Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
POLICE IN SOUTH CAROLINA have released footage taken on a dashcam moments before Walter Scott was gunned down by officer Michael Slager.
The video shows the 50-year-old man being pulled over in a black Mercedes. Slager approaches the vehicle and speaks with Scott.
He asks for the car registration, which Scott says he cannot produce because he says he is buying the car from someone else who still has the paperwork.
When Slager returns to his car, Scott can be seen looking out the door. A few seconds later, he opens the car door again and flees the vehicle.
The chase and shooting cannot be seen. They were caught on camera, however, by a bystander, a crucial piece of evidence which led to Slager’s arrest and charges brought against him.
Scott’s father has revealed that his son may have fled because he owed child support and did not want to go to jail.
Meanwhile, police officer Slager’s mother said the incident was hard to comprehend.
“I can’t imagine him doing something that’s just not like him, it’s not his character. He has a little baby on the way due next month,” she told ABC News.
An online fundraising campaign was launched to support Slager, who has two step-children and whose wife is expecting another child.
A fund on Indiegogo raised more than $1,200 in its first day, with 44 people contributing and said it aimed to reach $5,000.
“Although he may have made missteps in judgment he was protecting the community… please help in any way you can. He has served five years with the department without being disciplined,” the page said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
It’s not the cops job to kill the man before he has his day in court.
There seemed to be 2 people in the guys car.
Were they his children?
This was cold blooded murder.
Maybe its time for a new type of “COPS” “Police Stop” style TV show where it shows bent cops murdering and battering their prey?
They could call it
“What goes on when we turn off the cameras”??
http://www.infowars.com/video-cops-turn-off-camera-before-beating-man/
http://www.infowars.com/apple-granted-patent-to-disable-cameras-according-to-location/
Would this dashcam video have been released if a member
of the public had not recorded the shooting?
Doubt it.
The black man was far from being an ideal citizen. Owed 18,000 in back payments, driving a stolen car and runs from the police. All this murderer cop needs now is a majority white jury.
Wait, the fundraiser is for the cop? Why does he need money? Are we giving charity to murderers now?
When was it proven in a court of law that he is a murderer? Here was me thinking we lived in a society where everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
We don’t live in that society, we live in irish society. As flawed as our own one is. . It’s a lot fairer and equal than America
Even still Karl, the US and Irish justice systems hinge on the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ for very good reasons. What we’re seeing now is people emotively and incorrectly labeling Michael Slager a murderer which is a stigma he’ll never be able to remove from his name even if found innocent of premeditated murder.
@Jason. Pity the same logic was not applied before the cop killed the man.
‘What we’re seeing now is people emotively and incorrectly labelling Michael Slager a murderer’
What label would you put on someone who willing shoots another individual 8 times in the back?
To pay for his legal team I suppose. The police union has said he doesn’t meet the criteria for them to pay for that.
“What label would you put on someone who willing shoots another individual 8 times in the back?”
A police officer who needlessly and recklessly endangered a man’s life by making a terrible judgement call.
Jason he shot an unarmed man in the back running away from him.
Quit talking pc Bull****.
He did murder him, it is plain to see. 8 bullets in to his back.
It wasn’t “a split second decision” as is often the excuse for excessive force.
What is wrong with people like you
@Joanna, WE are not in America…
Jason
If the victim was white would you be talking the same BS.
Stories like this really show a person for what they are.
“What is wrong with people like you”
Yes, that’s a valid question. What is wrong with people who believe in the concept of due process?What is wrong with people who believe that an individual should be found guilty in a court of law before being publicly labelled a murderer?
Maybe you could enlighten me Tom.
“Jason
If the victim was white would you be talking the same BS.
Stories like this really show a person for what they are.”
Yes, I would as I firmly believe that all facts should be shown in a court of law and a decision made there before people should be slapped with the label of ‘murderer’. A concept which seems to be completely lost on the emotive Journal commenters here.
