Absolutely subdued. No resistance whatsoever.
The shooting could be heat-of-the-moment, but planting evidence afterward is what can get him the chair. He had plenty of time to meditate on what he was doing. Not that planting evidence is a capital crime, but it will turn a jury against him.
I understand otherwise. Officer Wilson claimed that Brown ran 20-30 feet away from the car, then charged 10 feet towards him. Sounds scary. Except that Brown’s body was found 150 feet away.
You believe wrongly. You mentioned sociopaths, not psychopaths. A sociopath is only going to kill for personal gain, if they believe they can get away with it, and would have nothing to do with the “blue wall” mentality.
Of course. But you’ve not been talking about general police brutality, but your imagined cold-blooded murders. No-one’s denying that there’s too much police brutality - what’s being denied is that there’s some sort of conspiracy to let police officers get away with planning to execute 7 year old children in cold blood. By conflating the two, you harm your own argument and make your side look ridiculous.
Why use genitalia, a source of much enjoyment in life, at all for this? There is a time-honored epithet already existing to describe a bad cop. He’s a pig.
Never mind the eye witness accounts too.
Murdering is not subduing. He shot and killed an unarmed man running away from him over a fucking broken tail light. I suppose your next argument is that if you run the video backwards, he was charging the officer.
You skipped the in-between, wherein the suspect physically confronted the officer and appears to have knocked the taser out of the officer’s hand.
Saying the officer shot the suspect because of a broken taillight conveniently ignores the physical altercation that led to the shooting.
At least be thorough and honest when discussing this, please.
“Aforethought” has a strong legal history, and generally a heat-of-the-moment use of force, especially by a law enforcement officer to stop a fleeing suspect, does not typically meet that threshold.
All I’m saying is, murder may not be the appropriate charge.
It appears the South Carolina incident happened in a park. In Ferguson didn’t several of Wilson’s stray shots hit neighboring houses? Wilson also missed many more shots than Slager did. Either Slager was a better shot or he was closer.
Why would we believe this is the case? Why is that more likely than the officer just having dropped the taser?
The cop handcuffing his victim is probably SOP in South Carolina. I know it is in NY. They are required to handcuff “criminals” they’ve shot, even if apparently dead. That can’t help paramedics save those shooting victims, but what do they care?
Considering the quick arrival of the second cop from the direction Scott was running in, even if Slager was extremely fat and slow, between the two officers they should have been able to corral the 50 year old, and somewhat overweight, Scott without using lethal force.
Total number of American police shootings in March were 111. That does not compare favorably with a total of 52 in the UK since the year 1900. Cite
Confirmed by the eyewitness who made the video recording.
The altercation may have happened because the suspect had a warrant for unpaid child support and did not feel like going to jail for it.
Having said that, deadly force is not an appropriate tool for subduing a fleeing suspect who does not present a danger to anyone. Tasers, batons, OC spray, submission holds, harsh language, diplomacy? All acceptable tools for obtaining compliance. Deadly force? Since it eliminates the possibility of due process, it’s a last resort, justified only for defense of self or third parties from immediate threat of death or bodily harm (acknowledging that such a threat need not require possession of a weapon by the suspect). It is not an acceptable response to having recently been assaulted; it would only be acceptable if an assault is forthcoming/ongoing, which the video shows not to be the case here.
The troubling thing is that no one in the police department would have done any forensics to see if the officer’s account was true. No tests for gunpowder residue on the corpse, no questioning of the fact that all 5 bullet wounds are on the back of the corpse, etc… They would simply have gone about their jobs and left the case alone.
“We investigated ourselves and found that we did nothing wrong.”
There is that old adage:
suggesting that every, even mildly, problematic encounter with an armed US policemen will be dealt with by a shooting.
But, in fairness, there is the reality that America is awash with legal and illegal weapons which invites that other adage:
It would be unfair to expect US police to put themselves potentially, but literally, in the firing line of armed miscreants without a means to defend themselves.
However you also have the points made up thread that other countries have a lot of weapons in the population - isn’t it Switzerland where every other household has a gun? - but far less violent crime. Plus other countries seem able to arm their police while still having less civilian deaths.
I don’t have any answers, really, do I?
TCMF-2L
Are there stats on how often people violently resist arrest in other countries?
Yes, (for myself), I’m sorry about reference to NC … and I couldn’t even tell you for certain that it had anything to do with the name of the town having “North” in it. 
As for baby as to afterbirth, good one-ish). … and it reminds me of my curiosity about the splits between Dakota and Carolina.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stringbean View Post
“Ah. Thanks for the clarification. I still think proving malice in the act is going to be difficult. He clearly wanted to subdue the fleeing suspect, from my interpretation of the video.”
Uhm, no, he didn’t want to “subdue” the person (and again, I’m not sure why people are using the word “suspect”, since there’s been no information about the situation beyond the guy being pulled over for a broken tail light). When you’re an officer shooting at someone multiple times, you are not doing so to “subdue”. The guy wasn’t even running fast at all – more like a jog. Don’t tell me that requires shooting to “subdue”. 
Yikes.
Considering that the officer is pretty much a proven liar, that the dead man physically confronted him, as the officer stated, is certainly open to question.
This is not a criticism of your post, but an “add-on” to it…
Assuming the officer thought he had a legitimate reason to use deadly force, what would it have been? What did Scott do that could have possibly justified deadly force?