For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.
Imagine if he used that run to get the victim instead of running to plant evidence? We wouldn't be having this thread. Although the new one with the man and horse is pretty fucked up.
For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.
Could he have been more rattled after shooting a person than what people think?
Inwardly, I'm pretty sure his mind was racing in a multitude of directions.
We can say what he looked like, but we have no idea where his mind was.
For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.
Could he have been more rattled after shooting a person than what people think?
Inwardly, I'm pretty sure his mind was racing in a multitude of directions.
We can say what he looked like, but we have no idea where his mind was.
You are 100% correct. Just giving my thoughts on what I saw.
I also doubt that this cop considered the dash cam when he made the decision to shoot him. That is my opinion. He obviously was not thinking about anything rationally. I've talked with hundreds of people that went through the police academy and not one of them ever said they had training on where to shoot people when their backs are turned to you. This guy fucked up and it cost a man his life and his freedom.
For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.
Could he have been more rattled after shooting a person than what people think?
Inwardly, I'm pretty sure his mind was racing in a multitude of directions.
We can say what he looked like, but we have no idea where his mind was.
You are 100% correct. Just giving my thoughts on what I saw.
Don't get me wrong... I saw the same thing you did.
I also doubt that this cop considered the dash cam when he made the decision to shoot him. That is my opinion. He obviously was not thinking about anything rationally. I've talked with hundreds of people that went through the police academy and not one of them ever said they had training on where to shoot people when their backs are turned to you. This guy fucked up and it cost a man his life and his freedom.
Hundreds really man that's a lot of people ...
Somewhere between 100-150 without exaggeration. Hundreds is probably classified as 200 or more. My mistake.
Eerie watching that video clip knowing what the future held in store.
Why the decision to bolt? How can that possibly go well for a guy?
I'm also curious as to how a cop can go from performing very professionally at the stop- especially since Scott had no registration or insurance- to a guy bent on killing someone that truly never resembled a threat of any sort?
I think, given today's climate, it would be most prudent for all people to be very obediant and cooperative when being detained. Sort things out at the station if things begin to get out of control. I'm not saying this to give police absolute power... I'm saying this so one doesn't find themselves in a situation like some others have in recent times after a conflict of some form manifests itself.
You never truly know who you are dealing with and when dealing with cops... they have guns... and they may not have the skill set one typically assumes they should.
Thought about this and think fleeing is a natural instinct of man.
We have many instincts that the slightest dose of common sense and awareness override. 'Fight or flight' is not an excuse for behaving like an idiot when detained. If it is... well a cop's job is impossible.
Are you kidding. Everyone's actions change when they know they're being filmed vs. not being filmed. Hence the 8 shots in the back.
obviously. I know that, but in the heat of the moment? I sincerely doubt he was able to think "ok, now I'm out of video range.....now I can shoot him!". especially in this day and age of everyone having a cell phone, not to mention the potential for witnesses (broad daylight). if he was able to "turn off" his professionalism when he thought he was out of range of his dashcam, do you think he was that stupid as to tune out the potential for being seen?
He went as far as making up a story to go with the shooting but because he was filmed without his knowing he was caught. Which blows away your assumptions.
So you know that the officer's intent was to kill the guy once he was off camera?
No, I can admit I don't know what he is thinking... But that's what he did, now didn't he.
Why not come back and blow away the other guy too then. Fuck it he is a witness, you have to take care of him too.
Because the lawyers/police can easily make this other guys account appear not credible.
- the passenger has been detained and questioned he is insisting his name not be released - there is another witness female but she has inconsistent statements - 2 new cop dash cam vids are out - apparently one video shows when he gets up to run you can see one of the tazer strings on the vic apparently the other one is wrapped around the officers arm - the officer is in isolation at the jail - he's being monitored for his mental health - no confirmations of suicide or threats from other inmates. - they talked about how professional he was @ the stop before the vic initial ran - but then how calm and not stressed he looked later when using his gun - the officers attorney is not happy that the media has gotten more cooperation than he has with his requests
With each passing day and the information that comes out, the more I think that manslaughter will be what this cop is on trial for.
