SC - Walter Scott, 50, fatally shot by North Charleston PD officer, 4 April 2015 - #1

[mysteriew]

A public servant does not mean anyone can physically assault them, either. I'm pretty sure Officer Slager didn't gun down Scott just because he was fleeing. I think he was shot because he assaulted Officer Slager and resisted arrest. Slager stopped him with gunshots after Scott physically fought with him on the ground, got up, kept fleeing and the taser was ineffective. Nobody is entitled to rewrite the facts of this case just to fit with their anti-cop agenda.

No police officer that I have ever encountered has ever given me the slightest impression it is okay for me to put my hands on them and scuffle with them on the ground.

JMO

When was he placed under arrest and what for?

As far as I have heard he was stopped for a tail light violation. You don't usually get arrested for that, you get a ticket.
There has been conjecture that maybe the officer suspected a stolen car because he didn't have paperwork for it.
But the officer didn't have enough info at the time to determine that Scott stole it.
There has been conjecture that Scott may have thought there was a warrant for his arrest due to
child support issues, but we have never heard that there was an actual warrant.

So was he arrested? What for?

 

[MyBelle]

Within the North Charleston Police Department, there was hardly the typical closing of ranks around Slager. "I have watched the video," Police Chief Eddie Driggers said on Wednesday. "And I was sickened by what I saw. And I have not watched it since."

There has been a carefully crafted PR strategy put into play to avoid another Ferguson meltdown. The city will distance themselves and put it all on a grand jury.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

When was he placed under arrest and what for?

As far as I have heard he was stopped for a tail light violation. You don't usually get arrested for that, you get a ticket.
There has been conjecture that maybe the officer suspected a stolen car because he didn't have paperwork for it.
But the officer didn't have enough info at the time to determine that Scott stole it.
There has been conjecture that Scott may have thought there was a warrant for his arrest due to
child support issues, but we have never heard that there was an actual warrant.

So was he arrested? What for?

An Officer can detain during a traffic stop in order to further investigate. If you read the news stories you will find that the passenger in Scott's car was placed in the back seat of a squad car.

JMO

 

[Woodland]

A public servant does not mean anyone can physically assault them, either. I'm pretty sure Officer Slager didn't gun down Scott just because he was fleeing. I think he was shot because he assaulted Officer Slager and resisted arrest. Slager stopped him with gunshots after Scott physically fought with him on the ground, got up, kept fleeing and the taser was ineffective. Nobody is entitled to rewrite the facts of this case just to fit with their anti-cop agenda.

No police officer that I have ever encountered has ever given me the slightest impression it is okay for me to put my hands on them and scuffle with them on the ground.

JMO

BBM

I'm under the impression fleeing is exactly why former officer Slager gunned down Scott. The murder charge kinda backs that up, imo.

 

[mysteriew]

April 10 post.
.
^link is a summary of one section of a bill SC legislature passed & governor signed in 2006and effective that yr.
"PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ACT "The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine....
H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006."
I'm not sure how castle doctrine is relevant to this case. Maybe it's another part of the same bill?
.
^ summary does not summarize or refer to Section 3 of act, re taking firearms or weapons from LEOs. Here's that section
from http://www.schouse.gov/sess116_2005-2006/bills/4301.htm

"Crimes and offenses, taking firearms or other weapons from law enforcement officers

"SECTION 3. Article 5, Chapter 23, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:"

"Section 16-23-415. An individual who takes a firearm, stun gun, or taser device from the person of a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than five years, or fined not more than five thousand dollars, or both, if all of the following circumstances exist at the time the firearm is taken:
(1) the individual knows or has reason to believe the person from whom the weapon is taken is a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer;
(2) the law enforcement officer or corrections officer is performing his duties as a law enforcement officer or a corrections officer, or the individual's taking of the weapon is directly related to the law enforcement officer's or corrections officer's professional responsibilities;
(3) the individual takes the weapon without consent of the law enforcement officer or corrections officer;
(4) the law enforcement officer is authorized by his employer to carry the weapon in the line of duty; and (5) the law enforcement officer or corrections officer is authorized by his employer to carry the weapon while off duty and has identified himself as a law enforcement officer." bbm

Was poster's point of including link and referencing that bill to show -
in SC, taking firearm, stun gun, or taser from LEO is a felony [paraphrasing & simplifying].
Okay, agreed.
Seems that did happen or may have happened here: Scott took/knocked LEO's taser from LEO's hand or duty belt.

