Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
In The Zone

Another killing at the hands of the Police

Recommended Posts

How about a review of the races of those pulled over for "broken tail lights" AKA DWB? Is that really the most pressing issue in that city? Are they busting people for jaywalking and other innocuous "crimes". That is the issue in the white cop vs black man and we have to press police departments to clean out those lazy officers who use these loose laws for fishing trips in minority communities.

I drive through North Charleston every evening on my way to work. I've been pulled over twice by North Charleston police for burned out tail lights. Once the officer flat out told me he pulled me over because I was pulling into a gas station with a large number of complaints of drug deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have we figured out what this latest ''Thug'' was doing his whole life that will say whether or not he deserved to be shot to death while unarmed?

Settle down, Beavis.As far as I know, he's a Coast Guard vet and a father. If his past includes thuggish behavior, it is a moot point. He was obviously gunned down in cold blood, period.
oh you dont think pics will start popping up showing this poor guy in a bad light? whether holding a gun or flashing a gang sign? C`mon man it happens every single time ...its disgusting when it happens and im positive it will happen here
Give us some past examples of the main stream media doing this.
Michael Brown comes to mind. And the below was repeatedly mentioned by Darren Wilson supporters in the St. Louis thread as proof that Brown was a thug:BREAKING: Fergusons Michael Brown PICTURED Flashing GANG SIGNShttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-michael-brown-was-a-local-gangster-seen-flashing-gang-signs/

Did you read the part that his family released the photo? Give us more examples to support this.

stop being a yahoo cripes with eric garner the wall street journal and newsmax somehow got his not public criminal past and ran stories about his criminal past like that had something to do with him being choked to death its nice you are fishing but do it somewhere else brohan

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have we figured out what this latest ''Thug'' was doing his whole life that will say whether or not he deserved to be shot to death while unarmed?

Settle down, Beavis.As far as I know, he's a Coast Guard vet and a father. If his past includes thuggish behavior, it is a moot point. He was obviously gunned down in cold blood, period.
oh you dont think pics will start popping up showing this poor guy in a bad light? whether holding a gun or flashing a gang sign? C`mon man it happens every single time ...its disgusting when it happens and im positive it will happen here
Give us some past examples of the main stream media doing this.
Michael Brown comes to mind. And the below was repeatedly mentioned by Darren Wilson supporters in the St. Louis thread as proof that Brown was a thug:BREAKING: Fergusons Michael Brown PICTURED Flashing GANG SIGNShttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-michael-brown-was-a-local-gangster-seen-flashing-gang-signs/

Did you read the part that his family released the photo? Give us more examples to support this.

stop being a yahoo cripes with eric garner the wall street journal and newsmax somehow got his not public criminal past and ran stories about his criminal past like that had something to do with him being choked to death its nice you are fishing but do it somewhere else brohan

I haven't seen anyone try to portray this man in a bad light. It's a shame he is dead and I hope the cop gets convicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few questions and comments about this... trying to be objective here. We don't know all of the details.

1. What caused the cop to discharge his taser? Because the video shows what looks like the cord of a discharged taser from the onset of the video. You can see the cord uncoiled, but it didn't appear to have struck anyone. The man wouldn't be able to run away if he was struck, would he?
2. Why did the man run away from the cop? And did the cop say anything to the man prior to the video like (back off, stay away or even No!) Ultimately this probably doesn't happen if the man does what the cop says - but what does the cop say? What does the man say to the cop, if anything? We don't even know that.
3. Why shoot the man if he was clearly running away without any visible weapon, reducing any previous fear in each step that he was further away? This is the big question that will or won't ultimately seal the officer's fate.
4. This definitely does not look good for the cop. I'm sure we'll find out more details of this cop's background as a police officer. He appeared to be very nervous during and after the incident.
5. I agree that this is a separate event altogether from other incidents with similar back stories (white cop, black suspect). You can't correlate this with what happenend in other cases.
6. We should view this as cop shoots and kills unarmed, non-violent man, not white cop shoots and kills unarmed, non-violent black man.

These answers are from the local news.