The interviews on CNN are making me sick. Let's get as many people that have nothing o do with the case as possible and ask them questions they are not qualified to answer.
Yeah I can't take it and just turn it off. One of the shit things about "news". Hell next they'll publish poll results on if cops guilt. Right like I care what john q thinks? Oh but not my fellow MT debaters that's different HA.
Eerie watching that video clip knowing what the future held in store.
Why the decision to bolt? How can that possibly go well for a guy?
I'm also curious as to how a cop can go from performing very professionally at the stop- especially since Scott had no registration or insurance- to a guy bent on killing someone that truly never resembled a threat of any sort?
I think, given today's climate, it would be most prudent for all people to be very obediant and cooperative when being detained. Sort things out at the station if things begin to get out of control. I'm not saying this to give police absolute power... I'm saying this so one doesn't find themselves in a situation like some others have in recent times after a conflict of some form manifests itself.
You never truly know who you are dealing with and when dealing with cops... they have guns... and they may not have the skill set one typically assumes they should.
Thought about this and think fleeing is a natural instinct of man.
We have many instincts that the slightest dose of common sense and awareness override. 'Fight or flight' is not an excuse for behaving like an idiot when detained. If it is... well a cop's job is impossible.
Instinct trumps reason.
So my instincts to procreate lead me to fondle a woman who catches my attention and has me think of procreating?
No they don't. Unless the individual is unreasonable. This was a routine traffic stop where the officer was hardly acting hostile. The guy was a deadbeat dad, but did he actually have a warrant out for him? He wasn't going to be arrested unless this was the case.
Did he overreact or did he flee from justice?
And, before it begins... no, no I'm not justifying the cop shooting him.
For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.
Imagine if he used that run to get the victim instead of running to plant evidence? We wouldn't be having this thread. Although the new one with the man and horse is pretty fucked up.
Oh don't worry BB will be having similar discussion again soon you can take that to the bank
I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but... I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but... I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?
Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but... I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?
Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.
I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but... I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?
Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.
Gun problems of the US aside, what other observations could you make comparing the country's two cultures?
For example, would you say your country has a drug problem? If so, does crime manifest itself supporting an illegal drug trade? What does this crime look like?
I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but... I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?
Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.
Gun problems of the US aside, what other observations could you make comparing the country's two cultures?
For example, would you say your country has a drug problem? If so, does crime manifest itself supporting an illegal drug trade? What does this crime look like?
I'm in the west of Ireland. If I was in Dublin I could probably answer that better. I know Dublin has had big issues with heroin. Limerick has constant gang wars over drugs. I believe there are certain cops on task forces who carry guns in Limerick and Dublin.
You see now this will surely be the source his defense of former officer Slager. Which in turn justified him to shoot what appeared to be an unarmed man fleeing from the officer.
Also if there's no video there would never be a thread here on AMT, it wouldn't even be a news story.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
The "if there was no video" argument is a non-argument. There is video. And there is a body with 5 bullets in his back. Why nobody thinks that is relevant is beyond me.
The "if there was no video" argument is a non-argument. There is video. And there is a body with 5 bullets in his back. Why nobody thinks that is relevant is beyond me.
I think it's relevant. No matter what transpired prior, the officer murdered him while he was running away unarmed.
This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol: 1. Shoot him. 2. Track him down again and get into another fight. 3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol: 1. Shoot him. 2. Track him down again and get into another fight. 3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
Sad on so many levels.
Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.
In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol: 1. Shoot him. 2. Track him down again and get into another fight. 3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
Sad on so many levels.
Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.
In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.
Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.
How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?
I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.
I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol: 1. Shoot him. 2. Track him down again and get into another fight. 3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
Sad on so many levels.
Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.
In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.
Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.
How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?
I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.