For a person who ridicules others for a lack of critical thinking skills, you of all people should understand the concept of analysing all of the facts before jumping to conclusions.
Because Jason I can believe and trust my eyes.
When I see a man take out a gun and shoot an unarmed man in the back running AWAY from him, I don’t need anyone to tell me what it is or is not.
He decided to shoot him 8 times in the back = mureder, 1st degree, 2nd degree, argue away, but it is murder.
So what is wrong with you ? why do you not want to see or believe what is clear in front of you ??
Reckless? Jesus…. so shot one was ‘doing his job’ , but shot two, shot three, shot four, shot five, shot six, shot seven and FINALLY shot eight – Jason calls reckless.
Technically hes not a murderer (yet anyway) but he sure is a killer. Cold blooded as he shot an unarmed person 8 times in the back.
I think it’s ok to call him a murderer, since we have a video of him murdering a man.
Jason
Did you even watch the video??
It’s an open and shut case. You don’t need critical thinking to see this cops wrong.
Are you posting from the US?
Its hard for me to feel good judging situations like this from the safety of my couch all the way over here in Ireland but I do have family in the NYPD and dread to think of them ever being killed in the line of duty or even having to shoot anybody themselves which I know would haunt them for the rest of their lives. Chest cams are definitely the way forward. They may not be well received and might not even bring down the death toll but at least they may make a crooked cop think twice and a good cop feel a little more justified in their actions. That being said, Social media seems to be doing a great job of showing us a very one sided story. 126 american law enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty in 2014.
Gearoid O’Riada, This is a one sided story. This mans life is over, for what ?
What has statistics got to do with this case ?
What was the urgency that he had to be shot ANYWHERE ?
There’s an online page to support that murdering prik??? It says “he was protecting the community”??? Shooting the community isn’t protecting them??protecting the community from a guy who missed child support payments!! Ffs that country is completely insane.
Non payment of child support an general lack of parental support is a massive problem in that community, now it shouldn’t be punishable by death but it is a serious crime.
I didn’t realise he was found guilty of murder in a court of law already. I still haven’t seen the details of his premeditated plan to go out and kill Walter Scott that day, have the courts kept it secret?
All sarcasm aside, it is incredibly libelous to be declaring that this policeman is a murderer considering the fact that he has yet to stand trial for killing Walter Scott. Even still, criminally negligent manslaughter would be the likely sentence if he is found guilty due to the fact that murder needs premeditation which this case seems to wholly lack.
Well as u say murder needs premeditation maybe this cop was waiting for a day a coloured man ran away from him , so he thought as most cops over there seem to think , I’ll just say he’s a threat cause he’s a criminal ( for missing child support) and shoot him dead in the back as seen on video and get away with it,
Murder does not require premeditation, only an intention to kill or do serious bodily harm.
“maybe this cop was waiting for a day a coloured man ran away from him , so he thought as most cops over there seem to think , I’ll just say he’s a threat cause he’s a criminal ( for missing child support) and shoot him dead in the back as seen on video and get away with it,”
Do you have any evidence to back this up? Otherwise it sounds like a lot of projection and assumption on your part.
All the evidence which has come to light so far indicates that Michael Slager was a good police officer who made one reckless and fatal judgement call which was incorrect rather than a cold-blooded murderer who was just waiting for an opportunity to shoot some black people.
So you’re saying it’s not likely premeditated murder for a white policeman, in deep south USA, to shoot dead an unarmed black man in the back as he runs away, and all captured on video.
Interesting point of view!
“Murder does not require premeditation, only an intention to kill or do serious bodily harm.”
According to US Federal law, the presence of premeditation and malice aforethought is a prerequisite for a murder charge. There is no indication so far of either of these being present.
“So you’re saying it’s not likely premeditated murder for a white policeman, in deep south USA, to shoot dead an unarmed black man in the back as he runs away, and all captured on video.”
