Cop charged with murder after shooting

[moonbogg]

This cop is a damn liar. Filthy piece of trash would have gotten away with murder. I bet the victim said something that just pissed him off, like, "That taser don't got shit on me, fool." So the cop thought, "Oh yeah? Lets see what 8 rounds of lead got on ya." So he shot him out of anger and hatred. He's just another American citizen with a gun who lost his cool. Now someone is dead.

 

[emperus]

First of all,
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/02/why-are-american-cops-so-bad-at-catching-killers

Please point out anything that allows you to infer that whites are getting away with murder at a higher rate than blacks - anything that would shift the statistics of known murders in one direction or another significantly.

It seems like you jumped into a conversation without understanding the conversation. You may want to go back and reread from the beginning.

 

[rudeguy]

I didn't say all. Let's be honest you can always find a racist anywhere but if you look where most of them would reside...

It's not even close to being equivalent. That helicopter is both funny and dead on point.

Oh I love the helicopter! In case you haven't noticed, I try to be the first one to speak up when someone on the right is being racist. As far as I'm concerned, we should give them their own island. No food, water or any help. Just an island.

 

[Subyman]

This cop is a damn liar. Filthy piece of trash would have gotten away with murder. I bet the victim said something that just pissed him off, like, "That taser don't got shit on me, fool." So the cop thought, "Oh yeah? Lets see what 8 rounds of lead got on ya." So he shot him out of anger and hatred. He's just another American citizen with a gun who lost his cool. Now someone is dead.

You got a whole narrative made up about this haha.

 

[emperus]

The GoFundMe thing isn't a big deal. They clearly show in their terms and conditions:



http://www.gofundme.com/terms

Not sure I agree with them doing this. Not saying I oppose it either. One concern of mine would be who decides whose cause is just pre trial? But I can also see a flip side where people would do clearly heinous things and set up a page to solicit donations from like minded nuts.

 

[Blackjack200]

In other words you would rather have the taxpayers fund this guys defense because you believe he will have a better chance of getting convicted due to incompetent council. I on the other hand would prefer that the guy pay for his defense using GoFundMe, save the taxpayers a few dollars, get a good lawyer with a result less likely to overturned.

I'm not sure how you got that out of "The cop is entitled to competent legal counsel, and I don't see anyone suggesting that he shouldn't get it."

Compentent legal counsel doesn't mean the best legal counsel money can buy.

I support the provision of competent counsel for any indigent accused. If the officer is indigent, he should be provided competent counsel. If the officer is not indigent, he is free to hire whatever lawyer his budget allows.

I do not support any fund raising for a man that shot another man in the back as he tried to flee.

I would like to see the cop just plead guilty ,admit he made a poor decision in a somewhat stressful situation ,avoid a trial completely, accept whatever sentence the judge gives him.
-saves the taxpayers and the system time and money.

That's not how the CJS works. He might plea, but he will get the best deal that he can from the DA and Judge.

GoFundMe should not have shutdown the fund, it should have tolerated it even though it disagrees (as do I) with folks contributing, or the idea of contributing to the policeman's fund. It's very important we protect that right, even if we don't like how it is used in every circumstance. We should not be shutting down what we disagree with (current liberalism has taken on this mutation of thinking though).

Protect what right? GFM did not prevent anyone from doing anything, they simply refused to provide their platform for the benefit of man that shot a fleeing man in the back.

 

[soundforbjt]

He's already on his second lawyer, the one who initially spoke for him quit after the video came out.

 

[touchstone]

He's probably the reason FNC would restrict comments on such articles. Outside agitators think they're clever by stoking racist talk.

Do you really believe that the genesis for
the racism on the FNC website is "outside
agitators"? You must be trolling, even their mundane articles will have a plethora of racist comments, most totally unrelated to the original topic.

Why do people have to downplay the racial factor here? Yes, white people ARE brutalized by police and we DO face the same police state, but black people are ALSO unfairly targeted more than white people. Both problems can exist at the same time.

 

[Blackjack200]

One concern of mine would be who decides whose cause is just pre trial?

