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

[Elley Mae]

In my first post, I said that even if Scott was going for the taser the officer should have known it was not a threat, because the officer had already activated the taser and the electrodes were in the suspect. If the taser was able to be used again, at that point the suspect would have been tasering himself even if he got it, so the officer should not have been threatened by that action.

You then replied that I might think differently if I were on the ground with an angry man, and my response is that even then, if I were trained appropriately I would know him going for my taser was not a threat to my safety. And we know that him going for the taser is what the officer was saying was the problem.

Now you are asking if I am a law enforcement officer, and I am not. And I have not been in an altercation like that, but my point is that the officer says Scott was a threat implying that he had to kill him by shooting him in the back as he ran away from the officer, when the officer knew without question that there was no possible threat to his safety even if Scott did grab his taser.

Is that a clear enough explanation?

bbm, I am dumb founded by this, are you saying that it's ok to take items from a policeman's body, taser/cuffs and such and that is NOT a threat to the officer?

 

[KaaBoom]

Passenger in the Mercedes that LEO stopped -- where was s/he when LEO began foot pursuit of Scott?

Was passenger in Mercedes, free to leave? Or sitting in LEO vehicle, free to leave?
What would protocol be re passenger?
Did LE search & cuff passenger in one car or the other before LEO began foot pursuit?
If not, seems like LEO would be wondering if the passenger was going to join Scott in altercation w LEO.

Just wondering.

I believe that dashcam video clearly shows that the passenger was waiting unguarded in Scott's car. Technically I believe the passenger could have left, but chose to stay in the car and cooperated with police.

[video=youtube;MYaYdaFFLoQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYaYdaFFLoQ[/video]

 

[KaaBoom]

What are you talking about? The video being shown everywhere on every station clearly shows him being shot in the back.

I think he is in total denial.

 

[Elley Mae]

I believe that dashcam video clearly shows that the passenger was waiting unguarded in Scott's car. Technically I believe the passenger could have left, but chose to stay in the car and cooperated with police.

[video=youtube;MYaYdaFFLoQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYaYdaFFLoQ[/video]

I for one cannot image being a passenger in a car and the person that is my friend driving gets pulled over and as the officer walks back to the patrol car the driver bolts. I mean honestly, can you imagine? I don't live in beverly hills or shop on rodeo dr. but I sure as he77 don't have a friend that would bolt from a car on a traffic stop. There are different people in this world and this is why there are policemen. I for one am very thankful for that. jmo idk

 

[KEVINinTO]

I saw an interesting analysis of the video on a blog that I cannot link to but I will summarize. In the below screen grab notice that as the officer raises his firearm (Glock?) to shoot Scott we can see a taser wire emanating from the officers upper chest area. What this strongly suggests to me is that the officer NOT Scott - was struck by the taser. Perhaps the taser cartridge got wrapped around Scott's leg which is why we see this wire stretching from the officer to Scott.

As you look at this screen grab remember the officer is not holding a Taser but a firearm so why do we see a taser wire running from the officers upper chest area towards Scott? The only explanation is Scott fired the taser at the officer (probably the probes did not lodge). If in fact this is what happened (and I cannot think of any other explanation) officer Slager was more than justified in using deadly force against Scott!

http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1428523813820.png

 

[Sonya610]

I for one cannot image being a passenger in a car and the person that is my friend driving gets pulled over and as the officer walks back to the patrol car the driver bolts. I mean honestly, can you imagine? I don't live in beverly hills or shop on rodeo dr. but I sure as he77 don't have a friend that would bolt from a car on a traffic stop. There are different people in this world and this is why there are policemen. I for one am very thankful for that. jmo idk

I think some folks are more "comfortable" with the idea of hanging out and driving around with folks that may have open warrants.

I personally would have freaked out big time if I was in a car with a friend and then the friend takes off running at a traffic stop. I would imagine the worse (drugs or body in the car and now I take the blame etc...).

 

[Elley Mae]

Curious? Has it been reported that the car is/was in walter scott's name or was it still in his neighbor's name. Just wondering since he ran from the car I am thinking that the car is/was still in the neighbors name. I mean if it was in his name didn't he think about them finding him?

Life was looking up for Walter Scott. The 50-year-old father of four, who had gotten a job with a trucking supply company about nine months ago, had just proposed to his girlfriend and bought a car.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...harges-against-a-cop-in-north-charleston-s-c/

Scott was stopped on April 4 for driving with a broken tail light and eventually ran from the officer. Scott was driving a 1991 Mercedes that he bought from a neighbor and was headed to an auto parts store that morning, his brother Rodney Scott said.

Rodney Scott said his brother would take long detours while driving to their parents' house because he thought there were more police patrolling the direct, 10-minute route from his home. He said Walter also tried to make sure any vehicle he drove had working headlights and taillights.