Do you have a diary from Michael Slager proving he set out that day to kill a black man? Any previous history of racism on his part during the conduct of his job? Any evidence that he set out a plan that day of how he was going to kill someone?
The shooting itself happening on camera doesn’t prove the existence of premeditation. It proves criminal negligence at the most.
I’d prefer the term killer – I hope that is sensitive enough for you.
Be careful Jason. Not Jumping to conclusions is very unJournalesque.
‘Any previous history of racism on his part during the conduct of his job?’
Look up the case of Mario Givens. Another unarmed black man who was tasered a number of times before being dragged from his house even though he didn’t resist and didn’t match the description of the person they were looking for.
“Look up the case of Mario Givens.”
I did look that case up. No collaborating evidence to prove the allegations against Slager and Givens conveniently waited until this video emerged to begin legal proceedings.
Don’t make stuff up Jason.
18 US Code 1111
“Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree.
Any other murder is murder in the second degree.”
In any case, he’s likely to be prosecuted under state law, not federal law.
O Jason FFS, he shot him 8 times in the back, there was no effort at all to get him in the legs etc so as to immobilise him. Why? because he knew that even injuring someone with gunshots in an incident like this was entirely uncalled for and indefensible. It was shoot to kill, no doubt about it, with an attempt to frame the victim after that – better than letting him escape, better than having to deal with an excessive force claim in court.
“Don’t make stuff up Jason.”
Don’t misrepresent the facts Emily, you quite clearly ignored the next section.
18 US Code 1112
“Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of two kinds:
Voluntary—Upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
Involuntary—In the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, or in the commission in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection, of a lawful act which might produce death.”
‘No collaborating evidence’ ?
The witness to the original crime was on the scene and repeatedly told him that he wasn’t the guy the were looking for. Why would he have bothered going ahead with legal proceedings previously when it was obvious from the fact that his original complaint was closed, without being properly investigated, that he wouldn’t have received a fair hearing.
” there was no effort at all to get him in the legs etc so as to immobilise him. ”
By this statement, I can tell that your experience of shooting comes from Hollywood and that’s about it. I am a competitive shooter and I can assure you that shooting a stationary target the size of a leg or arm is already not an easy proposition with a pistol at that range in a controlled environment. Throw in the fact that the target is moving and the pulse and breathing rate of the officer is elevated and what you have is an impossible shot.
Besides, shooting to incapacitate is not guaranteed to actually incapacitate. A grazing shot to a leg or arm will be painful but will not incapacitate in any way. A shot to the leg can also easily penetrate the arteries in the leg leading to catastrophic blood loss, not to mention a miss would endanger any bystanders as they would experience the full force of that bullet impacting them.
It is standard practice among armed law enforcement officers to aim for centre mass to maximise the chances of scoring a hit and minimise the danger to bystanders.
Jason should be prosecuted for stupidity “Michael Slager was a good police officer who made one reckless and fatal judgement call which was incorrect”
Would it be the same if it was one of your family ?
Andreas Lubitz was a good pilot until he decided to kill everyone on the plane and it is the same because he (slager) was not under attack. He made a decision to kill that man. What other possible scenario is there from putting 8 bullets into a persons back ?
How many seconds does a person need ?
“The witness to the original crime was on the scene and repeatedly told him that he wasn’t the guy the were looking for”
He was the victim of the alleged crime, not a witness. There was nobody else to collaborate his story so it all boiled down to his word against Slagers. Even now the case will likely be thrown out of court due to lack of evidence.
Did you ever hear of correct punctuation?
“Jason should be prosecuted for stupidity”
Straight out the door your first contribution is to insult. This should be fun…
“Would it be the same if it was one of your family ?”
My emotional state would have no bearing on the facts of the case, it’s a non-point.
“Andreas Lubitz was a good pilot until he decided to kill everyone on the plane and it is the same because he (slager) was not under attack.”
Andreas Lubitz had a proven history of mental illness and a wealth of evidence exists to suggest that his actions were entirely premeditated. There is no such evidence against Slager at this time. It’s an inaccurate comparison and wholly incorrect in this case.