They do.

 

[bshole]

I'm not sure how you got that out of "The cop is entitled to competent legal counsel, and I don't see anyone suggesting that he shouldn't get it."

I guess you never know heard of a strawman. I created an argument for you that I could easily knock down.

Why do you object to obtaining the best counsel money can buy using a funding site? Why do you even care? I don't get that at all.

Good christ, they got him shooting the man in the back. You really think that good counsel can change that fact? He is going to prison for sure.

 

[Linux23]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/41609247...hooting-in-sc/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips

that was quite interesting.

 

[HTFOff]

He's probably the reason FNC would restrict comments on such articles. Outside agitators think they're clever by stoking racist talk.

Isn't he the fool who made the blackspidey account?

:\

 

[Attic]

Protect what right? GFM did not prevent anyone from doing anything, they simply refused to provide their platform for the benefit of man that shot a fleeing man in the back.

They prevented people from donating to the GoFundMe account that was setup for this police officer.

Whether you or I, or the GFM thinks this guy should get support or not, the reality is that GoFundMe is used as a platform to generate funds to support causes.

We do not have all the information in this case. The policeman should be able to secure funds without GFM shutting it down. The policeman is not guilty yet.

That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.

-Benjamin Franklin

This means you have to protect everyone the same (even the guilty ones), GoFundMe pulling their platform from the officer because of perceived guilt is the wrong way to do this and what they are doing will ultimately harm the innocent. Buying into the furvor of the day is bad; apply the platform equally and let folks decide. The fund is not raising funds for bombs, it's for legal defense.



We should be intelligent enough to think about GoFundMe's action's independently of the guilt and or innocence of the officer.

 

[umbrella39]

Actually their TOS is pretty clear:

"campaigns in defense of formal charges of heinous crimes, including violent, hateful, or sexual acts are prohibited."

Seems that they, rightfully, don't want their platform associated with cases such as this regardless of guilt or innocence that very clearly cannot be determined until after a court case. They are NOT in the business of judging court cases, hence their Terms to not allow any defense funds for formal charges of heinous crimes.

This has nothing to do with "perceived guilt".

Get over it Set up your own similar type of site and create your own TOS if you disagree with theirs...

 

[Attic]

Actually their TOS is pretty clear:

"campaigns in defense of formal charges of heinous crimes, including violent, hateful, or sexual acts" are prohibited."

Seems that they, rightfully, don't want their platform associated with cases such as this regardless of guilt that very clearly cannot be determined until after a court case. This has nothing to do with "perceived guilt". Get over it Set up your own similar type of site and create your own TOS.

What they are engaging in, and you are now defending, ultimately harms the innocent. Not something to take lightly or simply "get over".


Heinous crimes appears to be a subjective issue here. We do not have all the information on what occurred yet. Voluntary Manslaughter = Henious? Perhaps, but we can all cut to the chase and realize what GFM is doing, catering to the furvor of the day.


From what I see the officer is guilty, but i'm not comprised by my perception of his guilt like a lot of the knuckleheads following this. I wouldn't worry about me.

 

[umbrella39]

I am only defending their right to set up an online business and have a clear cut TOS that does not discriminate against or take away anyone's rights. No one has a right to an online defense fund on their website. This isn't a brick and mortar denying service to protected classes based on religious beliefs of the compay. This is their website, their servers, their TOS. They are not refusing service because someone is gay, black, whatever.

What they are saying is that they are not the courts and don't want to engage in the business of helping someone, anyone charged with crimes such as the ones spelled out in their TOS. Due to the fact that their severs, their website MIGHT be used to aid of in the financial defense of someone, anyone who MIGHT end up guilty, they simply do not allow it regardless of perceived guilt, not because of it as you are suggesting.

This has nothing to do with them judging cases online or the court of public opinion... this has to do with their name never being allowed to be used in this light.

And yes, even Manslaughter falls under their TOS which clearly states they don't allow funds for defendants charged with "violent" crimes.