1. In the video the officers says his car is parked at Geralds. Geralds is around the corner from the empty lot where the guy shot. Per the local news the guy tried the flee the scene of the traffic stop and was tased. The guy kept running after getting tased, and the video starts after the police officer caught back up with the guy.

2. The guys brother told the Post and Courier that he was running becuase he was afriad of going back to jail for not paying his child support. The above answer to question 1 is all I've seen on the news.

3. The video is pretty damning for him. There is really no justification that I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Granted.

The officer in this specific case has been indicted for 1st degree murder.

What more do you want at this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have we figured out what this latest ''Thug'' was doing his whole life that will say whether or not he deserved to be shot to death while unarmed?

Settle down, Beavis.As far as I know, he's a Coast Guard vet and a father. If his past includes thuggish behavior, it is a moot point. He was obviously gunned down in cold blood, period.
oh you dont think pics will start popping up showing this poor guy in a bad light? whether holding a gun or flashing a gang sign? C`mon man it happens every single time ...its disgusting when it happens and im positive it will happen here
Give us some past examples of the main stream media doing this.
Michael Brown comes to mind. And the below was repeatedly mentioned by Darren Wilson supporters in the St. Louis thread as proof that Brown was a thug:BREAKING: Fergusons Michael Brown PICTURED Flashing GANG SIGNShttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-michael-brown-was-a-local-gangster-seen-flashing-gang-signs/

Did you read the part that his family released the photo? Give us more examples to support this.

stop being a yahoo cripes with eric garner the wall street journal and newsmax somehow got his not public criminal past and ran stories about his criminal past like that had something to do with him being choked to death its nice you are fishing but do it somewhere else brohan

I haven't seen anyone try to portray this man in a bad light. It's a shame he is dead and I hope the cop gets convicted.

i pray you're right and nobody disparages this poor victim...i just dont have high hopes that it wont happen within a week or so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Granted.

The officer in this specific case has been indicted for 1st degree murder.

What more do you want at this point?

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Don't forget that Tamir Rice's mother might have been involved in some kind of domestic violence, which through some transitive property led to his being shot by a cop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Don't forget that Tamir Rice's mother might have been involved in some kind of domestic violence, which through some transitive property led to his being shot by a cop.

do not tell that to stingerray now he is trying to say he was just talking about this man and no one else which is probably worst backtrack in the history of backtracks take that to the backbank brobackos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the most harrowing shooting videos I've ever seen (the NYC choke hold video was hard to watch, but didn't involve a shooting). Not as bad as the iconic video during the Vietnam War were somebody is shot at point blank range in the side of the head, but he was still basically executed. Hard to see how he doesn't get a murder conviction.

If anybody is familiar with law enforcement training, I'm curious what kind of parameters they are given in extreme cases, before judgement comes into play. I saw a video (police car source?) where one officer pulled over three young looking adult males that may have been in a part of Texas where there is trafficing across the border. He had them exit the vehicle to inspect it, and one lunged at him since his gun wasn't drawn, pinning his arms, and one of the others grabbed it and murdered him in cold blood.

This was not one of those cases. In terms of a continuum, where at one extreme, you are trying to appehend a known serial killer like Ted Bundy and the use of deadly force would seemingly be more appropriate if he tries to run, to prevent him from killing others (I think he did escape from jail once, after which he committed multiple murders at a sorority?). On the other end of the scale, you have a case of a small child, not obviously armed, running away from a jay walking ticket. At some point, it would seem best to just let the person go. As others have noted, other police were in the area. I don't think it was a stolen car, so it isn't like he would be hard to find eventually. Not sure if it has been reported if there were any serious warrants (edit/add - I forgot, but mentioned above, may have been failure to pay child support warrants), but that gets to the heart of my question.

If there were warrants, I'm guessing they are more likely to fire at a running figure getting away if they have violent felon priors (murder, assault with a deadly weapon and armed robbery, especially, not sure about rape). Unpaid parking tickets, not so much. Just wondering about the training, how specific it is or ISN'T and left to judgement, under what circumstances lethal force is considered an appropriate response.