“He made a decision to kill that man.”
A split-second decision which is easy to judge in hindsight from the sidelines. Unless you have been put in a similar position, you do not know how you would react.
“What other possible scenario is there from putting 8 bullets into a persons back ?”
Do you honestly think that the only scenario where a police officer could potentially fire on a criminal is in a situation where there is a premeditated intent to kill?
Your points are emotive and wholly lacking in any substance or facts. I would seriously reconsider my arguments before accusing others of “stupidity”.
As a professionally trained shooter and marksman I can tell you that it is NOT that difficult to shoot to incapacitate from the range that the officer was from the suspect. a well placed shot to the thigh or knee would have brought the man down. If he had done this, then he wold not be facing a murder charge.
You for whatever reason are defending the indefensible
“A split-second decision which is easy to judge in hindsight from the sidelines”
Did you look at the shooting ? It was not a split second decision.
How long does it take to decide right or wrong ?
If i’m driving past your house later and one of your family run out in front of me, How long would you like me to take to decide what is the right or wrong thing to do ? How long dos it take ?
You are the one trying to muddy things with split second decision. So although you may like to think you are putting forward a reasonable and intelligent argument, actually you’re not. It’s stupid, plain and simple.
HE WAS UNDER NO THREAT, he made a decision to kill him
“As a professionally trained shooter and marksman”
How many patrol officers are professionally trained marksmen? Those who excel in marksmanship during basic training are usually redirected to specialist teams within the police force rather than assigned to standard patrol duties.
Also I would sincerely like to see you try to hit a target which is 12 cm square moving in a non-linear motion on the first shot.
Jason, if you can’t be bothered to read the section I copied for you or understand the concept of alternate offences, you’re just another grad of the Making It Up As You Go Along School Of Jurisprudence and not worth engaging with. Bye bye.
If they cannot meet a certain shooting standard and are incapable of using a firearm correctly and responsibly, then they should not hold one. Firearms are not toys. They are designed to kill. Would you hand a firearm to a person to let them use without supervision if they had inadequate training?
Jason “How many patrol officers are professionally trained marksmen?”
What was the urgency in shooting him anywhere, please explain to me, because I can’t see it ?
Jason,
Don’t give up. You know you’re right!
It’s just that the rest of us think your position is untenable.
It was a nice attempt at redefining murder above. It’s true of course, that he has not been convicted. But for the video evidence that will convict him, you would have some cause, as it stands, you don’t.
Wow, Jason, you are all over this story defending Slager with very little knowledge of the case. The first case, where he tasered the man who did not match the description, was dismissed because of no corroborating evidence because the police department did not interview ANY of the witnesses. They took Slager’s word for what happened, just as they were doing before the video emerged in the Scott case. This has been reported extensively by local media and ABC so it sounds like you haven’t done much research and/or you have an agenda.
Secondly, there are various degrees of murder charges. Murder one, which can result in the death penalty, is if you can show premeditation. There is also second degree and third degree murder, and manslaughter.
@Philip Walsh I am not going to comment on the rights or wrongs of this case, that is for a jury. What I will say is I have worked in nearly all levels of security in many countries and am very familiar with firearms. So I will state categorically that outside of 15-20ft handguns are notoriously inaccurate and this whole shoot someone in the arm or leg thing is nonsense complete and utter nonsense. This why all training (With the exception of certain special forces, who train for a double head shot) is to shoot centre body mass and continue firing until your target drops Also unlike the movies people may be struck several times before they even register the fact they have been shot
‘There was nobody else to collaborate his story so it all boiled down to his word against Slagers.’
I thought you said you looked into the case? From http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-slager-man-filed-previous-conduct-complaint-article-1.2178669
“Brown, the woman who had made the complaint, saw what transpired — and couldn’t believe Slager didn’t realize he was focusing on the wrong man. Givens stands well over 6 feet, but his brother is just 5-foot-5.