Or - anyone - why does above post reference SC castle doctrine?

LOL I was looking for info relating to self defense in SC since Slager claims he was in fear for for his life. Castle doctrine was
as close as I could find.

 

[Woodland]

An Officer can detain during a traffic stop in order to further investigate. If you read the news stories you will find that the passenger in Scott's car was placed in the back seat of a squad car.

JMO

What is acceptable after detaining? That doesn't result in a murder charge against a cop?

 

[mysteriew]

An Officer can detain during a traffic stop in order to further investigate. If you read the news stories you will find that the passenger in Scott's car was placed in the back seat of a squad car.

JMO

Detaining someone is different than an arrest.

 

[Elley Mae]

When was he placed under arrest and what for?

As far as I have heard he was stopped for a tail light violation. You don't usually get arrested for that, you get a ticket.
There has been conjecture that maybe the officer suspected a stolen car because he didn't have paperwork for it.
But the officer didn't have enough info at the time to determine that Scott stole it.
There has been conjecture that Scott may have thought there was a warrant for his arrest due to
child support issues, but we have never heard that there was an actual warrant.

So was he arrested? What for?

bbm

Walter Scott owed more than $18,000 in child-support payments and had a bench warrant for his arrest when he was fatally shot by a South Carolina police officer, according to court documents obtained by NBC News.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/wa...over-child-support-court-records-show-n339151
2. Bench Warrants

A bench warrant is a form of process issued "from the bench" for the attachment or arrest of a person. Section 17-13-160 requires that all arrest and search warrants be in a form prescribed by the Attorney General. It is the opinion of the Attorney General that bench warrants ". . . not being arrest warrants per se, are not required to be in such form." (1978-79 Op. Atty. Gen. No. 78-179, October 31, 1978).

A bench warrant, regardless of its form, however, may not be used to initiate a criminal action. It is a form of process to be used to bring a defendant back before a particular court on a particular charge for a specific purpose after the court has acquired jurisdiction over the defendant on that particular charge by virtue of a previously served proper charging paper.

Common examples of instances where bench warrants might be issued are: 1) where the defendant, under recognizance, fails to appear; 2) where the defendant, under sentence, fails to properly pay a fine or otherwise comply with the sentence; 3) where the defendant, tried in his/her absence, must now be brought before the court to comply with the sentence and, 4) where a witness, having failed to respond to a subpoena, must now be brought before the court.

It should be noted that §38-53-70 provides that "f a defendant fails to appear at a court proceeding to which he has been summoned, the court must issue a bench warrant for the defendant." Thus, while a bench warrant might be issued to bring the individual back into court to dispose of the original charge, it would be necessary to execute and issue a regular arrest warrant before a bench warrant could be issued for the defendant.

Bench warrants are generally disclosable to the public upon service of the warrant, unless issued in open court, when they should be disclosed upon issuance. (See 8-1-89 Op. Atty. Gen.).

http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/summaryCourtBenchBook/HTML/CriminalC.htm

 

[MyBelle]

Even with that there is gray area. Think of halloween and your kids or grandkids decide to tp the neighbors yard and soap their windows. I can almost guarentee you they will run if cops show up. According to your scenario the cops would have authority to shoot them.

Wouldn't it make more sense to teach the kids and grandkids not to destroy somebody else's property?