The rule of thumb I am familiar with, seemingly not the case here (running away, not pointing a taser, while he calmly takes aim and fires off eight shots - I counted) is if they feel threatened for their life, because a weapon is drawn on them. I think some police might try to tackle him, but maybe that could lead to losing control of the gun, so unless an extreme case as outlined before (Bundy, gun drawn at you), letting them run and giving the police dragnet the opportunity to apprehend them without killing them would be appear the most advisable, and part of their training?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott did owe back child support — and some have speculated that's why he ran — but he also had minor traffic infractions on his record. South Carolina's Post and Courier reported that Scott had been arrested about 10 times, mostly for failure to appear for court hearings and child support. The paper also said his first arrest was in 1987 for assault and battery, but that could not immediately be confirmed by NBC News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Granted.

The officer in this specific case has been indicted for 1st degree murder.

What more do you want at this point?

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

Uhhh,....what is your point? Not trying to be controversial. Just askin,.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Granted.

The officer in this specific case has been indicted for 1st degree murder.

What more do you want at this point?

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

Uhhh,....what is your point? Not trying to be controversial. Just askin,.

why do the others posting comments on my comments understand what my point is and yet you dont? I dont feel like explaining it again lol...if you care that much just scroll up and figure it out ...or dont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott did owe back child support — and some have speculated that's why he ran — but he also had minor traffic infractions on his record. South Carolina's Post and Courier reported that Scott had been arrested about 10 times, mostly for failure to appear for court hearings and child support. The paper also said his first arrest was in 1987 for assault and battery, but that could not immediately be confirmed by NBC News.

So what?

It doesn't matter why he ran. Justification for deadly force, in this case, seems specious at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Yeah I know. But that's kinda my point. There was some debate over Martin and Brown's actions as to how it may or may not have contributed to their deaths. There's no debate here. Whether or not this guy had a history of being in a gang is about as relevant as whether or not he liked Taylor Swift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott did owe back child support — and some have speculated that's why he ran — but he also had minor traffic infractions on his record. South Carolina's Post and Courier reported that Scott had been arrested about 10 times, mostly for failure to appear for court hearings and child support. The paper also said his first arrest was in 1987 for assault and battery, but that could not immediately be confirmed by NBC News.

The child support thing is relevant in that it informs us as to why he may have ran. That's it. And that has nothing to do with the culpability of the police officer for murdering him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Granted.

The officer in this specific case has been indicted for 1st degree murder.

What more do you want at this point?

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

Uhhh,....what is your point? Not trying to be controversial. Just askin,.

why do the others posting comments on my comments understand what my point is and yet you dont? I dont feel like explaining it again lol...if you care that much just scroll up and figure it out ...or dont

Dunno. You tell me. Scroll up and read my posts. I'm guessing that we, more or less, agree on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And also:

The mayor spoke at the same news conference that was repeatedly interrupted by protesters, who chanted: "No justice! No peace!" They called for Mayor Keith Summey to step down.
That's ######ed. What does the mayor have to do with a cop committing murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.
Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the victim will be shown in a bad light. There's no point. There was no struggle here, there's no room for interpretation. This guy was murdered.

With Michael Brown, his past may have been relevant because the cop was saying he was attacked by him. So you would want to find out more about him, what kind of guy he was.

This guy? He's a pure, 100%, victim. Whether or not he was a bad guy or a good guy is not relevant - he was running away (slowly) from this cop and was murdered.

people do it every time with these high profile cases...treyvon martin was a pot smoking gang member who organized kimbo slice types of fights at school and he was a thief and a pure gangsta...people posted a video of some big black kid beating up some old guy over a back pack ...turns out it wasnt even mike brown...those are the ones i can think of right now

Yeah I know. But that's kinda my point. There was some debate over Martin and Brown's actions as to how it may or may not have contributed to their deaths. There's no debate here. Whether or not this guy had a history of being in a gang is about as relevant as whether or not he liked Taylor Swift.

and i agree 100 % ...this guy shouldnt get the same thug treatment that most blacks get when the cops try to justify a shooting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.
Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.