“He looked nothing like the description I gave the officers,” Brown said. “He asked the officer why he was at the house. He did it nicely. The police officer said he wanted him to step outside. Then he asked, ‘Why, why do you want me to step outside?’ Then the officer barged inside and grabbed him.”
Brown said she was appalled by Slager’s use of a Taser. “He was screaming, in pain,” she said of Givens. “He said, ‘You tased me. You tased me. Why?’ It was awful. Terrible. I asked the officer why he tased him and he told me to get back.”
Brown said she kept trying to tell Slager and the other cop that they had the wrong Givens, but they ignored him — and Slager then zapped Givens with the Taser while he was on the ground.
She described Slager as “cocky.”
“It looked like he wanted to hurt him,” she added. “There was no need to tase him. No reason. He was no threat — and we told him he had the wrong man.”
@Francis. I am not doubting your training, but the distance from where the officer appears to fire the first shot is not more than 17 feet. The suspect is directly in front of him and I find it very hard to believe that he could not direct an shot from 17 feet that would not kill. He auotmatically aimed high when he didn’t have to. Anything said to the contrary is is total and utter nonsense. He had no justification in shooting that man to kill.
Jason Culligan !You are either a troll or a complete idiot or just both! This video makes this racist cop a murderer and a liar. Ok!
It’s pretty shocking that you have to pay with your life if you can’t produce tax and insurance.
Agreed. But I don’t run from police when I am stopped !
As well as that the runner knew the cop suspected him of stealing the car. They used to string up people who stole horses in the wild west. Maybe Americans still think of car theft as a capital crime.
Americans also have very relaxed gun laws. While maybe he was guilty of a non violent crime, it didn’t excuse the officer shooting an unarmed man in the back.
Conor, it still doesn’t excuse him being shot. We can’t always justify what the law does.
Never said it did!
You might consider running if you owed almost $20,000 in child support and were driving a (possibly stolen) car with no tax or insurance…
My guess is that if the car was stolen we’d know about it by now. Where’s the indigogo fund for the victims family? Baffling
Well the victim owed $20,000 in child support so…
Conor, you are claiming that had he not run, he wouldn’t have been shot. Which shifts part of the blame to the victim.
Dave, whether or not the car was stolen isn’t that relevant. When he decided to try and escape after being told once to stay in the car he ran knowing the cop thought it might be a stolen car. He had no papers, no ID, admitted he din’t own the car and you can hear the cop challenge him that he had contradicted himself. He knew the cop though it might be stolen so what did he think the cop would then think after he legged it?
Yes that’s right
Judge , jury and executioner.
I saw the other footage. It looks like he tried tasering him and he still ran so then he shot him. Common enough in America to shoot first instead of risk letting them get away. You can see from this dash cam footage that the cop already asked him not to get out of the car. When a cop asks you not to run and you run anyway its going to cause problems. This guy was driving a car that wasn’t his (stolen? Is possibility for cop) its not fit to be driven (tail light) and he has no insurance. There was something on the police computer that the cop could detain him for so he should have been apprehended but he resisted arrest. If he had stayed in the car like the cop asked, he’d still be alive. As a white female, I wouldn’t run from a cop at a traffic stop in America because I know they would made sure they stopped me with whatever force they wanted.
So are you saying it’s ok to shoot an unarmed man as he runs away?
Because this is pretty simple, either it is ok or it’s not. There was no question of any threat to the police officer. The man was running away not towards him and fir that his life is over.
Seems harsh to me.
It certainly is not ok to shoot someone who is fleeing the scene, although to be perfectly honest I don’t think the police officer intentionally sought to shoot someone that day. It seems to me that it was a bad judgement call by a police officer who was incapable of making a wise decision under stress and pressure rather than a willful intent to kill.
The declarations labeling this man a murderer are wholly unjust in my opinion.
I agree Jason. Perfectly summed up.
probably asked for it right? 8 shots in the back – give me a break.