He knew he was wanted. jmo

 

[Woodland]

I saw an interesting analysis of the video on a blog that I cannot link to but I will summarize. In the below screen grab notice that as the officer raises his firearm (Glock?) to shoot Scott we can see a taser wire emanating from the officers upper chest area. What this strongly suggests to me is that the officer NOT Scott - was struck by the taser. Perhaps the taser cartridge got wrapped around Scott's leg which is why we see this wire stretching from the officer to Scott.

As you look at this screen grab remember the officer is not holding a Taser but a firearm so why do we see a taser wire running from the officers upper chest area towards Scott? The only explanation is Scott fired the taser at the officer (probably the probes did not lodge). If in fact this is what happened (and I cannot think of any other explanation) officer Slager was more than justified in using deadly force against Scott!

http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1428523813820.png

What appears to be a wire in this shot is too high imo to be coming from former officer Slager's chest. It looks more like it is wrapped around his wrist or forearm to me.

 

[jjenny]

What are you talking about? The video being shown everywhere on every station clearly shows him being shot in the back.

And from a large distance, as he was running away as fast as he could.

 

[jjenny]

What difference does it make if the altercation was recorded or not? Scott was SHOT IN THE BACK. He wasn't shot during the altercation. There is enough clearly unedited video that shows that when he was shot, he presented no threat to the officer.

And his autopsy shows four bullets in his back.

 

[jjenny]

He knew he was wanted. jmo

I think it's obvious he knew he was wanted. Which is why he took off running. But at that time police had his car, his passenger, they knew who he was. Even if he run away from the officer, they could have arrested him later.

 

[Elley Mae]

Mr. Stewart said the coroner had told him that Mr. Scott was struck five times — three times in the back, once in the upper buttocks and once in the ear

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/u...ged-with-murder-in-black-mans-death.html?_r=0

bbm

 

[Elley Mae]

I think it's obvious he knew he was wanted. Which is why he took off running. But at that time police had his car, his passenger, they knew who he was. Even if he run away from the officer, they could have arrested him later.

I am not convinced that the car was in walter scotts name, I know that is what is being said but I have not seen it yet.

 

[popsicle]

[h=1]Among the thousands of fatal shootings at the hands of police since 2005, only 54 officers have been charged, a Post analysis found. Most were cleared or acquitted in the cases that have been resolved.[/h]http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/04/11/thousands-dead-few-prosecuted/?tid=sm_tw

 

[Elley Mae]

Slager is then seen walking up to Scott's car, asking him for his driver's license and registration, and tells him that he was pulled over because a brake light is out.

Scott says that he is in the process of buying the car from a neighbor and does not have insurance for the vehicle.

http://www.wyff4.com/news/sled-police-officer-charged-with-murder/32239980

bbm Figured as much.jmo

 

[jjenny]

Slager is then seen walking up to Scott's car, asking him for his driver's license and registration, and tells him that he was pulled over because a brake light is out.

Scott says that he is in the process of buying the car from a neighbor and does not have insurance for the vehicle.

http://www.wyff4.com/news/sled-police-officer-charged-with-murder/32239980

bbm Figured as much.jmo

And the significance of that would be what, exactly? Police officer knew who Scott was since Scott gave him his driver's license.

 

[Ray_of_hope]

His story is inconsistent with the other witness who said she also saw the scuffle at the entrance to the park and that words were exchanged. It is though Santana has been coached with answers. But not for a minute do I believe his story that he only started the video after the scuffle took place.

I think the video of the scuffle was intentionally edited out because it was favorable to Officer Slager. I'm wondering if any cop saw him taping and asked for the video at the scene and if he refused.

JMO

I believe that the interview on Anderson Cooper clarified this issue. Sanatana stated that he either told the officers at the scene that he had witnessed or videoed it and they told him to remain in place. Anderson asked "So what did you do?" And Santana stated that he left for work and later showed the video to the parents of Mr Scott. They showed the video to their lawyer and then later it was shown to LE.

 

[Ray_of_hope]

Of course. No surprise there....

Disgusting! This ruins his cred IMO. I initially liked Santana and was surprised that he stated "they were on the floor scuffling" and he didn't know anymore initially. I felt he was unbiased. Now I feel that he is simply a tool. A crowd funding site? Again, disgusting!

 

[Elley Mae]

And the significance of that would be what, exactly? Police officer knew who Scott was since Scott gave him his driver's license.

I don't know that it was his license that he handed him. It took him forever to produce what ever it was that he handed him. And as the officer was saying to him did you buy it or are you buying it monday, there was alot of double talk with walter so who knows what he handed him. jmo idk btw it appeared to me that he turned into the auto store because he had lights in his rearview not to get a new light for the car like his brother has insinuated. jmo idk

 

[Woodland]

http://killedbypolice.net/
Interesting stats. Are linked to news articles.

Mind boggling imo.