I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
There is absolutely nothing in this story to suggest he posed a risk to any innocent bystander if allowed to continue to run while the first officer continues to follow as the other officers gather; clearly they would have been there in about a minute anyway, given the video. I have seen police detain people many times and it's pretty much standard to gather reinforcements if someone has resisted one officer, or even if they haven't but the officer isn't sure of their ability to contain the situation.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol: 1. Shoot him. 2. Track him down again and get into another fight. 3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
Sad on so many levels.
Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.
In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.
Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.
How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?
I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.
I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
There is absolutely nothing in this story to suggest he posed a risk to any innocent bystander if allowed to continue to run while the first officer continues to follow as the other officers gather; clearly they would have been there in about a minute anyway, given the video. I have seen police detain people many times and it's pretty much standard to gather reinforcements if someone has resisted one officer, or even if they haven't but the officer isn't sure of their ability to contain the situation.
You mean outside of violently resisting arrest and fleeing in a highly agitated state and ultimately knowing how things played out.
What if the second cop had tried, like the first cop, to wrestle him down and his service revolver instead of the taser was taken and used against him?
How many larger cases have been solved as a result of routine traffic stops? When he ran, as 12 said, this became a highly unusual situation.
Do you feel he has any culpability in this incident at all? If the officer had drawn his pistol and shot him as he stole his taser and began using it on him... would this be excessive force?
The common denominator in EVERY one of these police shootings has been these guys were resisting arrest. When will some of you realize that you can't do this. That your chances of being shot or killed increase dramatically when you resist.
Andy Savage is a GREAT defense attorney. I just wonder if there will be riots here in Charleston when this guy gets a second degree manslaughter conviction. Better yet for the defense, if the prosecution goes for first degree murder, there very well could be an acquittal.
The common denominator in EVERY one of these police shootings has been these guys were resisting arrest. When will some of you realize that you can't do this. That your chances of being shot or killed increase dramatically when you resist.
Andy Savage is a GREAT defense attorney. I just wonder if there will be riots here in Charleston when this guy gets a second degree manslaughter conviction. Better yet for the defense, if the prosecution goes for first degree murder, there very well could be an acquittal.
But he wasn't being arrested though...it was just a routine traffic stop.
Comments
Inwardly, I'm pretty sure his mind was racing in a multitude of directions.
We can say what he looked like, but we have no idea where his mind was.
No they don't. Unless the individual is unreasonable. This was a routine traffic stop where the officer was hardly acting hostile. The guy was a deadbeat dad, but did he actually have a warrant out for him? He wasn't going to be arrested unless this was the case.
Did he overreact or did he flee from justice?
And, before it begins... no, no I'm not justifying the cop shooting him.
Good thing the priest explains why it happened.
5th paragraph
fuck me
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/hundreds-attend-funeral-for-police-shooting-victim-walter-scott/article23888904/
I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
For example, would you say your country has a drug problem? If so, does crime manifest itself supporting an illegal drug trade? What does this crime look like?
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/04/12/game-changer-or-paradigm-shift-walter-scott-shooting-enhanced-video-shows-officer-slager-with-taser-darts/
Also if there's no video there would never be a thread here on AMT, it wouldn't even be a news story.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
1. Shoot him.
2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
3. Let him run away.
If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.
Sad on so many levels.
In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.
How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?
I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.
I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
What if the second cop had tried, like the first cop, to wrestle him down and his service revolver instead of the taser was taken and used against him?
How many larger cases have been solved as a result of routine traffic stops? When he ran, as 12 said, this became a highly unusual situation.
Do you feel he has any culpability in this incident at all? If the officer had drawn his pistol and shot him as he stole his taser and began using it on him... would this be excessive force?
Andy Savage is a GREAT defense attorney. I just wonder if there will be riots here in Charleston when this guy gets a second degree manslaughter conviction. Better yet for the defense, if the prosecution goes for first degree murder, there very well could be an acquittal.