JMO

 

[Bayou Mistress]

Wouldn't it make more sense to teach the kids and grandkids not to destroy somebody else's property?

JMO

Because kids and adults never make a judgement error and the potential penalty for that is getting shot in the back until they're dead. No No NO!! People are not perfect.

 

[Zuri]

Thanks to all of you for your POV and links. My take away is that Mr. Scott did not want to be detained or arrested as he was aware there was a bench warrant out for his arrest. More than likely, Slager tried to detain him, ended up tasing Mr. Scott and Mr. Scott managed to escape the grip of Officer Slager despite being tased.

Should Mr. Scott have resisted arrest? No. Could he have been cooperative? Yes. We're Mr. Scott's intentions to flee to escape being arrested and going to jail? It appears so to me. Was Mr. Scott partially responsible for the chain of events that occurred? IMO Yes. Did Mr. Scott have a reasonable expectation not to be shot in the back as he fled? IMO yes.

Officer Slager could have pursued Mr. Scott on foot further as Mr. Scott ran. He could have waited for backup to assist. Mr. Scott did not appear to have the taser weapon on him nor any weapon for that matter as none seemed to be recovered when the officer frisked him while Mr. Scott lay dead on the ground. Slager chose to use his weapon, IMO not out of fear, but out of anger.

No medical assistance was given to Mr. Scott as he lay face down on the ground. IMO, Mr. Scott's life seemed to mean nothing more than an inconvenience or thought of as a by the officers initially on the scene, including Slager and the first LE to arrive. The second officer, IMO, was operating under the belief that Mr. Scott had tried to harm his fellow officer and no compassion was warranted in that moment.

Sometimes the right thing to do is the hardest thing to do. IMO, this was a classic example of two wrongs not making a right, and it cost Mr. Scott his life. Poor choices on both parts. JMV IMO

 

[Woodland]

bbm

Walter Scott owed more than $18,000 in child-support payments and had a bench warrant for his arrest when he was fatally shot by a South Carolina police officer, according to court documents obtained by NBC News.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/wa...over-child-support-court-records-show-n339151
2. Bench Warrants

A bench warrant is a form of process issued "from the bench" for the attachment or arrest of a person. Section 17-13-160 requires that all arrest and search warrants be in a form prescribed by the Attorney General. It is the opinion of the Attorney General that bench warrants ". . . not being arrest warrants per se, are not required to be in such form." (1978-79 Op. Atty. Gen. No. 78-179, October 31, 1978).

A bench warrant, regardless of its form, however, may not be used to initiate a criminal action. It is a form of process to be used to bring a defendant back before a particular court on a particular charge for a specific purpose after the court has acquired jurisdiction over the defendant on that particular charge by virtue of a previously served proper charging paper.

Common examples of instances where bench warrants might be issued are: 1) where the defendant, under recognizance, fails to appear; 2) where the defendant, under sentence, fails to properly pay a fine or otherwise comply with the sentence; 3) where the defendant, tried in his/her absence, must now be brought before the court to comply with the sentence and, 4) where a witness, having failed to respond to a subpoena, must now be brought before the court.

It should be noted that §38-53-70 provides that "f a defendant fails to appear at a court proceeding to which he has been summoned, the court must issue a bench warrant for the defendant." Thus, while a bench warrant might be issued to bring the individual back into court to dispose of the original charge, it would be necessary to execute and issue a regular arrest warrant before a bench warrant could be issued for the defendant.

Bench warrants are generally disclosable to the public upon service of the warrant, unless issued in open court, when they should be disclosed upon issuance. (See 8-1-89 Op. Atty. Gen.).

http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/summaryCourtBenchBook/HTML/CriminalC.htm

With all due respect - not getting prior history mandating/forgiving being shot in the back - 8 shots with 5 hitting the target (Scott's back) and 3 going astray - endangering others. From where I sit, prior history is for the cop charged with a crime (whether this incident or another) or to validate a cops actions regardless of the law.