Whether or not he intended to kill when he got up that morning. He certainly did intend to kill when he repeatedly shot this man.
Don’t forget as a police officer he is highly trained in the use of firearms, lethal force and what constitutes a threat.
“Don’t forget as a police officer he is highly trained in the use of firearms”
This is a commonly purported myth that has no basis in reality:
I think it was probably a case of red mist – a moment of madness – rather that a premeditated plan to kill someone. That is not, and has never been, a defence against murder though.
But to be fair, once the black guy ran, the cop absolutely intended to kill him.
He shot him 8 times.
It wasn’t 7 warning shots and one unlucky shot in the back, it was 8 bullets in the back.
He made the snap decision to murder him and also, lets not forget, plant a Taser on the body.
Yes, it was a snap decision, that’s my point Andy. A snap decision in the heat of the moment following a scuffle, with probably a lot of adrenalin involved and the red mist descending. That doesn’t justify it in any way, and I’m sure the cop himself is still struggling to believe/understand what happened. One moment of madness can cost a life and last a lifetime, as I’m sure many murderers with time on their hands in jail know well.
I don’t know…
If me and you got into some insane argument and one of us hit the other with a blunt object or something to that affect, I think your ‘red mist’ argument would stand up.
But the cop drew his gun and shot the guy 8 times and then almost immediately planted a weapon next to the body.
There is blind rage and then there is cold calculating logic, I think this cop falls into the second camp.
Yeah! such a bloody fool, Culligan
He had a warrant out for non payment of child support, silly excuse to run. Still no excuse for what the cop did, it was cold blooded murder. He’s getting life without parole or the death sentence. How I wish we had those options in this country.
It’s a very good reason to run in the US. Being caught could very well mean a felony conviction, imprisonment, consequent loss of the ability to earn a living and a host of other stuff like confiscation of your driving licence and passport. Makes the routine injustice in the Irish family courts look like the second coming of Solomon.
Well Emily I’ll give one very good reason not to run ! Don’t run because the U.S. Cops r trigger happy , so would prefer to have a felony , future earnings affected , R prefer to b dead ?y would anyone in the states risk their life like that , well those with not lookin at serious time any way, how many stories do we c like this. And the way the cop tried to set him up after murdering him , imagine how many times this has happened and wasn’t recorded
But even if you don’t run, they still kill you with their choke holds #ericgarner ‘I can’t breathe’ !! It’s a Police state, simple. Thank God for Irish cops
Rolo, that’s a stupid comment. The situation in the US is completely different from here. Ordinary citizens are armed. Crime is a major problem and as a result the mass bulk of law abiding citizens want cops who play tough. The dead man was extremely foolish. You simply don’t run from a cop, especially if you think he suspects you have just stolen a car, have no licence and no car insurance.
And are black, right William?
Daniel, more brownish. Colour is irrelevant. No one in the US runs from an armed cop who thinks they’ve stolen a car unless they’re bonkers.
what worries me is how the cop lifted the tazer gun from its original position & placed it beside the dead man.
What do the community want rid of black people ? Is that how he was helping ?
Did you even read the article? The group which is campaigning to fund Michael Slager’s legal fees quite clearly stated that this was an albiet significant bad judgement call in what was otherwise an impeccable record.
‘an impeccable record’
Is that why they’re re-opening a complaint against him where he tasered a man for no reason before dragging him from his house?
The police aren’t re-opening a complaint against Slager, the person who was the alleged victim has decided to sue only now when this video of Slager has emerged.
The police dismissed the investigation due to the fact that it was the argument of one person against another. There was no collaborating evidence.
Jason as you’re so hot on justice and the technicalities, you might at least get the terms right. It’s corroboration, not collaboration!
I don’t think its ok but it America it is common place. You’d be mad to flee the scene in America. If it turned out the man shot was wanted for murder this cop would be getting a medal most likely.