Imagine you're the officer in this case. The suspect is a good 15 to 20 feet away from you, running in the opposite direction. Would you draw your weapon and shoot 7+ rounds?

Keep in mind that you're out of danger and the suspect isn't a violent felon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.
Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.

Imagine you're the officer in this case. The suspect is a good 15 to 20 feet away from you, running in the opposite direction. Would you draw your weapon and shoot 7+ rounds?

Keep in mind that you're out of danger and the suspect isn't a violent felon.

I have no idea why you're asking me this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.
Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.

Imagine you're the officer in this case. The suspect is a good 15 to 20 feet away from you, running in the opposite direction. Would you draw your weapon and shoot 7+ rounds?

Keep in mind that you're out of danger and the suspect isn't a violent felon.

I have no idea why you're asking me this.

Because I suck at quoting posts when I'm on my phone!

The search engine sucks.

Goin' with that....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.

Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.

Sounds like the bs cover story he was going to use and just stick with it despite the video because he's got nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have we figured out what this latest ''Thug'' was doing his whole life that will say whether or not he deserved to be shot to death while unarmed?

Settle down, Beavis.

As far as I know, he's a Coast Guard vet and a father. If his past includes thuggish behavior, it is a moot point. He was obviously gunned down in cold blood, period.

oh you dont think pics will start popping up showing this poor guy in a bad light? whether holding a gun or flashing a gang sign? C`mon man it happens every single time ...its disgusting when it happens and im positive it will happen here

I think the protocol here is releasing the thugs pics after the middle school ones come out first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have we figured out what this latest ''Thug'' was doing his whole life that will say whether or not he deserved to be shot to death while unarmed?

Settle down, Beavis.

As far as I know, he's a Coast Guard vet and a father. If his past includes thuggish behavior, it is a moot point. He was obviously gunned down in cold blood, period.

oh you dont think pics will start popping up showing this poor guy in a bad light? whether holding a gun or flashing a gang sign? C`mon man it happens every single time ...its disgusting when it happens and im positive it will happen here

I think the protocol here is releasing the thugs pics after the middle school ones come out first.

actually this is fairly accurate...but both sides during these things have an agenda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't know this.

He said there had been a struggle between the two men on the ground before he started recording, and that the officer was in control."He" is the guy who recorded it.

Doesn't change anything, but it's odd that there was a "struggle on the ground" that ended up with the two of them just standing up after.

Sounds like the bs cover story he was going to use and just stick with it despite the video because he's got nothing else.

This account is from the person who filmed the incident, not the cop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott did owe back child support — and some have speculated that's why he ran — but he also had minor traffic infractions on his record. South Carolina's Post and Courier reported that Scott had been arrested about 10 times, mostly for failure to appear for court hearings and child support. The paper also said his first arrest was in 1987 for assault and battery, but that could not immediately be confirmed by NBC News.

The child support thing is relevant in that it informs us as to why he may have ran. That's it. And that has nothing to do with the culpability of the police officer for murdering him.

I've never understood the running thing. Do they somehow think this is going to make their situation better? Even if he didn't get shot. Did he think he was going to get away. He was 50 years old and slow as hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little doubt that the shooter is going down. But it will be interesting to see how many other police officers get in trouble over this for contributing to the cover up, and what ultimately happens to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy could have been a serial killer or the most despicable criminal on the planet and still there is technically no justification for ever shooting someone in the back. I cared that Trayvon had a criminal history as he was fighting with someone and there was a possibility of justification for the shooting. Same for Ferguson. This is cold blooded murder and has no similarity to the other cases.

I think this is going to be the tipping point in this whole cop/vs black saga. It still is absolutely baffling to me what kind of mindset the cop could have had? HTF does he not know he is screwed after shooting an unarmed person in the back numerous times as they are running away? Obviously his life wasn't being threatened. This guy is borderline psychotic like Hernandez IMO not to mention incredibly stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

:goodposting:

Murder? Absolutely. Premeditated? Unless this cop knew him and was looking for him, no way. I don't see how the death penalty could even be in the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

Premeditation can happen in an instant. And it would not have to occur between his shots - it would've occurred before the first one. The fact that he (apparently) dropped his tazer n the ground before firing shows that he was already thinking of how to cover up his actions. That sounds like "rationally considering" to me.

