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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Scott was the one hit with the taser, not the officer.
"Scott was found with at least one stun gun projectile still attached to him, WCSC reported."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mayor-s...d-with-murder-in-shooting-after-traffic-stop/

Thank you for posting this.


I find the arguments supporting Slager laughable. I mean come on here, we have an officer who can't identify the number of brake lights out on a vehicle he pulls over for a traffic stop AND he can't identify whether or not he has been shot with the taser. If both were true, why wouldn't he 1) have stated to Scott he had no working brake lights instead of mentioning only the third brake light and 2)Stated over the radio he had been shot with his taser rather than Scott grabbed his taser. It can't be both ways, the guy can't be dumb enough to not find a prize in a cracker jack box versus having a PHD when determining what is legal deadly force.
 
It was a traffic stop, why are you referring to Scott a "suspect"? He wasn't being arrested.


IMO as soon as someone runs during a routine traffic stop over break lights they become a suspect. No adult would run if they did not fear they would be arrested for another offense.
 
IMO as soon as someone runs during a routine traffic stop over break lights they become a suspect. No adult would run if they did not fear they would be arrested for another offense.

You asked how Slager could have handled the stop different to prevent the suspect from acting feloniously. It reads as though Scott was a suspect before he ran.
 
You asked how Slager could have handled the stop different to prevent the suspect from acting feloniously. It reads as though Scott was a suspect before he ran.

I did not ask that. You must be confusing different posts.
 
just wanted to add that Mr. Santana did NOT start a fund for himself. It was started by someone that he does not even know. You can see the name and the org. that this person supposedly represents on the FB page.
 
What seems to be easily forgotten by some is the fact that the Officer has only been charged, has not been indicted and is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

JMO
 
What seems to be easily forgotten by some is the fact that the Officer has only been charged, has not been indicted and is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

JMO

BBM in court. We aren't a jury. ;)

Honestly, I can't understand the opposite stance. The video plainly shows the man standing squared off shooting a feeling man in the back multiple times. What is there to disprove this as being murder? I'm not seeing it, but if anyone has any links to show it's justified, please share.
 
And yet, it seems to be very easily forgotten. Also, the former officer has been charged with murder. Not manslaughter, not illegal use of force.

Murder.
yes, and since child support seems to be such an issue, let's remember that Slager is not supporting his child. The city is picking up the tab, at least for now...moo
 
What seems to be easily forgotten by some is the fact that the Officer has only been charged, has not been indicted and is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

JMO

I have not forgotten that. The charges against him coupled with the information available to us at this time make the former LEO the ONLY suspect in the murder of Walter Scott.
 
People are responsible for child support whether they were married or not. The child still exists, so they owe support. One doesn't get a pass just because they're not married to the other parent.

Forgive me if this is addressed later in the thread (haven't read the whole thread bc I was following the Arias sentencing),
but why did Mr. Scott owe so much child support, $18,000? Three of his children are in their twenties, only one still a minor at sixteen. My son's child support agreement ended when he turned eighteen. Surely he could have negotiated that amount down several years ago!
 
Very simple, actually. When Scott run away, he could have either run after him on foot, or waited for back up.
Or considering he had Scott's driver's license, they could have arrested Scott later.
I don't see how shooting Scott in the back was justified under the circumstances.

Exactly, or better yet they had his friend still sitting in the car. They could have asked him, to go ask Scott to come back and talk to them and get his license and car back. If that didn't work they could have gone and asked his mother to talk to him. More then likely after he calmed down, he would have turned himself in. Then the problem would be solved, and the lazy cops wouldn't even have to go chase him.

It's just a brake light charge. No need to kill a guy for it.
 
Forgive me if this is addressed later in the thread (haven't read the whole thread bc I was following the Arias sentencing),
but why did Mr. Scott owe so much child support, $18,000? Three of his children are in their twenties, only one still a minor at sixteen. My son's child support agreement ended when he turned eighteen. Surely he could have negotiated that amount down several years ago!


IDK, honestly, but I would imagine he was in arrears quite a bit and still owes for non-payment from when the now-adult kiddos were still minors.

Just a guess.
 
I would like to hear how Slager (or whatever his name is, the cop) could have handled the stop differently to prevent the suspect from acting feloniously in this situation. I saw nothing to justify Scott's reaction.

Your question is loaded. The only felony committed was by the cop.
 
I think he's owed child support for several years. The amount, sometimes including back support, adds up quickly, even if it's only been a few years. Just one year at $400 per month is 4,800.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
4,197
Total visitors
4,279

Forum statistics

Threads
592,400
Messages
17,968,411
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top