@jason ….. look up the article …….. it was the events that led up to the incident that shows up this policeman for what he is ….. a bully ……. stop trying to defend the indefensible …….
Seemed like a pretty routine traffic stop to me – he seemed to be pretty courteous overall, I certainly couldn’t see anything which could be called bullying. That’s not to defend what happened afterwards though.
@Jason .This policeman did not have an impeccable record as you claim. A couple of weeks before this incident he tasered another guy when he came looking for the guys brother at his parents house. The guy complained to the police dept but, as usual, police investigating police, found nothing wrong with the policemans actions as he ‘percieved himseld to be in danger’ ……
Are you honestly surprised that a man complained when a police officer tasered him? I’m sure every person who has ever been tasered in their life has complained about it happening.
The man was shot as he ran away , the cop should have left him run then picked him up later with support .
If he was a wanted felon with a history of being armed and dangerous the cop might have been fearful but he had no reason to shoot him while he fled ,by fleeing he was taking what ever threat the cop percieved with him , this will make for a very interesting court case.
RIP Walter Scott .
The man was shot in the back, how can that not be murder?. What perceived danger could there have been by the police officer when the man is running away from him?
Walter Scott had three children and was formerly an enlisted man – part of the US Coast Guard.
Correct and he had been honourably discharged with an impeccable record.
… and wasn’t paying child support. His parents claim that’s why he ran away.
Which was the wrong thing to do, but ended up being shot and killed by his non-violent behaviour.
In America not paying child support (maintenance) is a criminal offence. Also in many states they can revoke your driving license on top of putting you in jail. Neither of which makes any sense as if you are already having a hard time paying how does putting you in jail for months which will get you sacked and then taking away your primary means of transportation to and from any new work help you get the money you owe?
I don’t know why the cops even need to chase these people. He had the driver licence,they he had the address. The man has to go home some time. It is totally ‘over-kill’, literally, for all that to happen because a break light was not working!!!
I thought he DIDN’T have a licence. He had no insurance, no paperwork. He admitted he didn’t own the car. He could be anyone and could have stolen the car. If he got away the cop had no way of ever finding out who he was.
Before the cop shot him, did he call on him to stop btw?
You thought wrong! Yes he could have been anyone but that’s why the cop took his drivers licence and was i suspect, about to run his name through some system to check if there was anything on him. There was also a passenger in the car and if the car was stolen surely that passenger would have been guilty too but that didn’t seem to interest the cop, he was more interested in chasing a man. Maybe that is what they are supposed to do if someone runs but I question the sense of that. Like I said, the man had to go home some time.
William, are you actually condoning the actions of the police officer?
No use of minimum force, 8 shots fired backs that up. The suspect was unarmed and can hardly have been described as a threat. No warning shot either.
Philip, no I’m not condoning the actions of the cop. Two lives + friends and relations have been ruined by a guy who should have stayed put in the car as he was told by an officer of the law. With what we know the cop will at worst be found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to a few years in jail. Cops pull over millions of people every year, many are armed, many are criminals. This time the cop screwed up badly. However, the event was triggered by Scott.
I can’t see how anyone can defend this incident. Bad enough to shoot someone in the back eight times but then to ask the man you’ve just shot to put his arms behind his back and cuff him! Incredible! What was this police officer thinking.
And by the way, getting through five years of policing without being disciplined is nothing to be proud of. In view of the previous investigation into his trying to arrest the wrong man and the police closing ranks to protect him, I think he got lucky there.
This guy was in and out of jail for years because he never paid child support, plus he was driving a car with no tax or insurance. You know he would have run from the scene of any accident as he was terrified of going BACK to jail.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-falling-behind-child-support-can-end-jail
Obviously it doesn’t justify anything that happened, but he wasn’t some innocent man.
Spare a thought for his kids, because he never did.,
Cool song. Everlast – what its like. About showing your fellow man a bit of empathy.
He shot him in the back multiple times in cold blood,handcuffed him ,then tried to frame him by placing the tazer beside the victim.
have your say