It's not making sense imo. Run and be shot in North America by LE? Eastern Europe, North Korea, and anywhere in the Middle East yes, North America though? Geeez, can't believe anyone from North America advocates for cops shooting unarmed people in a car, on foot etc and in the back, based on prior history. I can't bear the thought of giving up my rights to someone with a badge - how do I know what that persons agenda is?

 

[dodie20]

Thanks to all of you for your POV and links. My take away is that Mr. Scott did not want to be detained or arrested as he was aware there was a bench warrant out for his arrest. More than likely, Slager tried to detain him, ended up taking Mr. Scott and Mr. Scott managed to escape the grip of Officer Slager despite being tased.

Should Mr. Scott have resisted arrest? No. Could he have been cooperative? Yes. We're Mr. Scott's intentions to flee to escape being arrested and going to jail? It appears so to me. Was Mr. Scott partially responsible for the chain of events that occurred? IMO Yes. Did Mr. Scott have a reasonable expectation not to be shot in the back as he fled? IMO yes.

Officer Slager could have pursued Mr. Scott on foot further as Mr. Scott ran. He could have waited for backup to assist. Mr. Scott did not appear to have the taser weapon on him nor any weapon for that matter as none seemed to be recovered when the officer frisked him while Mr. Scott lay dead on the ground. Slager chose to use his weapon, IMO not out of fear, but out of anger.

No medical assistance was given to Mr. Scott as he lay face down on the ground. IMO, Mr. Scott's life seemed to mean nothing more than an inconvenience or thought of as a by the officers initially on the scene, including Slager and the first LE to arrive. The second officer, IMO, was operating under the belief that Mr. Scott had tried to harm his fellow officer and no compassion was warranted in that moment.

Sometimes the right thing to do is the hardest thing to do. IMO, this was a classic example of two wrongs not making a right, and it cost Mr. Scott his life. Poor choices on both parts. JMV IMO

What I heard Slager say on the phone was, 'he grabbed my taser' . If Scott did grab the taser but dropped it before running, why did Slager shoot? and if that black thing was the taser, why did Slager later move it? from what I saw, it looked like there might have been a scuffle over the taser but it was either dropped or tossed down, Slager looked down at it, Scott took off running with nothing in his hands, Slager got his gun out, (while an unarmed Scott was still right there), and fired multiple shots. As far as Scott using the taser as a weapon against Slager, I haven't seen or read 1 thing to support this. When I watched, I caught a small glimpse of what looked like taser wire hanging from Scott. (right when he took off to run). So, going by what I heard Slager say on the phone PLUS what I saw on the video, it looks like Slager shot Scott for grabbing HIS taser. That's it. Also, In my opinion, it appeared that Slager didn't put his hand on Scott's neck until an oncoming siren was so loud, you could tell another cop was arriving on the scene-which doesn't look good for Slager because imo, he stood there and did NOTHING for Scott until a backup unit showed up and could see him. moo

 

[Zuri]

Even in the Wild Wild West, people who shot someone else in the back were considered to be a coward. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now. IMO

 

[LietKynes]

Please don't accuse me of making up facts. The two were seen by an eye witness.

On Thursday, Gwen Nichols told CNN's Brian Todd that she saw Scott and Slager scuffling at the entrance to a vacant lot.

http://www.wtae.com/national/walter-scott-to-be-laid-to-rest-saturday/32316148

Reports state Scott attempted to flee, resulting in a foot pursuit. Officer Slager then deployed his Taser weapon to detain the driver but was unsuccessful, a spokesperson for the police department said.

