are /valid/ questions. -- I think they've made the right move in detaining the officer until they sort things out; not only for "IF" the officer acted wrongly, but for the riot issue as well.
I'd like to note that even in the very limited amount of time I have had to research on this incident, I have found a TON of inconsistencies between the reported "facts" given in various articles. While a lot of it is pretty minor, sloppy reprinted evidence, there's been some MAJOR mistakes. Like I'm trying to figure out if it was the officer who was in the coast guard for 6 years, or if the suspect was in the coast guard for 2 years; because I've seen multiple reports of both. Maybe they were both in the coast guard?
Bottom line - don't just trust what you're reading is true: as usual the media are being a bunch of greedy self-serving sock-puppets.
A couple opinions/speculations here: I've seen a number of reports that said the suspect didn't actually have a warrant out for his arrest at the time he was pulled over - though his family is reported to have said that they figured he had ran because he didn't want to go to jail again for arrears child support. He was jailed for failure to pay child support at least three times over the past decade or so, and from what I've read and had been as much as $7.8k behind, the last time he was jailed he was supposedly $5k behind, and was currently $7.5k behind.
I trust the child support division about as far as I can pick up their building and throw it; that entire body is fucked and needs to be completely reworked - I've LIVED through some of the most ridiculous stupid bullshit with them because someone's exe ******* lied, and those bastards just go "okay" and proceed to immediately destroy the non-custodial parent's life, don't even get me started... That said, I do believe this guy owed a fairly large amount of back child support and was indeed actively trying to avoid his responsibility to pay it - why is another question for sure, but he owed it and it is very probable that is why he ran, stupidly thinking he could avoid it. He already knew better if that payment history is correct, he was already in the financial prison hell of CS enforcement, but for whatever reason he thought he could get away; perhaps again, or maybe /this/ time to see if he could, who knows...
My point is that he ran even though the officer having his ID, kinda makes me think the address was incorrect on that ID. My thought is he's been dodging it with some success for a good number of years - kind of speaks to character is all. Couple that with the big if - IF he attacked that officer - then I'm sorry you don't have an innocent black man running away from a racist cop anymore, you have a long-standing /legal/ problem and someone who refuses to take responsibility for his actions to the point that he's going to attack an officer to escape them: and THAT would be why he died. This seems to be a very common theme for almost EVERY cop vs civilian shooting out there - the refusal to man up and take responsibility for their actions, even though its hard, in their general life as well as in those last second decision's that ultimately end their life...
I've been down right sassy with officers on more than one occasion in the past because I disagree with them pulling me over, NEVER ONCE has an officer even put a HAND on his gun, never once has an officer had ANY fear of me being /any/ threat, never once have I been even asked to get out of the car, or even to stop arguing with the officer. In fact, most of the time, both the officer and I leave laughing, half the time without a ticket even if it was /technically/ a violation... I am NOT going to let an officer walk all over /my/ "rights," or even my /perceived/ rights, but I'm also not going to be a /problem/ that requires immediate, sometimes deadly, force from an officer - ever - and I am 99.99% confident that no police officer is going to shoot me - ever.
The country as a whole needs to be teaching people how to act in a non-threatening way even when they do think their rights are being violated, NOT going around essentially "forgiving," and thereby condoning, the very behavior that is causing the situation to get to that lethal stage. IF one truly believes it's /racism/ then take it to court, publicize the shit out of it, and get rich through court or legal settlements, instead of just picking a fight, running, and getting killed. Flip on that cellphone recorder every. single. time. you get pulled over; one should quickly hit the jackpot in the supposed "epidemic" of "black hate from cops game." Teach your peeps that, and dollars to doughnuts, the "epidemic" will resolve itself regardless of "why" it's happening... (A lot of peeps already figured this out, we don't say "I'm gonna kick your ass," we say "You'll be hearing from my lawyer," JS)
I'm not sure it matters if the suspect actually had the tazer or not frankly. IF the suspect tried to take the tazer and the officer THOUGHT he had it, then that is enough for the officer to believe that the suspect is now a danger to the public or other officers.
The fact that the officer has been arrested is NOT necessarily an indication of anything more than the police station felt there were serious questions about his actions, and given recent national events they chose to err on the side of caution and placation - the first thing they said after arresting/detaining him was in relation to riots in Ferguson. I do however think they have questions given the phone video, and I think they are /valid/ questions. -- I think they've made the right move in detaining the officer until they sort things out; not only for "IF" the officer acted wrongly, but for the riot issue as well.
I'd like to note that even in the very limited amount of time I have had to research on this incident, I have found a TON of inconsistencies between the reported "facts" given in various articles. While a lot of it is pretty minor, sloppy reprinted evidence, there's been some MAJOR mistakes. Like I'm trying to figure out if it was the officer who was in the coast guard for 6 years, or if the suspect was in the coast guard for 2 years; because I've seen multiple reports of both. Maybe they were both in the coast guard?
Bottom line - don't just trust what you're reading is true: as usual the media are being a bunch of greedy self-serving sock-puppets.
