It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Charleston cop charged with murder after video surfaces of him shooting man in the back

page: 5
89
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: liejunkie01

I just watched the whole video on FB. It shows the cop talking to the man and he started running.


Well that's funny because I watched the same video and all I saw was something hitting the ground in front of the cop and something hitting the ground and sliding behind him, then he pulled out his gun and the guy started running.

Perhaps you should watch it again.




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: dr1234
Really? That's your attitude? Are you being snarky or do you really not see the value in this thread?


I apologize I was just mimicking American apathy



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

And over a broken tail light?


Oh lord, here we go with this crap again. Sounds like "over a pack of cigars". Let's just completely overlook everything that happened from the time he was pulled over til the time he was shot.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo

Ah! Thank you!

Well, the article certainly does put the whole incident in a terrible, senseless perspective. I hope that they load "the book" into a trebuchet, and fling it at this officer at extreme speed.


+1 more 
posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Great idea, as it happens, because THE MAN WAS SHOT IN THE BACK!

It really wouldn't matter if the fellow had done two head spins, a backflip while flipping the officer the bird, and then open handed slapped him across the face, one does not shoot fleeing suspects in the back. It is that simple. What happened between the officer pulling the dead man over, and the officer killing the man is ABSOLUTELY immaterial to the case as a result.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I was addressing the enlightedservant's ignorant assertion that the guy got shot over a broken tail light. He most certainly did not. Just as Mike Brown didn't get shot for stealing a pack of cigars.


What happened between the officer pulling the dead man over, and the officer killing the man is ABSOLUTELY immaterial to the case as a result.


Actually the only reason its immaterial is because the cop tried to plant his taser next to the body. If he hadn't done that he might have had a solid defense based on those events, but since he did, no jury is going to buy his reason for shooting the guy... at least I wouldn't.




edit on 8-4-2015 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:22 AM
link   
on radio world service.
they talk't about it as if it was Just a race killing?
the cops are shoting ANY one they can!

it is good to see the wolr news reporting this.
maybe they will stop killing low people,
must be easyer than booking them?

I bet soon a cop will shoot the person with the camra!
and say it was a gun one day soon...
edit on 8-4-2015 by buddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   
This is scary. It's right there, we've all witnessed it. I cannot even imagine what the victims family is feeling. All I can say is kudos to the person brave enough to film what was happening, who ever he or she is, godbless them for having the bravery and quick thinking in filming this. Personally I think I would've been too shocked to do so.

Imagine if there wasn't video footage? How divided opinion would be in public? How much would this guy get in donations to support his defense? Hmmm.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   
These appear to be the sequence of events at the start on the full video:

1) You hear the taser going in the background as the guy filming moves in, but he doesn't have the camera on them yet.
2) You hear the cop say "You run again I'll shoot you".
3) You hear a sort of hitting sound like something hitting the ground as the camera moves onto them and you see an object hitting the ground behind the cop. It looks like the cop had hold of the suspects arm and he flings it off and then runs.
4) The suspect starts running and at the same time the cop draws, you see Taser leads going from the top of the cop to the suspect and they extend as he runs. It is not very clear who has what end. The cop is now holding his gun, if the object that hit the ground the cop goes back to pick up was the taser it makes no sense for the leads to follow this path.
5) When the cop goes back to pick up an object at 1:08 it appears to be the object we see hit the ground earlier based on the position, though the video is so shakey it's hard to tell for sure.

Clearly he should not have shot him in the back like this, but to get an accurate picture of the events a few questions arise:

1) Why did the suspect run not once but twice?
2) Why did the suspect run even after the cop said if he did he would shoot him, this was before the cop drew his gun
3) What is the object hitting the ground? If it is the taser, then how are the leads going from the cop to the suspect? If it is not the taser, then what is it that he picks up?

I think that maybe the suspect did get hold of the taser perhaps at first and the cop became angry, perhaps he even managed to shock the cop with it. He wrongly fired on the man if he was no longer armed out of anger and told a half truth with regards to the taser perhaps, deciding to exaggerate it by considering to plant the taser maybe as while he may have had it initially maybe he did not when he ran. The thing is we can not tell for sure what he tosses down, and he does pick it back up assuming it is the same object. We have to make a few assumptions with this video, as it is not that clear what objects are. You cannot even tell properly which direction the taser wires are going.

Cops need to stop shooting people, but it would really help if people did not continuously run away from them or not comply with someone holding a gun whoever they are. It is how I avoid being shot, I see it as common sense - if someone points a gun at you or has one and threatens to use it, then do as they say.
Also don't break the law, I'm not talking about the stop light - I'm talking about whatever the reason was for running away. Twice. And resisting arrest. These we know as facts, we can also further speculate as to wherever or not he went for or at any point had the taser, but I prefer the facts.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

There was a warrant out for the guy. He got stopped for a broken taillight. The reason for the warrant was back child support payments and was put out by family court. The guy didn't want to go to jail and be forced to make the payments it seems. While the guy might have been no saint, it still does not clear the cop from shooting him in the back. A warrant is only to take them in not kill them on the spot.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: [post=19212989]AgentSmith[/p]
- if someone points a gun at you or has one and threatens to use it, then do as they say.