Police say an altercation then began between Slager and Scott resulting in a fight for the officer's Taser. During the fight, Scott allegedly gained control of the Taser to use it against the officer who then fired his service weapon at the suspect
http://raycomgroup.worldnow.com/sto...died-from-multiple-gunshot-wounds-to-the-back

RSBM

So , there is NO video of the fight alluded to by witnesses ? That's too bad, because it would help the investigation.
I am by no means anti-law enforcement ; but if Slager was in the wrong he needs to face the maximum punishment.
Slager is more accountable than Scott was or than we are -- because of his position and authority. He is held to a higher level .
Not saying Scott was a law abiding person, and IF he fought with Slager and rolled around or knocked Slager to the ground ; that was unwise and may have cost him his life.
When a cop stops any of us , he/she does not know what kind of person you are-- an obedient type or a raving lunatic , or somewhere in between.
Also, we don't know if the officer is a mild-mannered type , or possessing a hair trigger temper.

At this point, and seeing Slager try to drop the tazer by Scott, I'm guessing he snapped and lost it. But who knows ? Now we have to let the justice system sort this out.
The scant evidence on the video is all we have to go on.

Not sure what to think of witnesses since their perception of events can be faulty.

One thing out of many that astounded me in the Zimmerman/Martin tragedy was that people commenting (admittedly mostly on (ms)NBC news) seemed to have been right there in person that night ,following either Martins' or Zimmermans' footsteps -- they way they all described how it all went down. Ridiculous.
:moo:

 

[LietKynes]

Would like to think this happens more often than what is in the news these days. Thank-you for the reminder there are good cops out there that do right thing when called upon - sadly they are being overshadowed by the bad cops these days. But then again, good cops cover for there buds as far as reports they didn't see anything and know nothing. Not helpful to the paying public, or the public-cop relationship.

I really liked the viral cop video to a TS song - it was fun and made a person out of cops. More such videos were promised but haven't seen anything. Someone ought to hurry up with that. Jmo.

SABBM

Got a link ?

Have to leave but I'll BBL !

 

[Zuri]

What I heard Slager say on the phone was, 'he grabbed my taser' . If Scott did grab the taser but dropped it before running, why did Slager shoot? and if that black thing was the taser, why did Slager later move it? from what I saw, it looked like there might have been a scuffle over the taser but it was either dropped or tossed down, Slager looked down at it, Scott took off running with nothing in his hands, Slager got his gun out, (while an unarmed Scott was still right there), and fired multiple shots. As far as Scott using the taser as a weapon against Slager, I haven't seen or read 1 thing to support this. When I watched, I caught a small glimpse of what looked like taser wire hanging from Scott. (right when he took off to run). So, going by what I heard Slager say on the phone PLUS what I saw on the video, it looks like Slager shot Scott for grabbing HIS taser. That's it. Also, In my opinion, it appeared that Slager didn't put his hand on Scott's neck until an oncoming siren was so loud, you could tell another cop was arriving on the scene-which doesn't look good for Slager because imo, he stood there and did NOTHING for Scott until a backup unit showed up and could see him. moo

I agree. It looked like the medics were removing taser wire when then were putting combine gauze on his back. There may have been a grab for the taser, or what Slager interpreted as a grab. Maybe it was Mr. Scott trying to knock it out of his hand. I don't know. The video IMO gave us all pause, as it just didn't seem right.

Had Mr. Scott been running with a gun in his hand, turned and fired at Slager, and then turned back around and ran, I could see use of justifiable force in trying to stop Mr. Scott.

 

[dodie20]

Even in the Wild Wild West, people who shot someone else in the back were considered to be a coward. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now. IMO

my step daughter got kicked out of the navy for hitting another female in the back of the head. The navy was completely disgusted with her cowardice and let her have it.

 

[MyBelle]

What is acceptable after detaining? That doesn't result in a murder charge against a cop?

In this case, detaining was never achieved. Mr. Scott resisted being detained, had a physical altercation with a police officer and fled. Because of his actions, I'll be very surprised if this case results in a guilty verdict.

JMO

 

[Woodland]

SABBM

Got a link ?

Have to leave but I'll BBL !

Sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XFBUM8dMqw