I don't think it will happen, but it's not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

I'll take your word for it. I'm a water and sewer line inspector. So, I don't know #### about ####.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

I'll take your word for it. I'm a water and sewer line inspector. So, I don't know #### about ####.

You do know #### about #### I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

I'll take your word for it. I'm a water and sewer line inspector. So, I don't know #### about ####.

And yet in your line of work you do know ####. Also, I would note that your visceral understanding of the term premeditated may well be reflective of a large portion of any jury pool, so as a practical matter you are correct that the prosecution, though being able to charge such, may well not bring that charge to a successful conclusion in front of fair-minded people such as you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy could have been a serial killer or the most despicable criminal on the planet and still there is technically no justification for ever shooting someone in the back. I cared that Trayvon had a criminal history as he was fighting with someone and there was a possibility of justification for the shooting. Same for Ferguson. This is cold blooded murder and has no similarity to the other cases.

I think this is going to be the tipping point in this whole cop/vs black saga. It still is absolutely baffling to me what kind of mindset the cop could have had? HTF does he not know he is screwed after shooting an unarmed person in the back numerous times as they are running away? Obviously his life wasn't being threatened. This guy is borderline psychotic like Hernandez IMO not to mention incredibly stupid.

Well I'm pretty sure the cop wasn't aware that he was being video taped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy could have been a serial killer or the most despicable criminal on the planet and still there is technically no justification for ever shooting someone in the back. I cared that Trayvon had a criminal history as he was fighting with someone and there was a possibility of justification for the shooting. Same for Ferguson. This is cold blooded murder and has no similarity to the other cases.

I think this is going to be the tipping point in this whole cop/vs black saga. It still is absolutely baffling to me what kind of mindset the cop could have had? HTF does he not know he is screwed after shooting an unarmed person in the back numerous times as they are running away? Obviously his life wasn't being threatened. This guy is borderline psychotic like Hernandez IMO not to mention incredibly stupid.

Unless, of course, it's because it happens more than we realize and the only reason he is going to jail is because there was video of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

My statement had only to due with the reality that a jury will never convict a cop of premeditated murder, when the cop claimed he feared for his life and shot a "criminal" in the line of duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only shot an unarmed man in the back, but also appeared to tamper with the crime scene by planting a taser on the guy.

Yep. Murder. Does not need to have a badge. Lock him up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my point has nothing to do with the cop...i hope the cop gets whatever punishment fits that crime ...i wouldnt have an issue if he got the death penalty if convicted of premeditated murder.

there is somewhere around a 0% chance the cop is convicted of premeditated murder, let alone get the death penalty.

well it turned into premeditated murder when he decided to keep shooting ...especially the last shot he fired

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully and intentionally causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

Unless you can argue that he had time between his shots to 'rationally considering the timing', no way is this premeditated.

And yet there is case law out there that states the time necessary for premeditation can happen in the twinkling of an eye, a moment, less than a second, at least there is if I remember correctly. Now those decisions are judicial interpretations, and getting a jury to buy into that may be difficult, but in my initial post in this thread I noted the pause in the rhythm of the shots between the first 7 and the final shot precisely because that pause could at least be argued as premeditation. This is to not even mention the time it took to draw the weapon and to squeeze off the first shot also was an opportunity to evaluate the situation, as was the time it took to squeeze off each shot.

I am not arguing for premeditation. I merely note that as a bar exam question this scenario leaves open the door to arguing for it.

My statement had only to due with the reality that a jury will never convict a cop of premeditated murder, when the cop claimed he feared for his life and shot a "criminal" in the line of duty.

I don't think that's a reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if only our politicians wore body cams we might get some honesty there.

DO NOT WANT ANTHONY WEINER WITH A BODY CAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if only our politicians wore body cams we might get some honesty there.

DO NOT WANT ANTHONY WEINER WITH A BODY CAM

C'mon, a Weiner cam would be awesome! Can't you imagine how great it would be to see the POV of a Weiner at work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.