I'm guessing you'll be praising Allah if and when it ever happens then?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I wonder how this will be spun in order to justify the shooting. Killed over a broken tail light. If he was being arrested, is there some outstanding warrant. What ever happened to tickets...


Oh I'm sure Faux News is currently writing a character assassination piece about the "dangerous black thug" being "neutralized" by the "heroic, white Christian" as we speak.

I wonder how far back they'll have to go to find something the guy might have done wrong to "justify" being executed in the street?

Glad the cop was charged with murder, but I have a feeling there's going to be a lot of drama around this case, probably caused primarily by the "cop club" who seem to want to prevent themselves from ever being held to account for anything one of their gang does.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: [post=19212989]AgentSmith[/p]
- if someone points a gun at you or has one and threatens to use it, then do as they say.


I'm guessing you'll be praising Allah if and when it ever happens then?


Not quite sure what you're getting at... It has happened to me both by cops and during a robbery, I didn't get shot any of those times by not being a hero, or an idiot. I'm still here and I didn't have to praise Allah to achieve this..



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Without eyes in the back of one's head, it's hard to know if someone is pointing a gun when one is running away. Since it was an interaction with police the gun pointing and firing is most likely a given in today's world.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ObjectZero
a reply to: AgentSmith

There was a warrant out for the guy. He got stopped for a broken taillight. The reason for the warrant was back child support payments and was put out by family court. The guy didn't want to go to jail and be forced to make the payments it seems. While the guy might have been no saint, it still does not clear the cop from shooting him in the back. A warrant is only to take them in not kill them on the spot.


Of course not, I didn't say it was justified. I'm quite rightly asking for all of the details and would like to know all of the facts, it scares me that there could be people potentially on jury's that don't think this is important.
Out of curiosity, if he had acquired the cop's gun and fired at him because he didn't want to go to jail and make the payments would that be OK?
How do we figure out how big a law you can break or how much force you can use against a cop to avoid the penalty for a more minor offence?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Without eyes in the back of one's head, it's hard to know if someone is pointing a gun when one is running away. Since it was an interaction with police the gun pointing and firing is most likely a given in today's world.



Before he ran away and as you can hear at the start of the long video the cop did say "If you run again I'll shoot you" so I guess that may have been the clue.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: [post=19212989]AgentSmith[/p]
- if someone points a gun at you or has one and threatens to use it, then do as they say.


I'm guessing you'll be praising Allah if and when it ever happens then?


If you're referring to the ISIS videos and the like then I'm guessing all of those hostages were just pussies and you would, of course, just spit in their faces and tell them to kill you. Oh you big hero you. I bet you watch Bruce Willis movies and everything.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

The guy ran away, thats not enough reason to kill him.
You could maybe have an argument if he was a known terrorist or murderer.
but not someone who hasnt paid child support.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: AgentSmith

The guy ran away, thats not enough reason to kill him.
You could maybe have an argument if he was a known terrorist or murderer.
but not someone who hasnt paid child support.


I never have said it was reason to kill him. I in fact have said:


Of course not, I didn't say it was justified. I'm quite rightly asking for all of the details and would like to know all of the facts, it scares me that there could be people potentially on jury's that don't think this is important.
Out of curiosity, if he had acquired the cop's gun and fired at him because he didn't want to go to jail and make the payments would that be OK?
How do we figure out how big a law you can break or how much force you can use against a cop to avoid the penalty for a more minor offence?




Clearly he should not have shot him in the back like this, but to get an accurate picture of the events a few questions arise:



Cops need to stop shooting people,....


The only other things I have said are questions relating to getting all of the facts and I've pointed out some common sense. Like if someone points a gun at you then it's best to comply, generally. The cop did say 'If you run again I'll shoot you' and he ran again, so he shot him. I do not think this is right, nor did I imply it was right. However it is common sense to not run in that situation and the guy would still be alive if he had not run away again.

I see that certain people seem to have a problem where they put words into people's mouths, or completely ignore what has actually been said and spin their own narrative to meet their own preconceived perceptions.
There also seems to be some discomfort among the ranks when anyone dares to question anything purely for an accurate picture of the events rather than just banging a war drum and demanding blood.
A trend I've also seen on places like Twitter and extending to here is the blatant lying about what people have said if they ask pesky questions.

Are some of the people here a bit delusional and compulsive liars maybe? Or just not very good at reading?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

I never said you did. You asked for info I provided.

Don't think this can come down to a race shooting as well. More as someone who feels they have power over another to the point of killing them.



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join