If I were part of a business such as Go Fund Me, I am sure our TOS would mirror this one exactly and might even go so far as to include any and all charges brought by police.

 

[emperus]

Actually their TOS is pretty clear:

"campaigns in defense of formal charges of heinous crimes, including violent, hateful, or sexual acts are prohibited."

Seems that they, rightfully, don't want their platform associated with cases such as this regardless of guilt or innocence that very clearly cannot be determined until after a court case. They are NOT in the business of judging court cases, hence their Terms to not allow any defense funds for formal charges of heinous crimes.

This has nothing to do with "perceived guilt".

Get over it Set up your own similar type of site and create your own TOS if you disagree with theirs...

I guess that makes sense. As long as they are uniformly denying everyone who fits in that category.

 

[Attic]

If I were part of a business such as Go Fund Me, I am sure our TOS would mirror this one exactly and might even go so far as to include any and all charges brought by police.

Bolded would be required for me to stand behind you on these matters.

The seriousness of the allegations can not be used to determine the path to follow on matters dealing with one's approach or ability to gain legal defense. Yet this is exactly what GoFundMe is currently using to determine whether one can set up legal defense on their site or not.

The path for defense needs to be independent of the allegations/charges. GoFundMe support for legal defense - allow it all or deny it all. Otherwise there is a clear issue here.

 

[CU]

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/...to-shut-down-ravenel-bridge-eastbound-at-4-pm

Looks like some protesters will try to cause some traffic problems today. 15 people plan to block four lanes of traffic with their four cars. But, they don't want to get arrested. Seems like you wouldn't protest in the middle of a busy road, a major bridge none the less, if you didn't want to get arrested. Because you are risking arrest by doing it.

 

[Oyeve]

This bacon mofo is doomed.

 

[rudeguy]

This bacon mofo is doomed.

Yea...he's going to plead out on this one. Otherwise prosecutors can throw a million more charges on and he would never get out. I say he pleads to manslaughter or murder 2 and serves less than 20 years.

I'm ok with that though. Every single day in prison is going to be hell for him. I like that.

 

[CU]

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/...to-shut-down-ravenel-bridge-eastbound-at-4-pm

Looks like some protesters will try to cause some traffic problems today. 15 people plan to block four lanes of traffic with their four cars. But, they don't want to get arrested. Seems like you wouldn't protest in the middle of a busy road, a major bridge none the less, if you didn't want to get arrested. Because you are risking arrest by doing it.

Well, now the same lady who said there would be a protest says it is not longer relevant and that there was a leak. I guess they didn't want everyone to know when and where they were going to block traffic. Probably best not to tell the press then.

 

[LTC8K6]

The Taser lands about 4-5 feet behind Slager. It's clearly visible.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/...les/2015/04/08/scott_family_10941106_01_0.jpg

Taser wires are coming from behind Slager where the taser has fallen, going over his arm, and down to Scott, still attached to Scott. Slager has his pistol in his hands.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_c...quence_02_stroke_yellow_jc_150408_4x3_992.jpg

Slager returns to Taser and picks it up. Same spot as in the first pic.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_walter_scott_shooting_video_new_02_jc_150409_4x3_992.jpg

Slager drops Taser near Scott.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_walter_scott_shooting_video_new_01_jc_150409_4x3_992.jpg

 

[LTC8K6]

The drop is right in front of the other officer.

 

[Ns1]

The Taser lands about 4-5 feet behind Slager. It's clearly visible.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/...les/2015/04/08/scott_family_10941106_01_0.jpg

Taser wires are coming from behind Slager where the taser has fallen, going over his arm, and down to Scott, still attached to Scott. Slager has his pistol in his hands.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_c...quence_02_stroke_yellow_jc_150408_4x3_992.jpg

Slager returns to Taser and picks it up. Same spot as in the first pic.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_walter_scott_shooting_video_new_02_jc_150409_4x3_992.jpg

Slager drops Taser near Scott.

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_walter_scott_shooting_video_new_01_jc_150409_4x3_992.jpg

that's some CSI zoom enhance stuff right there.