A couple opinions/speculations here: I've seen a number of reports that said the suspect didn't actually have a warrant out for his arrest at the time he was pulled over - though his family is reported to have said that they figured he had ran because he didn't want to go to jail again for arrears child support. He was jailed for failure to pay child support at least three times over the past decade or so, and from what I've read and had been as much as $7.8k behind, the last time he was jailed he was supposedly $5k behind, and was currently $7.5k behind.
I trust the child support division about as far as I can pick up their building and throw it; that entire body is fucked and needs to be completely reworked - I've LIVED through some of the most ridiculous stupid bullshit with them because someone's exe ******* lied, and those bastards just go "okay" and proceed to immediately destroy the non-custodial parent's life, don't even get me started... That said, I do believe this guy owed a fairly large amount of back child support and was indeed actively trying to avoid his responsibility to pay it - why is another question for sure, but he owed it and it is very probable that is why he ran, stupidly thinking he could avoid it. He already knew better if that payment history is correct, he was already in the financial prison hell of CS enforcement, but for whatever reason he thought he could get away; perhaps again, or maybe /this/ time to see if he could, who knows...
My point is that he ran even though the officer having his ID, kinda makes me think the address was incorrect on that ID. My thought is he's been dodging it with some success for a good number of years - kind of speaks to character is all. Couple that with the big if - IF he attacked that officer - then I'm sorry you don't have an innocent black man running away from a racist cop anymore, you have a long-standing /legal/ problem and someone who refuses to take responsibility for his actions to the point that he's going to attack an officer to escape them: and THAT would be why he died. This seems to be a very common theme for almost EVERY cop vs civilian shooting out there - the refusal to man up and take responsibility for their actions, even though its hard, in their general life as well as in those last second decision's that ultimately end their life...
I've been down right sassy with officers on more than one occasion in the past because I disagree with them pulling me over, NEVER ONCE has an officer even put a HAND on his gun, never once has an officer had ANY fear of me being /any/ threat, never once have I been even asked to get out of the car, or even to stop arguing with the officer. In fact, most of the time, both the officer and I leave laughing, half the time without a ticket even if it was /technically/ a violation... I am NOT going to let an officer walk all over /my/ "rights," or even my /perceived/ rights, but I'm also not going to be a /problem/ that requires immediate, sometimes deadly, force from an officer - ever - and I am 99.99% confident that no police officer is going to shoot me - ever.
The country as a whole needs to be teaching people how to act in a non-threatening way even when they do think their rights are being violated, NOT going around essentially "forgiving," and thereby condoning, the very behavior that is causing the situation to get to that lethal stage. IF one truly believes it's /racism/ then take it to court, publicize the shit out of it, and get rich through court or legal settlements, instead of just picking a fight, running, and getting killed. Flip on that cellphone recorder every. single. time. you get pulled over; one should quickly hit the jackpot in the supposed "epidemic" of "black hate from cops game." Teach your peeps that, and dollars to doughnuts, the "epidemic" will resolve itself regardless of "why" it's happening... (A lot of peeps already figured this out, we don't say "I'm gonna kick your ass," we say "You'll be hearing from my lawyer," JS)
tigerred59
Gold Member
- Mar 17, 2015
- 21,276
- 2,892
- 290
- Banned
- #691
President Obama is a black man, he has an obligation like no other to address what is going on in the black community and if people like you, ie white motherfkkkers don't like it, who gives a fkkk??? I'm not a Sharpton fan, are you?
tigerred59
Gold Member
- Mar 17, 2015
- 21,276
- 2,892
- 290
- Banned
- #692
Cops are just lazy...they don't want to chase you down, they don't want to argue with you, they don't want to do a damned thing but get a paycheck, eat a damned doughnut for free and go home. All guilty of not admitting that they secretly hate minorities, especially blacks and don't value them as human beings.
RoshawnMarkwees
Assimilationist
Obama is not black. He's faux black. He was raised by assimilated whities among assimilated whities and went to school with assimilated whites. His absentee father was not even an American black. He was an African national from a country with virtually no involvement in slave trade. Obama's white side is way more american black than his daddy's side. But skin color is all that matters to insulated white lefties and segregationist black bigots.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,545
- 2,165
- Banned
- #694
Rosh is describing himself as he projects his self hate on his perceived enemies.
tigerred59
Gold Member
- Mar 17, 2015
- 21,276
- 2,892
- 290
- Banned
- #695
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, do wake me up when you have something to say that's worth my time, until then ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Manonthestreet
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2014
- 41,499
- 33,807
- 3,645
Wonder if they have his social media scrubbed clean yet.........
Jarlaxle
Gold Member
If he agrees to a plea (unless it's for LWOP), the DA should go down as an accessory. **** that: bring it to trial and go for the needle.
Jarlaxle
Gold Member
Seems that 50,000mg of morphine might work better.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
May Day demonstrators admit they don’t fully understand the movement they’re supporting
- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Investigative Reporter Attacked by Antifa in Portland
- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 5
